Amillennialism Debate -Part Three

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by DeafPosttrib, Mar 1, 2005.

  1. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    About three weeks ago, Dr. Bob closed amill debate topic, because it was 20 pages. Amill debate part two debate will be closed anytime because of now page 20. Baptistboard rules, all topics must be limited 20 pages. That why, I have to start new topic to continue discuss on amill.

    Carl, soon I will reply back to you about 'wrath', 'escape', rapture timing, etc. with verses.

    Also, I will post on 'a thousand' with verses, tell which one is literal or figurative. During this evcening.

    In Christ
    Rev. 22:20 - Amen!
     
  2. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    I repeatedly asked on the previous thread that adherents of Darbyism/Scofieldism/classic dispensationalism/ultra dispensationalism, whichever they prefer, quote just one verse of Scripture that teaches a pretribulation rapture. They have not done so yet. They are apparently unable to do so. Strangely they keep referring to Scripture they have supposedly posted and exegeted. Did they get lost in the system? Can I blame it on the computer? :D
     
  3. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe this sounds stupid guys (and gals), but I have not done a lot of study of end-times prophecy.

    Can one of you who hold the Amil belief please provide me with a short overview of EXACTLY what you believe?

    In other words, when and how does the tribulation work? ..when and how is the millinium kingdom? ...I assume that the coming of Christ is at the same time as the rapture based on what I'm reading? Can you please help me understand your specific positions on each of these items, as compared to--say, the LeHaye interpretation of end-times?

    I'm not debating. Based on your posts, I am missing some of your core beliefs.

    Thanks,
     
  4. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's an interesting point Old reg.

    While I am amillenialist I can certainly appreciate the scriptural support for historic premillenialism. I do however think that taken as a whole the scriptures point to a "thousand year reign" as figurative.

    What I cannot appreciate is the "rapture". While there are many verses that support the position of historic premillenialism I cannot find one verse that point CLEARLY to a rapture.

    1 Thessalonians 4:16 speaks about being caught up in the air to be with the Lord forever. No mention of how this temporally relates to a subsequent literal 1000 years or a time of judgement. This verse was intended to comfort the Thessalonian Christians in that the faithful dead would not "miss out".

    On the subject of the millenium I will respect the position of my chiliast brothers, even though I disagree.

    I will likewise echo the challenge to find any scripture giving compelling support for a rapture.
     
  5. trailblazer

    trailblazer
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey there!

    40 pages and we haven't convinced ONE about the truth of scripture????

    Are we missing the mark? Or, what?

    I must admit, the last 20 pages were very disheartening. Gave up and signed out. I'd spend hours at a time trying to make certain that what I was posting was scripturally sound only to have it just blown away without being read, let alone taken seriously. I ended up just accepting the fact that there has always been those that "don't have the ears to hear" even if Christ himself were sitting in front of them just as there were those back then that didn't either. I am even more aware of how he must have felt when He sat on the Mount of Olives and "wept."

    I think I'll observe in the background a bit. DPT and OldReg...you two are great. Right on.

    :D
     
  6. carlaimpinge

    carlaimpinge
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Solomon the Preacher

    Proverbs 1:22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?

    Paul the Preacher

    1 Corinthians 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

    1 Corinthians 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

    Carl the Preacher

    It's a waste of time to deal with a fool or a heretic more than twice based on the PREACHERS' statements as found in Pro. 14:7 and Titus 3:10.
     
  7. trailblazer

    trailblazer
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, maybe just one more time....

    Philip, I think if you start for yourself and look up the word "tribulation" in a concordance and then look at the context it is used in each verse you should begin to see that believers, OT and NT, have always gone through tribulation. Therefore, why take them out of any other tribulation. The Pre-mils and the dispys have that confused with God's wrath. It isn't "wrath". God's wrath is upon the unjust at the end of the world.
     
  8. trailblazer

    trailblazer
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    392
    Likes Received:
    0
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
  10. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Solomon the Preacher

    Proverbs 1:22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?

    Paul the Preacher

    1 Corinthians 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

    1 Corinthians 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

    Carl the Preacher

    It's a waste of time to deal with a fool or a heretic more than twice based on the PREACHERS' statements as found in Pro. 14:7 and Titus 3:10.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Carl the Preacher?

