1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Why [I believe] Premillennialism is false

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Saint of Circumstance, Oct 2, 2017.

Tags:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    There is only one solitary passage in scripture pertaining to the "thousand years" (Rev 20:1-9), and that single passage is found in a book that is rich in symbolism. Zero mentions of a millennium may be found in the Old Testament, gospels, or epistles.

    Here's how we know the "thousand years" of Rev 20 is a symbol and cannot be a true time period of history:

    (1) Premillennialists divide the judgment of the living and dead into multiple events separated by a time period of one thousand years. Scripture, in contrast, says that Christ's judgment of the living and the dead occurs "at his coming" (2 Tim 4:1; Matt 25:31-46; Rev 11:15,17-18). Thus, premillennialism is false.

    (2) Premillennialists divide the resurrection of the just and the resurrection of the unjust into multiple events separated by a time period of one thousand years. Scripture, in contrast, says that the resurrection of the dead occurs "at his coming" (1 Cor 15:22-23) and pertains to both the just and unjust together (John 5:27-29, Acts 24:15, Daniel 12:1-2). Thus, premillennialism is false.

    (3) Premillennialists claim that the wicked are not judged and raised simultaneously with the righteous on "the last day." Scripture, in contrast, says that it is on "the last day" that Jesus both resurrects and judges the wicked together (Jn 12:48; Jn 6:44,54). Thus, premillennialism is false.

    (4) Premillennialists claim that the "Thief in the Night" (Matt 24:43) speaks of some "rapture away of christians" that takes place seven years prior to the Day of the Lord/coming of Christ; they also claim that the "new heavens and earth" comes one thousand years after that. St. Paul, in contrast, says the "Thief in the Night" event is the Day of the Lord (1 Thess 5:2-5). Interestingly, St. Peter teaches that this same "Day of the Lord/Thief in the Night" event is simultaneous with the "passing of heavens and Earth" (2 Peter 3:10). Therefore we see that the "Thief in the Night," the "Day of the Lord," and "the passing of heavens and earth" are simultaneous, leaving no room for a literal thousand years in between the events. (Finally, we note that Jesus says the "Thief in the Night" event took place for the first-century church - Rev 3:2-3). No literal thousand years can be made to fit anywhere. The New Heavens/Earth and Second Coming are clearly simultaneous. Thus, premillennialism is false.

    (5) Premillennialists claim that Christ's kingdom has been postponed and will begin at some future millennium. Scripture, in contrast, says that Christ's kingdom was established during his generation (Mark 1:14-15; Rev 1:5-6,9) and isn't limited to a thousand years. Christ's Kingdom is eternal (Isa 9:6-7), and Christ has been the King of Kings for twenty centuries now, as the only Sovereign of Heaven and Earth (Matt 28:18-19/Rev 1:5-6/1 Tim 6:15/1 Pet 3:22). We are not waiting for Christ to reign. He reigns, and the increase of his government has no end. Thus, premillennialism is false.

    As we see, Premillennialists wrongly divide key events into many scattered events spread out over a long period of a thousand years, with some parts happening at some "rapture," some happening at the second coming, and some happening after the completion of a literal thousand years. That scheme clearly contradicts scripture. Scripture refutes premillennialism.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. BobRyan

    BobRyan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    31,146
    Likes Received:
    18
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Yet it is scripture -- so we believe it.
     
  3. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    And I suppose you also believe, ya know, since it is scripture, that a 7 headed, 10 horned beast/dragon burns and eats a human harlot, while an intersteller woman escapes the dragon, as heavenly creatures in the skies overhead throw bowls of plagues and fire down upon men and use sickles to chop up their bodies. Meanwhile, hundreds of stars like our sun pummel the earth, poisoning only a few waters. The intersteller woman finally marries a seven-horned, seven-eyed lamb -- after he defeats the dragon, of course, right?
     
  4. TCassidy

    TCassidy Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,977
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No I don't.

    No I don't.

    No I don't.

    No I don't.

    No I don't.

    0 for 5. You aren't doing too well, are you.
     
  5. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Got anything more substantive than "no I don't"?

    Sounds like you're not really a premillennialist then.
     
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    31,146
    Likes Received:
    18
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    God, the devil, angels, the saints, the world, trees etc are all mentioned in Revelation - are they all to be dismissed as fiction? Are we to argue "no truth in Revelation just in the rest of the Bible"?

    There are 66 books in my Bible and even though a few of those books use a symbol here or there - does not mean we can toss them out the window.

    Revelation tells us about two resurrections and they are 1000 years apart. Shall we cancel the doctrine on the resurrection?

    Revelation tells us the saints are raised in the first resurrection and the wicked are raised 1000 years later in the second resurrection. Is this Bible detail supposed to be "too hard to read and understand"?

    In your example above it was "easy" find symbols that we all know are symbols... that was "easy" not "hard". So then where is the difficulty here??
     
  7. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Who's tossing anything out the window?
    Who's dismissing anything in scripture as fiction?
    Certainly not I.
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    31,146
    Likes Received:
    18
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    That's the spirit! :Thumbsup
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Ok... so what's your objection?
     
