Who Has Part in The First Resurrection?

[DHK]

It is utter nonsense to say that because the word Church does not appear in Chapters 6-19 of the Book of Revelation that establishes the doctrine of a pre-trib "snatching away" of the Church. In fact the Bride of jesus Christ is mentioned in Chapter 19 and the word Israel appears only one time in Chapters 6-18; the word Jew not at all.

I posted the following earlier but it bears repeating in the face of such claims.



Arguing that because the word Church does not appear in Revelation 6-19 the Bride is not there is like arguing that God is absent at the time the book of Esther was describing. As noted above the editor of the Thompson Chain Reference Bible notes: "The name of God does not appear in the book, while a heathen king is referred to over 150 times."

I would also note that the words church or churches are not mentioned in 1st & 2nd Peter, 1st & 2nd John, and Jude. Does anyone want to argue that the Church was missing at that time in history. The words are also absent from the first 15 chapters of Romans and occur only twice in Hebrews. it is likely that only the hyper-dispensationalists would take comfort in that since they are only concerned with the prison Epistles of Paul.

It is also worth noting that the argument presented by Walvoord above is typical dispensational spin, worse yet it is totally false as I show.

Your argument does not make sense to me.
Esther is an OT book. There was no church in the OT. Remember the word "church" is ekklesia and simply means "assembly."
When we speak about the Church in the book of Revelation (esp. chapters 6-19 we speak of believers in Christ, the Bride of Christ, the kingdom of God, the family of God, etc. We are speaking of NT believers. They are not there. All NT believers, the bride of Christ, were taken out of the world before the Tribulation began. They are in heaven with Christ.

Now look what happens in chapter 19:
Revelation 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
--Here is the Second Coming of Christ at the end of the Tribulation. He is coming in righteousness and will judge and make war against all those who are gathered against Israel.

Revelation 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
--He is coming with armies that have been with him in heaven for some time.

Revelation 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
--Now he is coming to earth as KING, and will reign as KING.

Who are the armies in heaven? They are the saints which were raptured seven years ago. Go back a couple of chapters:
Revelation 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
They are the "called, chosen, and faithful." That cannot be said of angels, only believers.

Look just a few verses before 19:14:
Revelation 19:7-9 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
--Already in heaven, just preceding this great event, is the marriage supper of the Lamb. Here the bride and the bridegroom celebrate. What does "fine linen" represent? It represents the righteousness of the saints--that is us.

Again, verse 14:
Revelation 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
--Christ is coming with the saints (that were previously raptured) to take vengeance on those that obeyed not the gospel, and are the enemies of Israel.

Revelation 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
Revelation 19:20-21 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

 

[prophet]

Spirits eat?

They do. Next.

Psa 78:25
25 Man did eat angels 'food:
he sent them meat to the full.

Unless you wanna see the poetic liscense here, and say that "falling from heaven" could be expressed, poetically, as "angel food".

Either way, He once again differentiates between Man and Angel.

 

[OldRegular]

The Apostle John is told in Revelation 1:19 to Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. The command is worded so as to indicate the completeness or perfection of the revelation of Jesus Christ to be recorded by the Apostle John. John is to write those things revealed to him, nothing more and nothing less. In Verse 4 John addresses the book in its entirety to the seven churches.

Revelation 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

There is nothing at all in either Revelation 1:4, 1:19, Chapter 1, or the entire Book to indicate that the Book of Revelation is to be divided into parts dealing with totally different sets of events at different periods of time. Furthermore, there is nothing in the revelations made to John that indicate that the book reveals a consistent chronological order of future events. In fact there is evidence of repetitive parallelism in the book.

If we apply a strict literal interpretation, which is indicated for this passage, the things which are could represent only those events that are ongoing during the time that John is writing, not the entire Church age. That fact is only common sense! The things which shall be hereafter would represent those events that occur after the time during which John is writing, not some seven year period in the unknown distant future. It is stretching credibility to argue that the letters to the seven churches of Asia [Chapters 2 & 3] are the things which are and represent the entire ‘Church age’ while the things which shall be hereafter encompass Chapters 4-19, or Chapters 6-18 depending of the particular dispensationalist, and represent only a ‘seven year tribulation period’ that follows the ‘Church age’. The things which shall be hereafter is the Church Age. That is only common sense. It is incredible that dispensational doctrine would apply the same irrational reasoning to Revelation 1:19 that they do to Daniels 70th week.