    You prove my point. Instead of quoting Scripture, even one pssage, to support a pre GRRReat TRRibulation "so-called rapture" you hand out insults. Just quote one passage of Scripture that proves a pre GRRReat TRRibulation "so-called rapture".

    Anyone can post insults, even EE and DD. In fact I believe that DD has you and EE beat but perhaps he has more practice!!!!!!
     
  11. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, you do keep repeating your montra (we keep showing verses - duh). But you only dissed me once for using the scripture from the
    King James Version, 1611 Edition (KJV1611).

    /note for those who don't know 'montra'.
    This term comes from Eastern (Asia) religions
    and refers to a repeated prayer - usually
    repeated until god delivers./
     
  12. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Two of the three branches of a-mill are described in
    2 Peter 3:4.

    1. post-trib a-mill - says that there will be a physical
    return of Jesus but a spiritual reign of Christ
    - they are looking for Jesus to come back after the
    tribulation period

    There are two branches of a-mill that do what
    2 Pter 3:4 says is wrong:

    2. Peterist a-mill - Jesus will not physically return
    in the future, He returned in the past

    3. Mystic a-mill - The Second Advent of Jesus is a
    deep spiritual truth, not a physical thing

    Five major Eschatologies compared:

    Pretrib pre-mill outline of time forward:

    0. church age continues &lt;-- you are here
    1. rapture/resurrection
    2. Tribulation time
    3. Second Advent of Jesus event
    4. literal MK=millinnial kingdom
    5. new heaven & new earth

    Postrib pre-mill outline:

    0. church age continues &lt;-- you are here
    2. Tribulation time
    1.3. Second Advent of Jesus event
    (this is one event with the rapture/resurrection)
    4. literal MK=millinnial kingdom
    5. new heaven & new earth

    Postrib a-mill outline:

    0. church age continues - is the same as: &lt;-- you are here
    2. Tribulation time - is the same as: &lt;-- you are here
    4. spiritual MK=millinnial kingdom &lt;-- you are here
    1.3. Second Advent of Jesus event
    (this is one event with the rapture/resurrection)
    5. new heaven & new earth

    Peterist a-mill outline:

    0. church age continues &lt;-- you are here
    1. rapture/resurrection &lt;done happened
    2. Tribulation time &lt;-- or maybe you are here
    3. Second Advent of Jesus event &lt;done happend
    4. spiritual MK=millinnial kingdom &lt;done happened
    5. new heaven & new earth &lt;-- or maybe you are here

    Mystic a-mill outline:

    0.-5. - Ummmmm-waaaaaa!
     
  13. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Ed, I think the scriptures that you gave me and have listed here seem to cover the rapture and tribulation with clarity.

    I'm surprised (no I'm not......) that they can't see this. This sounds like other false arguments; especially the remark "Rapture doesn't appear in the scriptures." What an argument.
     
  14. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Charles

    I am amillennial in my eschatology. Amillennialism or post millennialism were the predominant historic Baptist belief until the Scofield bible crept in unawares. [I fear that the dispensationalists have left their mark on the HCSB.] Though I do not agree with Historic/Covenent premillennialism I have no real problem with it since they have a correct doctrine of the Church.

    My problem with the dispensationalists is two fold.

    The first is their assertion that Jesus Christ came to establish the Messianic Kingdom, failed, and established the Church instead. Their doctrine of a parenthesis Church, or worse an intercalculation, is an unbiblical and repugnant doctrine.

    In His prayer for the Church as recorded in the 17th chapter of the Gospel according to John Jesus Christ declares:

    John 17:4, KJV I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

    This Scripture clearly and decisively refutes the claim of dispensationalists that that Jesus Christ failed to accomplish the mission for which He was sent and that He instead established the parenthesis form of the Kingdom, the Church, which is unknown in the Old Testament. Dispensational writers tend to ignore the message of John 17:4.

    If Jesus Christ came to establish the ‘earthly’ Messianic Kingdom, He would have established it, otherwise He would not have been able to say to the Father I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. To claim that Jesus Christ came to establish such a kingdom but failed in that task and established the Church instead is to deny the words of Jesus Christ Himself. To do so is to call into question either the truthfulness and deity of Jesus Christ or the sovereignty of God. The truth of the matter is that the rejection of Jesus Christ by the Jews was for the simple reason that He did not fulfill their carnal desire for an ‘earthly’ Messianic Kingdom that would throw off the yoke of Rome.