  10. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Scripture teaches that the resurrection of the dead occurs "at his coming" on the Last Day. (Jn 12:48; Jn 6:44,54)(1 Cor 15:22-23) and pertains to both the just and unjust together (John 5:27-29, Acts 24:15, Daniel 12:1-2)

    You can't have a "First resurrection" that isn't actually "First".

    The First Resurrection is not something Jesus does, it's something Jesus IS.

    "I am the resurrection and the Life"

    the resurrection of Jesus Christ IS the First Resurrection, and on those that take part in it, the 2nd death has no power.

    Jesus Christ was the first to rise out of the dead. Jesus was, literally, the "first resurrection." This fact, well attested by the writings of the New Testament, MUST form the basis for understanding Revelation 20:5-6:

    "This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power" (Revelation 20:5-6)

    The first resurrection was Jesus Christ:

    Revelation 1:5

    Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born out of the dead Acts 26:23
    Christ should suffer and...be the first that should rise from the dead

    Colossians 1:18
    He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead

    1 Corinthians 15:20
    Christ hath risen out of the dead--the first-fruits of those sleeping he became


    Jesus Christ was, plainly, the first resurrection. This fact forms the basis of St. John's depiction of the tribulation martyr saints becoming full partakers of the "first resurrection" in Revelation 20--everything Christ received by his death and resurrection is granted to them. Revelation 20:4-6, therefore, depicts the reality of Pauline theology concerning the identity Christ's followers had "in Him." Paul had taught that the saints were to become partakers of Christ's own reign and victory over death. Paul, with his detailed theology of our baptism into the very death and resurrection of Jesus (Rom 6:3-14), taught that the saints had co-resurrection and co-enthronement in the realized resurrection and enthronement of Jesus Christ.

    Revelation 20:4-6 is a narrative depiction of the saints' realization of the glorious promise Paul held out for them in his teachings--the saints are depicted as having attained the goal for which they all strove. As Paul taught, their resurrection and reign was "in Christ," and their sufferings and martyrdoms were honored by God with the reward of partaking in Christ's own resurrection, enthronement, and reign. They realized the promise of Paul's teaching that the saints were truly to take part in the first resurrection, the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Truly, on these the second death has no power (Rev 20:6).
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,977
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Faith:
    Baptist
    What more is necessary to understand I don't believe any of the things you claim I, as a Pre-Mil, believe?
    Wrong again. I am a non-dispensational Chilliast (Historic Pre-Mill).
     
  12. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Fair Enough.
    Thanks for Chiming in...

    Suppose I could edit my OP to specify DP, so as not to be 0-5 :)
     
  13. BobRyan

    BobRyan Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    31,146
    Likes Received:
    18
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    True and Rev 19 describes that coming - with Rev 20:1-5 telling is that this second coming of Christ event - is where the saints are raised - "blessed and holy" and over them the 2nd death has no power.

    John 5 (same writer as in Rev 20) tells us again of the two resurrections - one for the just and one for the unjust.

    As does Acts 24;15
    15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust

    And John reminds us that the two resurrections are 1000 years apart. A detail we are hard-pressed to "simply ignore".

    and pertains to both the just and unjust together (John 5:27-29, Acts 24:15, Daniel 12:1-2)

    You can't have a "First resurrection" that isn't actually "First". - so then as John looks into the future the first resurrection he sees is the one in Rev 20... according to him.

    IF he were to look in the past and ask about the first resurrection since Adam - he might find a thing or two to talk about in the OT as well as the various resurrections that Jesus caused.

    But that would not make sense.

    Rev 19 -- is the second coming.
    Rev 20 starts with second-coming events then 1000 years then the 2nd resurrection.

    This is very obvious from the text itself.

    Your quote of "you" noted. But I prefer the actual text that mentions the first resurrection.

    BTW -- "I am the resurrection and the Life" not "I am the first resurrection". I prefer the Bible


    "the resurrection of Jesus Christ IS the First Resurrection, and on those that take part in it, the 2nd death has no power." -- is what you appear to "wish" was written in Rev 20... it is not

    Repeatedly "quoting you" is not the same thing as quoting the actual text that speaks of the "first resurrection" and we both know it. I prefer the Bible .

    4 Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years.
     
  14. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    And scripture, time and again, testifies that the resurrection of the dead occurs "at his coming" on the Last Day. (Jn 12:48; Jn 6:44,54)(1 Cor 15:22-23) and pertains to both the just and unjust together (John 5:27-29, Acts 24:15, Daniel 12:1-2)

    My Interpreting the thousand years differently than you, does not equate to me ignoring it.
    Where do you get that notion from anyway?

    Jesus Christ IS the First Resurrection.

    Me too:

    Revelation 1:5
    Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born out of the dead

    Acts 26:23
    Christ should suffer and...be the first that should rise from the dead

    Colossians 1:18
    He is the beginning, the first born from the dead

    1 Corinthians 15:20
    Christ hath risen out of the dead--the first-fruits of those sleeping he became

    We are hardpressed to "simply ignore" these passages, or render them "fiction" and "throw them away", don't you think?