We must not forget the introductory promise of the Revelation that the Apostle John is to record; a promise that applies to all that is recorded by John.

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

God's servants are those redeemed by Jesus Christ, not unbelieving Israel. John is shown those things which must shortly come to pass. It has been noted previously that these things will come to pass on God’s timetable, not ours. However, there is absolutely no rationale for splintering the Revelation that Jesus Christ gives John to record. That is exactly what dispensational doctriney does.

 

[DHK]

The Apostle John is told in Revelation 1:19 to Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. The command is worded so as to indicate the completeness or perfection of the revelation of Jesus Christ to be recorded by the Apostle John.

Chapter and verse please.
Where do you get such an idea as that? It must come from the heretic Origen who taught people to interpret the Bible allegorically. BTW, lest you think I use that word glibly, even the RCC considered Origen a heretic, and many considered him the father of Arianism.

John is to write those things revealed to him, nothing more and nothing less. In Verse 4 John addresses the book in its entirety to the seven churches.

That simply means that he was writing to the believers that were alive at that time. But Scripture as a whole is written to believers living at the time it was written, and yet it is not a static book; it is living and relevant for us all.

There is nothing at all in either Revelation 1:4, 1:19, Chapter 1, or the entire Book to indicate that the Book of Revelation is to be divided into parts dealing with totally different sets of events at different periods of time. Furthermore, there is nothing in the revelations made to John that indicate that the book reveals a consistent chronological order of future events. In fact there is evidence of repetitive parallelism in the book.

In your opinion; verse 19 says differently:
Revelation 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

If we apply a strict literal interpretation, which is indicated for this passage, the things which are could represent only those events that are ongoing during the time that John is writing,[/quote]
The thing which are, which were present during John's time were the churches in chapters 2 and 3.

not the entire Church age. That fact is only common sense!

I never said anything about the entire church age except to mention that it is not existent after chapter four.

The things which shall be hereafter would represent those events that occur after the time during which John is writing, not some seven year period in the unknown distant future. It is stretching credibility to argue that the letters to the seven churches of Asia [Chapters 2 & 3] are the things which are and represent the entire ‘Church age’ while the things which shall be hereafter encompass Chapters 4-19, or Chapters 6-18 depending of the particular dispensationalist, and represent only a ‘seven year tribulation period’ that follows the ‘Church age’.

And why should this be incredible to you? In each church there are characteristics of different churches that exist today. Would you deny that there are some churches that:
--Have lost their first love,
--are neither cold nor hot, but are lukewarm.

The things which shall be hereafter is the Church Age. That is only common sense.

Your opinion and you are entitled to it; but it is not common sense as the world is not undergoing the wrath of God is it?

It is incredible that dispensational doctrine would apply the same irrational reasoning to Revelation 1:19 that they do to Daniels 70th week.

I don't. Daniel's 70th week is between chapters 6 and 19.

We must not forget the introductory promise of the Revelation that the Apostle John is to record; a promise that applies to all that is recorded by John.

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

God's servants are those redeemed by Jesus Christ, not unbelieving Israel. John is shown those things which must shortly come to pass. It has been noted previously that these things will come to pass on God’s timetable, not ours. However, there is absolutely no rationale for splintering the Revelation that Jesus Christ gives John to record. That is exactly what dispensational doctriney does.

And some things (chapters 2 and 3) did shortly come to pass.
It also speaks of a new heaven and a new earth. Have those been created yet? No. Not all things have been fulfilled yet, have they?
http://www.baptistboard.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=2107745

 

[DHK]

How in the world do you get that I view Revelation as simply tradition?

If you don't want to be accused of holding "tradition" then don't accuse others (me) of doing so. I am simply throwing the same back at you. Now you are offended because I use the same language you use toward me, and yet you don't think I should be offended? Where is the logic in that?
As I said, I believe the Word of God, not tradition, as you accuse me of. And every time you accuse me I will throw the same back at you just to show what you are doing.

With that I agree. But you also can't assume that everything which false under "things which shall be hereafter" in the book is chronological. Again, the world ends 3 times in the book, how can it be chronological?

So you believe the world ends three times? Does it or does it not? Be clear!
As I said previously there is a "general chronology" to the book. There are some exceptions. The world ends but once.

