A problem with premillennialism

[jeremiah1five]

@jeremiah1five responded:


J indicts himself:

I'm in very good company.

 

[jeremiah1five]

If someone said to you as a way of asserting that what they say is unquestionably true, "The depth of my knowledge is equal to my suffering and grief in life. So if you don't understand the things I say today, you are not as spiritually advanced as me (implied) ,and I am still right." (When someone says they are not wrong, they are saying they are right.); as you stood on Mt SInai (not Zion) and looked into their heart, what would your conclusion about the person be?

Sincere.

 

[Arial]

Sincere.

Not likely.

 

[jeremiah1five]

That designation doesn't make any difference whatsoever! What matters is the Church, which is comprised of all true believing Israelites AND Gentiles, all of whom lose the bloodline classification distinctions of this world in Yahshuah! If you don't believe that, then you are a purveyor of doctrines of demons! You may be a really nice guy in person, but what you are saying is not of God if and when it contradicts the inspired writings of Yah!

MM

Scripture cannot be broken.
Show me Gentiles in the Great Congregation of Hebrews in the desert after God delivered them through Moses.
Show me that under the Mosaic Covenant and the sacrificial system God commanded that the high priest after offering sacrifices for the sins of the children of Israel going to the Gentiles that surrounded Israel and offering sacrifices for their sin.
If you can show me God atoning the sin of Gentiles under the Law, then you have an argument.

Scripture cannot be broken. Even in the face of passages that contradict your beliefs you choose your beliefs over the Word of God. And the strange thing is that you use the Word of God to prove your comments. Sounds like you're neither hot nor cold but Lukewarm.
You accept Scripture when it suits your purpose but reject Scripture when it contradicts what you believe.
That doesn't sound like true Christianity to me.

It is more like someone who doesn't love God or His Christ.

Jesus said, "I will spew you out of my mouth!"

I just hope you don't land near me.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Israel is not a Christian nation, it is Jewish.

If there is just one Jewish Christian in the land, and Israel is in the New Covenant era, then it is a Christian nation that one day will be Christian through and through.

There is no such thing as a Christian nations as it pervades most nations (maybe all, though in some converts to Christianity would be in great peril) and no nation is without a multitude of religions within it.

The whole existence of Israel is that in its purest form still prophesied for a future fulfillment, God has His hand upon this people and one day very soon when the King of the Jews sits on David's throne in Jerusalem, that all Israel will be Christ-followers and the whole nation ruling on earth. In its prophesied purest form Israel is a Theocracy.

Which brings us once again close to the topic of the OP. The predominant view in my understanding, of premillennialism is that Satan is bound now and will be released in the "Great Tribulation." In amillennialism (my perspective of it) the Scripture says he is bound from deceiving the nations. Not that he is completely bound---and evidence shows he is not.

So when he is released for a short time, he is released to deceive the nations. WHat might that mean?

If we look at the fact that even nations that consider Christianity the devil himself, and forbid preaching the gospel, even kill those caught doing so, there are still pockets within those nations where the gospel is preached and Bibles distributed. This is done in direct obedience to Jesus' command that it should be preached to all nations, by very, very, brave Christians. Satan is bound from stopping it.

When he is unbound I believe we will see a worldwide persecution of the church by governments. And those days will be cut short for the sake of the elect.

Jewish Christians were commanded the good news of Messiah's arrival be preached to "all nations" because that's where God scattered the Jews two times at the time this was taking place, and two more times still future.
God needed to get His message to the twelve tribes scattered with a simple message to them.

"God has answered your prayers, my people. He knows you've been waiting a very long time. I am here with the message from the King of the Jews that your Messiah, Israel, has finally come and He sent me here to you to let you know of the things that recently took place in Israel and Jerusalem, of our Messiah who died on a tree, defeated death, and will come again to take you all to Himself.
The God of your father, Abraham, has spoken. He will come again."

 

[jeremiah1five]

Not likely.

You asked and I gave you the answer.
Oh, my bad. You weren't trying to get information, you were baiting me to answer so that you can say, "Not likely."
Talk about insincerity at its finest.

 

[Arial]

Show me Gentiles in the Great Congregation of Hebrews in the desert after God delivered them through Moses.

You have been shown, three times, and when you are shown, this is what you do.

Even in the face of passages that contradict your beliefs you choose your beliefs over the Word of God. And the strange thing is that you use the Word of God to prove your comments.