    It is cleear to me that you base your view on a literal reading of 6 verses of Revelation 20, and that's it. That's all there really is to premillennialism. There are no other verses of scripture that mention any Thousand Years reign of Christ on earth. None.

    According to the gospels and epistles, the final coming of Christ and the resurrection and judgment of all people take place at one time. Christ comes to judge all the living and the dead. A literal reading of Rev 20:1-6 would contradict the rest of the NT verses concerning this, and since scripture can't contradict itself, we know that the Rev 20 passage contains symbolism (as does every chapter of that book).

    Since the resurrection occurs at the second coming (1 Cor 15:23)...

    And since the judgment occurs at the second coming (2 Tim 4:1; Rev 11:15-18)...

    And since the New Heaven/Earth occurs at the "thief's coming," on the "day of the Lord" (2 Pet 3:10/1 Thess 5:2)...

    THEREFORE we know there is no literal historic millennium. The bible proves there is no literal earthly "millennium." The "thousand years" is a typological symbol in John's highly typological and symbolic vision.

    The fact is, there is no literal 1000 years. The bible writers leave no place anywhere on any timeline that accommodates a literal 1000 years.

    As we see, Premillennialists wrongly divide these singular events into many scattered events and intersperse them over a long period of a thousand years, with some parts happening at some "rapture," some happening at the coming, and some happening after the completion of a literal thousand years. That clearly contradicts scripture. Scripture thus refutes premillennialism.

    There is no literal thousand years. It's a fact. Jesus, Daniel, and Paul, in their non-vision statements, are clear about this. St. John, who has countless symbolic uses for his writing and who does not give a sequential pattern of events, should not be understood literally--his VISION is a story that parallels some generation of God's cataclysmic judgment upon Israel. It it obvious that the generation in view is St. John's own then-contemporary generation (Rev 1:1,3; 22:6-7; 22:10-11). It is obvious that the cataclysmic judgment is the destruction of apostate Jerusalem and the Temple which took place in John's time, and concerning which Christ spoke at length.

    Christ's reign isn't limited to 1000 years, nor are we still waiting for it to begin as classic dispensationalists claim. Rather, Christ's Kingdom is eternal (Isa 9:6-7). He has been the King of Kings for 20 centuries now and is the only Sovereign of Heaven and Earth (Matt 28:18-19/Rev 1:5-6/1 Tim 6:15/1 Pet 3:22). We are not waiting for Christ to reign. He reigns, and the increase of his government has no end. Thus, premillennialism is false.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    18,501
    Likes Received:
    816
    Faith:
    Baptist


    First born/First fruits

    The first fruits were gathered from the fields of Israel as an "wave offering" to be brought to the temple BEFORE the harvest commenced.

    Jesus indeed is the first fruits of those sleeping , LATER those who follow Him in the regeneration are part of His resurrection.
    1 Corinthians 15
    20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
    21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
    22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
    23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

    IMO these passages do not defeat premillennialism.

    Personally (like Dr Cassidy) I prefer the term chialism - the choice of the early church fathers.
    FWIW - Early on dispensationalism was my preference, presently for my own view I have greatly modified it from the original Scofield/Dallas view


    True.

    HankD
     
  16. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    18,501
    Likes Received:
    816
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "Rapture" is taken from the Latin Vulgate root rapturo and is from 1 Thessalonians 4:17

    VULGATE 1 Thessalonians 4:17 deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus

    Actually some reports say that Jesuit priests "discovered" the "rapture" (so called) in the Vulgate Bible.

    KJV 1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
    caught up - Greek root - harpazo

    So it is a biblical word and if we followed the Greek text of inspiration we would call it The Harpazo

    HankD
     
  17. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 EXPLICITLY teaches that this "Cathcing up" of the Living happens at some point AFTER the Dead are raised.

    Premill teaches it happens BEFORE.

    Given the choice of which of these two polar opposite teachings to hold as truth, Scripture or Premill, my money is on scripture, every time.
     
  18. TCassidy

    TCassidy Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,977
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, it doesn't. The dead in Christ rise first. Then the living saints are caught up with them.

    The dead rise first because they have 6 feet farther to travel!
     
  19. Saint of Circumstance

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    2
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    AFTER the Dead are raised, not before and not simultaneously. AFTER. Scripture does not teach how long after, but it is definitely AFTER the dead are raised.

    There is no Pre resurrection Rapture of the living taught in scripture, In fact, the opposite is taught explicitly, therefore premillennialism is false.

    You can't be serious.
    Ever been to a Mausoleum?

    Sometimes the Dead are 10 feet above the living.

    [​IMG]
     
    #19 Saint of Circumstance, Oct 12, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. TCassidy

    TCassidy Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,977
    Likes Received:
    2,314
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes. That is what I said. The dead in Christ rise first then the living are caught up to be with them in the air. Just like the bible says.

    Pre resurrection Rapture? What in the world is that? The rapture IS the resurrection.

    Yes, I can be. I was not, but I can be. (Don't take yourself so seriously, I don't.) :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...