WHAT!?! That is the most illogical nonsense I think I have ever read! How in the world do you possibly get the idea that I view the Bible as just tradition? Why are you being so dishonest? Are you that incapable of discussing this like a rational human being? Are you so afraid that your system will be proven to be in error?

I am not dishonest at all. You said "your tradition" right? The fact is I don't believe in tradition, so it must be you. I have already explained this to you. You are the one that needs to be rationale here and stop hurling the insults.

The Mt. of Olives is not in either text. They are perfectly complimentary once you stop trying to do violence to the text in order to support your system.

The Mount of Olives does not have to be in this exact text.
When he comes the Second time he will come to the Mount of Olives.

Zechariah 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
--Clear enough.
Now go back and read 1Thes.4:16-18. Both events cannot happen at the same time. He cannot come "to the clouds" and land on the Mount of Olives at the same time. Have you studied physics?

I don't even know what the heck you are saying here. You really are illogical.

The world doesn't end three times, does it. Just because you think it is suggested doesn't mean that it happens.

 

[webdog]

They do. Next.

Psa 78:25
25 Man did eat angels 'food:
he sent them meat to the full.

Unless you wanna see the poetic liscense here, and say that "falling from heaven" could be expressed, poetically, as "angel food".

Either way, He once again differentiates between Man and Angel.

That does nothing to explain the physical bodies that ate with Abraham...unless you are going to tell me the men visiting Abraham was also only poetic.

 

[OldRegular]

Your argument does not make sense to me.
Esther is an OT book. There was no church in the OT. Remember the word "church" is ekklesia and simply means "assembly."

I never said anything about the church being in Esther I said:

Arguing that because the word Church does not appear in Revelation 6-19 the Bride is not there is like arguing that God is absent at the time the book of Esther was describing. As noted above the editor of the Thompson Chain Reference Bible notes: "The name of God does not appear in the book, while a heathen king is referred to over 150 times."

When we speak about the Church in the book of Revelation (esp. chapters 6-19 we speak of believers in Christ, the Bride of Christ, the kingdom of God, the family of God, etc. We are speaking of NT believers. They are not there. All NT believers, the bride of Christ, were taken out of the world before the Tribulation began. They are in heaven with Christ.

Only in the mind of dispensationalists. God knows they are not there, only the ones who have died.

 

[OldRegular]

The Apostle John is told in Revelation 1:19 to Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. The command is worded so as to indicate the completeness or perfection of the revelation of Jesus Christ to be recorded by the Apostle John. John is to write those things revealed to him, nothing more and nothing less. In Verse 4 John addresses the book in its entirety to the seven churches

Chapter and verse please.
Where do you get such an idea as that? It must come from the heretic Origen who taught people to interpret the Bible allegorically. BTW, lest you think I use that word glibly, even the RCC considered Origen a heretic, and many considered him the father of Arianism.

I simply quoted Scripture. Here it is again in larger type! The Apostle John is told in Revelation 1:19 to Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. The command is worded so as to indicate the completeness or perfection of the revelation of Jesus Christ to be recorded by the Apostle John. John is to write those things revealed to him, nothing more and nothing less. Now do you understand? You are unreal DHK, I take the Scripture "at face value" as Ryrie would say and you insist I am allegorizing it. That is why discussion with you is impossible.

The dispensational doctrine is false and primarily the invention of John Nelson Darby, invented by the way in the same Century that gave us Jehovah's Witnesses or the Watchtower Society, the Mormons, the Seventh Day Adventists, The Christian Scientists.

I have called hyper dispensationalism heretical just as Dr Bob did.

I have never called dispensationalism, either classic or progressive, heretical because I do not believe its error sinks to that level.

You keep saying that the information I present comes from heretics. The only reason I can imagine you do so is that you hope you will provoke me into saying something that will get me banned. That will not happen! If I am banned it is because I believe and history shows that Dispensational doctrine is primarily the invention of John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth [England} Brethern and was popularized in this country by the Scofield Reference Bible and that dispensational doctrine regarding a "parenthesis" church and a pre-trib "snatching away" of the church is not Biblical and cannot be made to comport with Scripture.

I would also note that you have cleverly [you think] questioned my salvation three times in the last week or so. That is a ploy I have observed, in the almost 10 years I have been on this BB, by dispensationalists who are unable to make a Biblical case for their error!