Show me that under the Mosaic Covenant and the sacrificial system God commanded that the high priest after offering sacrifices for the sins of the children of Israel going to the Gentiles that surrounded Israel and offering sacrifices for their sin.

A false dichotomy fallacy. Also known as the black-or-white fallacy, either/or fallacy, false choice, no middle ground. considering your other posts, it is stating that if Israel's high priest offered sacrifices for the sins of the children of Israel, and the priest didn't then go out and do the same with the surrounding nations, then Gentiles have no covenant with God and that there is no salvation for Gentiles.

Also it wrongly assumes that there were no non-Hebrews in the congregation, when the Bible specifically names them in the covenant with Abraham, with the sign of circumcision. ANd it presumes what is highly unlikely, that no non-Hebrews came out of Egypt. If there were circumcised non-Hebrews in the Israeli community, they offered the same sacrifices as the Hebrews did, which would make your statement a false one right from the start.

 

[Musicmaster]

All that was promised to Abraham will come to pass, in that physical Israeli will have a kingdom...the Kingdom of Heaven, which will be upon this earth...a Theocracy Kingdom.

The Church will not preside over it, will not rule it, for it will be the fulfillment of a promise made to the man who birthed the nation and the lineage through which Yahshuah, of the tribe of Judah, now serves as our High Priest, which is a change in the priesthood, which leads to the inevitable change in the Mosaic Law, the LETTER of the Law, that is no more a requirement upon us; contrary to what some groups of Judaizers today believe. Fulfillment of the Law does not mean its having passed away, but rather that Yahshuah showed to us how to live within the Law by way of it being written in our hearts, not on tablets of stone and papyri.

So, we are indeed living in the premillennial age, and details of which are debatable, but we are definitely pre right now.

MM

 

[Tambora]

Israel was in his loins.

He wasn't chosen from his loins, he was chosen from Gentiles.
He was told to leave/separate even from his own father.

Abraham was a descendant of Shem and of Salah and Eber.

Which were all Gentiles since Israel was not established as a nation separated from Gentiles, and wouldn't be for some time.
You should know that.

 

[Musicmaster]

Scripture cannot be broken.

True. What I question is your warped and twisted interpretational system.

Show me Gentiles in the Great Congregation of Hebrews in the desert after God delivered them through Moses.
Show me that under the Mosaic Covenant and the sacrificial system God commanded that the high priest after offering sacrifices for the sins of the children of Israel going to the Gentiles that surrounded Israel and offering sacrifices for their sin.
If you can show me God atoning the sin of Gentiles under the Law, then you have an argument.

This seems to mistakenly rely upon the presupposition that the Gentiles needed those sacrifices. Romans 1 is very clear on the subject, and to your argument is moot. The Gentile converts were not required to obey all the Law, for they were allowed to eat what was forbidden to us Jews at that time.

Please, feel free to enjoy a shell fish sandwich, eat some snails and shrimp with cocktail sauce...I as a Jew enjoy them.

Scripture cannot be broken. Even in the face of passages that contradict your beliefs you choose your beliefs over the Word of God. And the strange thing is that you use the Word of God to prove your comments. Sounds like you're neither hot nor cold but Lukewarm.
You accept Scripture when it suits your purpose but reject Scripture when it contradicts what you believe.
That doesn't sound like true Christianity to me.

(yawn) Your diatribe is something that stands upon the strength of its own merits, which are pretty much non-existent.

The difference between fulfillment and what you call "broken" only speaks to us all your severe lack of understanding in how to rightly divide the word of Truth. That whacko group out there who thinks that they have gone back to the Hebrew Roots of the Christian faith...they too are without understanding and rightly dividing of the word of Truth!

MM

 

[Arial]

You asked and I gave you the answer.
Oh, my bad. You weren't trying to get information, you were baiting me to answer so that you can say, "Not likely."
Talk about insincerity at its finest.

No, actually I was giving you a chance to be honest, at least with yourself, and learn something. If our were going to do that and save face, which we all like to do when we are embarrassed, you simply could have left the question unanswered. It was a rhetorical question.

If there is just one Jewish Christian in the land, and Israel is in the New Covenant era, then it is a Christian nation that one day will be Christian through and through

National Israel is not in the New Covenant. Entrance into the New Covenant requires knowing Christ as the Messiah and Savior of the world. Besides that, the reasoning is illogical in every direction. Wisdom dictates that one be logical in arriving at conclusions.