    My second problem with those who follow after Darbyism/Scofieldism/dispensationalism is that they label anyone who disagrees with their false doctrine as heretics or unsaved or fools or gnostics or romanists, etc., etc.

    Frankly I will try to discuss the errors of the Darbyite eschatology but their belief in this error really is not going to change God's plans for the Second Coming. It may well be that none of the four major doctrines of the Second coming are correct though I believe amillennialism is best supported by Scripture.

    However, I believe that the doctrine of the Church as promulgated by Darbyism/Scofieldism/dispensationalism is, as I stated before, unbiblical and repugnant because it denigrates the work of my God and my Savior, Jesus Christ, who purchased His Church with His own blood [Acts 20:28].
     
  15. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Yes, you do keep repeating your montra (we keep showing verses - duh). But you only dissed me once for using the scripture from the
    King James Version, 1611 Edition (KJV1611).

    /note for those who don't know 'montra'.
    This term comes from Eastern (Asia) religions
    and refers to a repeated prayer - usually
    repeated until god delivers./
    </font>[/QUOTE]I hesitate to accuse anyone on this thread of an untruth but there has not been one passage of Scripture posted that supports a pre GRRReat TRRibulation so-called rapture of the Church. In fact the word rapture does not even appear in Scripture.

    EE if you are going to try to insult me at least spell your words correctly. It is mantra not "montra" . At least DD was crude enough to try to insult me directly by calling me a gnostic heretic. Let me give you some advice and this goes for you, DD, and Carl whatever. You cannot insult me regardless of what you say, I just consider the source and feel sorry for you. Your insults only show the weakness of your argument.

    Years ago in high school I had a dear English teacher who stated that those who use profanity only show the limits of their ability. Could the same be said about those who only hurl insults?

    On two occasions on the previous thread I posted the various insults that hat been hurled against those who disagreed with your position. I hope that is not the case on this thread.
     
  16. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    quote from this place:

    //We should understand that in all these different views of eschatology, it is not simply a matter of opinion about chronology, it's a matter of different hermeneutics and of different types of exegesis.//

    Here are the key verses and key terms that
    i've found from discussions in the matter:

    1. The antecedent of the two 'he's in
    Daniel 9:24. Some say the Messiah, some
    say the Anti-messiah (people of the coming
    Prince) - quite a difference.

    2. The word KAI in Greek and the word 'AND'
    in English both have multiple functions
    (sometimes the KAI is just ignored in English.

    2A. the AND starting Matthew 24:31
    2B. the AND in Revelation 20:4 seperating
    IMHO two seperate groups of elect saints
    (others say they AND unites two equal sets
    /(sets with the same members/ )
    2C. The AND in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 - does
    the AND connect or seperate :
    'the coming' and 'the gathering'?

    3. The FIRST in Revelation 20:5.
    Is that 'FIRST' or 'FIRST and only'?


    Yep, these simple 5 uses of 3 words delinate
    nearly all the variances of the eschatologies.
    Wonder why we couldn't split up on hard
    words like 'sanctification' and 'justification'?
     
  17. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Your descriptions are innacurate! But then so is your doctrine of eschatology. :D
     
  18. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    OldRegular: "My problem with the dispensationalists is two fold.

    The first is their assertion that Jesus Christ came to establish the Messianic Kingdom, failed, and established the Church instead. Their doctrine of a parenthesis Church, or worse an intercalculation, is an unbiblical and repugnant doctrine."

    Unfortunately for you, no dispensational here beleives that.
    WOuld you debate with us here instead of the dispies
    somewhere else. Thank you. Salvation of the mostly Gentiles
    of the church age was always God's plan. Salavation of
    a maximum number of Jews in the Tribulation PERIOD is
    a part of God's plan also.
     
  19. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your comments are moot because
    nobody else will even offer to define the
    terms.
     
  20. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    OldRegular: "My second problem with those who follow after Darbyism/Scofieldism/dispensationalism is that they label anyone who disagrees with their false doctrine as heretics or unsaved or fools or gnostics or romanists, etc., etc."

    Can you hold the scarsam till DD comes back? Thank you.
     

Share This Page

Loading...