 

[DHK]

I never said anything about the church being in Esther I said:

Which is totally irrelevant to: pretribulation, Millennial Kingdom, Great Tribulation, the Second Coming, and all other aspects of eschatology. The Book of Esther is a complete red herring.

Only in the mind of dispensationalists. God knows they are not there, only the ones who have died.

Again, reconcile 1Thes.4:16-18 and 2Thes.1:6-10. Funny thing how you guys can't do that.
The event described in 1Thes.4 occurs at the beginning of the Tribulation. Prove that it doesn't. None of those believers are present in chapters 6 to 19. If they are demonstrate it.
The event described in 2Thes.1:6-10 is the same event described in Revelation 19 where Christ comes in judgment.
You can't reconcile these two separate comings, and until you can, you should keep quiet about your sarcastic remarks "only in the mind of dispensationalists."
Address the Scripture I gave. Prove me wrong. Or keep quiet.

 

[OldRegular]

Which is totally irrelevant to: pretribulation, Millennial Kingdom, Great Tribulation, the Second Coming, and all other aspects of eschatology. The Book of Esther is a complete red herring.

Again, reconcile 1Thes.4:16-18 and 2Thes.1:6-10. Funny thing how you guys can't do that.
The event described in 1Thes.4 occurs at the beginning of the Tribulation. Prove that it doesn't. None of those believers are present in chapters 6 to 19. If they are demonstrate it.
The event described in 2Thes.1:6-10 is the same event described in Revelation 19 where Christ comes in judgment.
You can't reconcile these two separate comings, and until you can, you should keep quiet about your sarcastic remarks "only in the mind of dispensationalists."
Address the Scripture I gave. Prove me wrong. Or keep quiet.

You cannot prove a word you say by Scripture because your doctrine is not Biblical! You splinter the Word of God and gloat about it!

 

[DHK]

I simply quoted Scripture. Here it is again in larger type! The Apostle John is told in Revelation 1:19 to Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. The command is worded so as to indicate the completeness or perfection of the revelation of Jesus Christ to be recorded by the Apostle John. John is to write those things revealed to him, nothing more and nothing less. Now do you understand?

No I do not understand. You said:
"The command is worded so as to indicate completeness or perfection."
Hogwash! This is your opinion and you probably got it from someone who delves into numerology.

Discussion with you is impossible. The dispensational doctrine is false and primarily the invention of John Nelson Darby, invented by the way in the same Century that gave us Jehovah's Witnesses or the Watchtower Society, the Mormons, the Seventh Day Adventists, The Christian Scientists.

More name-calling. You can't deal with Scripture so you refer back to names.
Read the link I gave you.
http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/dispensation.htm

He gives you numerous ECF and others that believe in a pre-trib rapture as well as dispensationalism.

I have called hyper dispensationalism heretical just as Dr Bob did.

I have never called dispensationalism, either classic or progressive, heretical because I do not believe its error sinks to that level.

Where did that come from? I am not hyper-dispensational.

You keep saying that the information I present comes from heretics. The only reason I can imagine you do so is that you hope you will provoke me into saying something that will get me banned.

That is not true. I am totally against the allegorical method of interpretation. It is the method of interpretation that Preterists use. It is the method of interpretation that originated with Origen. I do not apologize pointing out that the early church did not use this method, but that Origen, a heretic (even by RCC standards) invented the allegorical method of interpreting the Bible. It is a method that should not be used if one wants to rightly divide the Word of Truth. It leads to all kinds of false doctrine, and gets one there very quickly.

That will not happen! If I am banned it is because I believe and history shows that Dispensational doctrine is primarily the invention of John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth [England} Brethern and was popularized in this country by the Scofield Reference Bible and that dispensational doctrine regarding a "parenthesis" church and a pre-trib "snatching away" of the church is not Biblical and cannot be made to comport with Scripture.

What you believe is false. You keep repeating this false history over and over again. You refuse to be educated. Read the link I gave you and see how wrong you are about dispensationalism. How can you know anything about it, unless you read it from their point of view?

I would also note that you have cleverly [you think] questioned my salvation three times in the last week or so. That is a ploy I have observed, in the almost 10 years I have been on this BB, by dispensationalists who are unable to make a Biblical case for their error!

I told you clearly: I questioned your use of logic, not your salvation. If you are not willing to accept my word for it, what can I do?