The whole existence of Israel is that in its purest form still prophesied for a future fulfillment, God has His hand upon this people and one day very soon when the King of the Jews sits on David's throne in Jerusalem, that all Israel will be Christ-followers and the whole nation ruling on earth.

Jesus is King on the throne now.

What does Scripture tell us happens when Christ returns? The dead are raised to life, the sheep and goats are separated, the harvest is harvested. How quickly? As the lightning flashes from east to west, at the sound of the trumpet. The dead in Christ will be raised, imperishable, with glorified bodies, and those who remain at His coming,will be changed in the twinkling of an eye.

You have Jesus returing, ruling over temporal people, still in the state as it was with Noah, from a temporal temple, even though He is the Temple, in a world of still fallen people, who plan war against the temporal people in the temporal land.

Scripture tells us that when Jesus returns, all will be made new, the devil and all who follow him thrown into the lake of fire. The great and terrible day of the Lord, that is both an unimaginable blessing for the redeemed, and the worst day ever in all of history for those who have rejected Christ.

So there is something very unscriptural about the scenario you present.

Jewish Christians were commanded the good news of Messiah's arrival be preached to "all nations" because that's where God scattered the Jews two times at the time this was taking place, and two more times still future.
God needed to get His message to the twelve tribes scattered with a simple message to them.

But you have them preaching bad news. "Behold! Only Jews will be saved!" They already believed that! And you have the apostle TO THE GENTILES, Paul, teaching lies, because He says the truly good news is that salvation through faith in Christ, is for the Gentile also. He says people from all nations will be saved in the same way by the same ONE. He says Jesus tore down that wall of division, and contention. But I guess you love that wall!

 

[jeremiah1five]

You have been shown, three times, and when you are shown, this is what you do.


A false dichotomy fallacy. Also known as the black-or-white fallacy, either/or fallacy, false choice, no middle ground. considering your other posts, it is stating that if Israel's high priest offered sacrifices for the sins of the children of Israel, and the priest didn't then go out and do the same with the surrounding nations, then Gentiles have no covenant with God and that there is no salvation for Gentiles.

Also it wrongly assumes that there were no non-Hebrews in the congregation, when the Bible specifically names them in the covenant with Abraham, with the sign of circumcision. ANd it presumes what is highly unlikely, that no non-Hebrews came out of Egypt. If there were circumcised non-Hebrews in the Israeli community, they offered the same sacrifices as the Hebrews did, which would make your statement a false one right from the start.

the Bible says seventy souls of Hebrews went into Egypt. In a matter of years while the Hebrews multiplied a new king took over Egypt who didn't know Joseph and eventually made the Hebrews into slaves. Tell what non-Hebrew Gentiles (or Egyptians) volunteered to becoming slaves with the Hebrews? Answer: None.
So, it was ONLY the Hebrews that were made slaves.

When Moses delivered the Hebrews out of Egypt it was the Hebrew slaves that were delivered, and all the Hebrews were delivered. There were NO non-Hebrew Gentiles that left with Moses and the children of Israel. Only the Hebrews left Egypt.

37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. Ex 12:37.

Finally, at the end of their journey the children of Israel gathered at the foot of Mount Sinai where God gave them His Law. There were no non-Hebrew Gentiles that were in bondage and no non-Hebrew Gentiles left with the children of Israel because there were no non-Hebrew people that were slaves with the children of Israel.
The sacrificial system implemented by God was to atone yearly for the sins of the children of Israel.

Christ came and fulfilled the Law. The Law was nailed to His cross and as our substitute the New Covenant is the Mosaic Law fulfilled by Christ and also one more thing Jesus taught the children of Israel. The putting of Gods Law (of Moses) in the inward parts of the children of Israel. In other words, the Holy Spirit is put in the inward parts of the children of Israel. The "kingdom of God comes not with observation, lo, the kingdom of God is within you." Christ is the Law of Moses and Christ is the Kingdom of God. Christ in us is a new thing God was doing in the earth, in the land of Israel.

You keep trying to add non-Hebrew Gentiles into the three Hebrew covenants, but the covenants are closed. There were no non-Hebrew Gentiles named or mentioned when each covenant was being made and now today, as we look back in Hebrew history there are no non-Hebrew Gentiles in any of the Hebrew covenants. It is bad hermeneutics to add Gentiles into the Hebrew covenants after the fact and after the covenants have been closed for hundreds of years. The sacrificial system under the Law was for the atonement of the children of Israel. It's their covenant. Leave them to what belongs to Israel and stop stealing their covenants and their relationship with God.
There are no God-Gentile covenants in existence. None.

