Major doctrinal errors found in Amillennialism.

[ewq1938]

39. Christ never sets foot on the Earth at the second coming?

Amillennialism denies Christ sets foot on the Earth at the second coming yet we are told the opposite:

Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

The redeemer is Christ and he shall stand upon the Earth in the latter day.

Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Christ was on the Earth when he ascended into heaven so this verse promises he will return the same way which means he will step upon the Earth again.

 

[ewq1938]

40. Did the false expectations the Pharisees had about the Messiah match the expectations of Amillennialists?

The Pharisees expected the Messiah to rule right away but he didn't. His rule would come far into the future. Amillennialists make the same error the Pharisees did by wanting the rule to be happening now but the truth is the rule comes in the future. That's Premillennialism.

 

[ewq1938]

41. Does Christ reign now?

1Co 15:25 For he must reign (present tense verb), till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

Amillennialism presents this verse as evidence Christ is reigning now because "reign" here is in the present tense. The problem with this strawman fallacy is that Premillennialism knows Christ is reigning now, in heaven. This verse does not suggest he is reigning now over the Earth. Amillennialism uses similar verses with present tense verbs but all of them are contextually speaking about his reign in heaven. The Earthly reign (which Amillennialism usually denies will ever happen) does not start until he returns at the second coming.

When would Christ reign over his enemies on the Earth?

Mat 22:44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

Mar 12:36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Luk 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Luk 20:43 Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Act 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Act 2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

Psa 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Psa 110:2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
Psa 110:3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.
Psa 110:4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
Psa 110:5 The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.
Psa 110:6 He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries.
Psa 110:7 He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head.

So when does Christ leave the right hand of God in heaven and come to the Earth to defeat his enemies and rule in the midst of those enemies? The second coming of course. We also see this depicted in Revelation 19-20.

 

[ewq1938]

39. Christ never sets foot on the Earth at the second coming?

Amillennialism denies Christ sets foot on the Earth at the second coming yet we are told the opposite:

Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

The redeemer is Christ and he shall stand upon the Earth in the latter day.

Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Christ was on the Earth when he ascended into heaven so this verse promises he will return the same way which means he will step upon the Earth again at the second coming.

 

[ewq1938]

42. Do Amillennialists understand their own doctrine?

Amillennialists often say things like there is no Millennium or there is no thousand years or that there is no such thing as an Earthly rule. That's isn't actually what Amillennialism teaches. Amillennialists believe in a thousand years on the Earth. They believe it's happening now and has been for a long time. They believe Christ rules the Earth from heaven with the dead saints, and living saints are ruling with Christ now upon the Earth. The truth is they aren't actually ruling at all, it's 100 percent imaginary and Christ is also not ruling the Earth. Wicked men rule this world helped by satan whether they realize it or not. Christ will return and literally rule, a real rule, over the people of this world. We are still waiting for that glorious day.

 

[ewq1938]

39. Christ never sets foot on the Earth at the second coming?

Sometimes Amillennialism denies Christ sets foot on the Earth at the second coming yet we are told the opposite:

Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

The redeemer is Christ and he shall stand upon the Earth in the latter day.

Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Christ was on the Earth when he ascended into heaven so this verse promises he will return the same way which means he will step upon the Earth again after he returns.

 

[ewq1938]

(Each of these issues have been presented in threads in various forums by people who believe in Amillennialism. These may or may not be held by every individual of that doctrine.)

If any one of these are true, then you can be assured that Amillennialism is faulty and should be rejected as a theological doctrine.

Each person who believes in Amillennialism is a good person with good intent regarding scriptural interpretation but Premillennialism very much disagrees with their doctrine, their way of interpretation, and their exegesis of various scriptures. In this list you will see the many problems contained within Amillennialism.

 

[Jocund]

These may or may not be held by every individual of that doctrine.)

If any one of these are true, then you can be assured that Amillennialism is faulty and should be rejected as a theological doctrine.

This erroneously assumes that there is only one form of amillennialism. I think you could fairly say that some forms of amill are faulty. I don't think anyone disagrees with that premise.

Instead it would perhaps be more fruitful to tackle the claim "there exists a valid form of amillennialism" and work from there.

 

[ewq1938]

This erroneously assumes that there is only one form of amillennialism. I think you could fairly say that some forms of amill are faulty.

You are right. I'll edit or remove that. I can't edit at this forum but can in other ones. Thank you.

 

[ewq1938]

43. Does the term "Amillennialism" make any sense?

No. The term means "No Millennium", but the doctrine teaches there actually is a Millennium in contradiction to their own name. Some online sources claim the term might have been created by Premillennialism as a pejorative but I have seen many Amillennialists say there is no Millennium. See entry 42 for more information.

 

[ewq1938]

44. Does owning the cattle on a thousand hills prove Revelation 20's "a thousand years" is figurative?

Psa 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

Amillennialism likes to cite this verse to show that numbers are figurative, especially a "thousand" of something. Can this only be viewed as figurative?