 

[OldRegular]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
I simply quoted Scripture. Here it is again in larger type! The Apostle John is told in Revelation 1:19 to Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter. The command is worded so as to indicate the completeness or perfection of the revelation of Jesus Christ to be recorded by the Apostle John. John is to write those things revealed to him, nothing more and nothing less. Now do you understand?

No I do not understand. You said:
"The command is worded so as to indicate completeness or perfection."
Hogwash! This is your opinion and you probably got it from someone who delves into numerology.

That response reveals much about you DHK. I quote a simple verse of Scripture and you head off into numerology. Why in the world does that Scripture or my belief that the revelation God gives John is to be complete and perfect cause you head down the dark alley of numerology. God is perfection DHK and you have no respect for the Word of God.

 

[DHK]

[/SIZE] That response reveals much about you DHK. I quote a simple verse of Scripture and you head off into numerology. Why in the world does that Scripture or my belief that the revelation God gives John is to be complete and perfect cause you head down the dark alley of numerology. God is perfection DHK and you have no respect for the Word of God.

"The command is worded so as to indicate completeness or perfection."
Because that is what someone into numerology would say.
7 is the number for perfection.
10 is the number for completion.
Etc., etc.
I don't buy into that stuff. I believe it is all nonsense.

So when you say "The command is worded so as to indicate "completeness or perfection" where did you get that exact wording? I don't think it was your wording. I think it came from someone else who is familiar with numerology, or perhaps you said with numerology in your thinking.

It wasn't a dark alley. It came from the way you phrased that statement.

 

[percho]

Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Maybe, "the things which are," is the Lord's day as in the day of the Lord.

A day of wrath.

 

[convicted1]

Who has part in the First Resurrection?

Jesus is the Firstfruit of them which slept(1 Cor. 15:20).

Who are the ones that sleep?

When Stephen was stoned and gave up the ghost, it said he fell asleep(Acts 7:60). In 1 Thess. 4, Jesus is going to bring back with Him in the cloud, the souls that were asleep. Now, I don't think that being asleep is the same as when we sleep at night. I tend to believe we are resting from our labors, resting around the throne of God.


So, personally, I believe those who have part in the First Resurrection are those that He chose from the foundation of the world, given to the Lamb to atone for their sins, to redeem from amongst the accursed.

 

[OldRegular]

Rev 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

Strange how some can insert 2000 plus years between the things which are at the time the Revelation was given to the Apostle John and the things which shall be hereafter; that is those things which God reveals will begin to happen immediately following the things which are.

Immediately after God reveals the things which are, that is, those things regarding the seven churches in Asia {Chapters 2 & #} God calls John to reveal unto him the things which shall be hereafter; that is the things that will happen next.

Revelation 4:1, 2
1. After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
2. And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

The things which happen "next" the things which shall be hereafter refer to the so-called Church age, the last 2000 years, the time in which we are now living, and the time remaining until Jesus Christ comes a second time as we read in the following Scripture:

Hebrews 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

At that time Jesus Christ will resurrect ALL those in the graves as the following Scripture asserts:

John 5:28, 29
28. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29. And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Then we have the Great White Throne Judgment:

Revelation 20:11-15
11. And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Next we read of all those redeemed through the blood of Jesus Christ in the presence of the Triune God. These are the ones have part in the First Resurrection, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, those chosen in Him from the Foundation of the World.

Revelation 21:1-4
1. And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Scripture speaks much more clearly than the schemes of man!

 

[~JM~]

I moved from the modern evangelical default position of Dispensational Premil, to PreWrath, Historic Premil and then took a long break from the study of eschatology. I jumped into a study of the covenants and realized I could no longer, after understanding the covenants and the Pauline epistles, hold to anything but Amil.

jm

 

[OldRegular]

I moved from the modern evangelical default position of Dispensational Premil, to PreWrath, Historic Premil and then took a long break from the study of eschatology. I jumped into a study of the covenants and realized I could no longer, after understanding the covenants and the Pauline epistles, hold to anything but Amil.

jm

I will give that a hearty Amen!

 

[DHK]

I will give that a hearty Amen!

What is amill? a means no. Mill means Millennium.
Do you believe there will be no millennium at all? That certainly is contrary to Scriptures.

 

[webdog]

You cannot prove a word you say by Scripture because your doctrine is not Biblical! You splinter the Word of God and gloat about it!

The same could be said of amill.