 

[jeremiah1five]

He wasn't chosen from his loins, he was chosen from Gentiles.
He was told to leave/separate even from his own father.


Which were all Gentiles since Israel was not established as a nation separated from Gentiles, and wouldn't be for some time.
You should know that.

Abraham was a Hebrew from the family of Eber.
Try studying this and then come back with the truth of Scripture.

13 And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; Gen. 14:13.

Do you accept this Word?

 

[Mr GLee]

Israel is not a Christian nation, it is Jewish.

There is no such thing as a Christian nations as it pervades most nations (maybe all, though in some converts to Christianity would be in great peril) and no nation is without a multitude of religions within it.

Which brings us once again close to the topic of the OP. The predominant view in my understanding, of premillennialism is that Satan is bound now and will be released in the "Great Tribulation." In amillennialism (my perspective of it) the Scripture says he is bound from deceiving the nations. Not that he is completely bound---and evidence shows he is not.

So when he is released for a short time, he is released to deceive the nations. WHat might that mean?

If we look at the fact that even nations that consider Christianity the devil himself, and forbid preaching the gospel, even kill those caught doing so, there are still pockets within those nations where the gospel is preached and Bibles distributed. This is done in direct obedience to Jesus' command that it should be preached to all nations, by very, very, brave Christians. Satan is bound from stopping it.

When he is unbound I believe we will see a worldwide persecution of the church by governments. And those days will be cut short for the sake of the elect.

I would offer another perspective. .

The deceiving of all nations was a one time event .

The time of reformation had come. The veil representing the circummsion of the bloody husband Christ.

When it was rent from the top to the bottom , there was no Jewish man as King of kings sitting in the what they called Holy of Holies .Not what God called.

The father of lies could no longer deceive all the nations he was a Jewish king of kings. He will be released when the Lord sends a famine for hearing the gospel. . to again build another abomination of desolation (God living in temples made with the dying hands of mankind )

 

[Mr GLee]

the Bible says seventy souls of Hebrews

Where can we find that?

Seventy gods in the likeness of Jewish men?

We know where that leads " idol worship" .

They have no faith as it is written alone that could please of Christ's faith (understanding) working with us. Yoked with His labor of love .We miraculously can ask for our daily bread of his will . Look to the unseen eternal spiritual things, the food the disciples at first knew not of (hidden mana ) The will power of the invisible head, the "Let there be" Emanuel .

Acts 14: 11-14 And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.
Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people. Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,

 

[Musicmaster]

Modern thinking is interesting, is it not? We're told by Paul to "comfort" one another with the deliverance, but then there are those who believe that deliverance will happen only after horrid death all around. Be comforted with that...? Some belief systems render Paul's instructions as having originated either from a lunatic or a liar, or the Lord is really angry with the Church.

Which is it; to those of you who believe you'll be here during the horrid tribulation? Was Paul a lunatic, a liar or has the Church betrayed the Lord as did Israel, and therefore the wrath upon both? If the Church is going to be here through half or most or all of it, then the Lord must, in the thinking of those who believe along those lines, be angry with the Church as well, which places the Church on the same level of betrayal as the rejection of Israel.

Surely someone has an idea in how to rationalize this.

MM

 

[Arial]

the Bible says seventy souls of Hebrews went into Egypt. In a matter of years while the Hebrews multiplied a new king took over Egypt who didn't know Joseph and eventually made the Hebrews into slaves. Tell what non-Hebrew Gentiles (or Egyptians) volunteered to becoming slaves with the Hebrews? Answer: None.
So, it was ONLY the Hebrews that were made slaves.

The statement that only Hebrews were made slaves is almost certainly not true. Even Egyptians themselves were sometimes enslaved to pay a debt. The wars that occurred with other nations over Goshen after they migrated into it because of the famine, resulted in those who settled there to also become slaves. Also we have a record of at least one Hebrew, Joseph, marrying an Egyptian and having two sons.

The intermarriage and the influx of "Gentiles" into Goshen, and the likelihood of intermarriages with them, is one way of accounting for the increase in the population of seventy Hebrews to swell to the ranks of what was probably about two million, who left in the Exodus. Scripture appears to only be counting the males of military age, and the direct descendants of Jacob. (Numbers 1:1-3;2:32)
thecompletepilgrim.com

 

[Musicmaster]

Isaiah 2:12 For the day of the LORD of hosts [shall be] upon every [one that is] proud and lofty, and upon every [one that is] lifted up; and he shall be brought low:

Isaiah 13:6, 9
6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD [is] at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. ...
9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

Jeremiah 46:10 For this [is] the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries: and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood: for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.

Ezekiel 30:3 For the day [is] near, even the day of the LORD [is] near, a cloudy day; it shall be the time of the heathen.

Joel 1:15 Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD [is] at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.

Joel 2:1, 11, 31
1 Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for [it is] nigh at hand; ...
11 And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army: for his camp [is] very great: for [he is] strong that executeth his word: for the day of the LORD [is] great and very terrible; and who can abide it? ...
31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.

Amos 5:18, 20
18 Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end [is] it for you? the day of the LORD [is] darkness, and not light. ...
20 [Shall] not the day of the LORD [be] darkness, and not light? even very dark, and no brightness in it?

Obadiah 1:15 For the day of the LORD [is] near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.

Zephaniah 1:14 The great day of the LORD [is] near, [it is] near, and hasteth greatly, [even] the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly.

Zechariah 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.

Acts 2:20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:

1 Thessalonians 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

There's no measure of comfort in any of that, which is what was bothering the Thessalonians who were told that the day of the Lord had already begun. Some, for very strange reasons I can't figure out, seem to think that the deliverance of the Church is somewhere in the midst of all that horror, and that there could ever be an inkling for measure of "comfort" to be found in encouragements for passing through that horror only to be delivered at some unknown point in it all...IF they survive one out of every two on the earth dying in that time?

So, either Paul was a lunatic or a liar! How does one justify any of that being something within which can be found "comfort"?

MM

 

[Arial]

When Moses delivered the Hebrews out of Egypt it was the Hebrew slaves that were delivered, and all the Hebrews were delivered. There were NO non-Hebrew Gentiles that left with Moses and the children of Israel. Only the Hebrews left Egypt.

Ex 12:38 A mixed multitude went up also with them;
Joshua 8:35 There was not a word of all that MOses had commanded the Joshua failed to read before the whole assembly of Israel, including the women, the little ones, and the foreigners who lived among them.

Do you accept His word?

 

[Arial]

Modern thinking is interesting, is it not? We're told by Paul to "comfort" one another with the deliverance, but then there are those who believe that deliverance will happen only after horrid death all around. Be comforted with that...? Some belief systems render Paul's instructions as having originated either from a lunatic or a liar, or the Lord is really angry with the Church.

Which is it; to those of you who believe you'll be here during the horrid tribulation? Was Paul a lunatic, a liar or has the Church betrayed the Lord as did Israel, and therefore the wrath upon both? If the Church is going to be here through half or most or all of it, then the Lord must, in the thinking of those who believe along those lines, be angry with the Church as well, which places the Church on the same level of betrayal as the rejection of Israel.

Surely someone has an idea in how to rationalize this.

MM

It should never be a matter of rationalizing anything when it comes to searching the Bible for truth. It is a matter at arriving at that truth through the means of hermeneutical evaluation of texts, and comparing everything to the whole counsel of God in Scripture. He is not going to contradict Himself. And it must always take into account---"Who is God? Who is Christ? What is their purpose?"

Your statement presumes a number of things.

1. That the tribulation in Revelation consists of a seven year period of time, in which a series of judgements in which God's wrath is poured out, and horrific events take place.
2. That if the church is on earth when this happens, they are receiving God's wrath.
3 That if they are present, God is judging the body of Christ, and they are receiving the punishment that His Son already endured in their place. In this may be the idea that we can lose our salvation.

So I ask you this:

Do your think those great men of faith who were beheaded, crucified upside down, burned at the stake, tortured, hung, because they would not declare, "Caesar kurios"---Caesar is Lord---were experiencing God's wrath?

We are not promised a rose garden. We are not told that we will never have to endure suffering or tribulations and persecutions. In fact we are told the opposite. We are also told For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future no any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

ANd Jesus' own promise."I will lose none who the Father has given me, and I will raise them up on the last day."

So, it isn't a matter of rationalizing. It is a matter of whether there are presuppositions that have made their way into the hermeneutics, and arrived at something that may not be true, and then run with it.

Those martyred for their faith in Christ, stood on rock solid ground.