No.

If I asked someone to name a thousand hills or mountains where cattle were, and I said, "I own all the cattle on the hills/mountains you named." That would not be a figurative use of a thousand because it is exactly a thousand of them. The point of course is to imply God owns the cattle on all hills and mountains but he can demonstrate that by using an exact number of them.

 

[ewq1938]

45. Can one word prove Amillennialism is false?

Yes, "rule" (poimaino) being in the future tense in Revelation 19:15. (This is an addendum to number 35.)

 

[ewq1938]

46. Did the earliest identified Amillennialist oppose the canonization of the book of Revelation?

Yes.

The earliest identified Amillennialist was a Presbyter in Rome in the third century named Gaius. He opposed the canonization of the book of Revelation. No surprise Amillennialism would not want Revelation canonized since it is that book which speaks so much about the thousand years and proves Amillennialism wrong by speaking of two days of judgment and two separate resurrections. Amillennialism came out of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[ewq1938]

47. Did the Great Tribulation happen in the past?

No.

Amillennialism often teaches that the Great Tribulation started and ended in the past but that contradicts the teaching of Jesus:

Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
Mat 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Mat 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Jesus taught that his second coming would immediately happen once the Great Tribulation ends. This means Amillennialism is immediately incorrect.

 

[ewq1938]

48. Is there any relation between "cattle upon a thousand hills" and the "thousand years" in Revelation 20?


No.

Psa 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

H505
'eleph
eh'-lef
Properly the same as H504; hence (an ox’s head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousand: - thousand.
Total KJV occurrences: 504

H504
'eleph
eh'-lef
From H502; a family; also (from the sense of yoking or taming) an ox or cow: - family, kine, oxen.
Total KJV occurrences: 8

This did not even start out as a number that meant a thousand. It's original meaning was a family or an ox or cow.

How languages evolve is unique to each language. Trying to use this to redefine a Greek word is wrong and shows a lack of understanding of the Hebrew and Greek languages.

 

[ewq1938]

49. Did Paul say Revelation 20:4 already happened?

No.

Some Amillennialists believe these scriptures are speaking of the same thing:

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:


Paul wasn't literally sitting in heaven when he wrote that, nor was he beheaded, nor did he live again after being physically dead. The beheaded dead saints that come back to life and rule with Christ are not the ones who were sitting on the thrones. The two passages do not match at all aside from the mention of "sitting".

Revelation 20:4 is speaking of a physical resurrection of saved Christians. Ephesians 2:4-6 is speaking of formerly unsaved (spiritually dead) people accepting Christ and their souls being spiritually quickened resulting in them being saved by grace. Revelation 20:4 is what will happen to some of these Ephesians 2:4-6 saved people. It will be how they physically die. This will happen in the Great Tribulation which has not yet even started.

 

[ewq1938]

(Each of these issues have been presented in threads in various forums by people who believe in Amillennialism. These may or may not be held by every individual of that doctrine.)

Each person who believes in Amillennialism is a good person with good intent regarding scriptural interpretation but Premillennialism very much disagrees with their doctrine, their way of interpretation, and their exegesis of various scriptures. In this list you will see the many problems contained within Amillennialism.



50. The two prophets that are slain in Jerusalem in Revelation 11 are John the Baptist and Jesus?

Related to number 15, this is yet another absolutely unscriptural and impossible theory.

Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
Rev 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

1. Jesus did not lie dead in the streets of Jerusalem for 3 and a half days. He died outside of the city walls and was buried near the end of that day.
2. Jesus is mentioned in verse 8 so he cannot be either of these two prophets.
3. John the Baptist can't be one of them either since he was buried the same day he died, Matthew 14:12.
4. John the Baptist died in a prison, not in the streets of Jerusalem, Mark 6:27.

 

[ewq1938]

51. Does Amillennialism change what the bottomless pit is?

Yes! I have seen many Amillennialists claim the bottomless pit is actually the Earth. This is how they "explain" how satan can be imprisoned in pit but be free to roam the entire Earth. This means Jesus and the prophets all lived inside the bottomless pit and so do you and I!

Revelation 20 clearly shows that the pit is located near (or possibly in) the Earth not that the entire Earth is a pit, which is quite nonsensical. This also completely erases the angel coming down to the Earth with a chain and key and throwing satan into the pit proving satan was on Earth BEFORE being cast into pit. Earth therefore cannot be pit.

This is yet another example of Amillennialism butchering the Holy text.

 

[Magenta]

Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

Job 19:25-27a

 

[Magenta]

50. The two prophets that are slain in Jerusalem in Revelation 11 are John the Baptist and Jesus?

Related to number 15, this is yet another absolutely unscriptural and impossible theory.

Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which
spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.
Rev 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead
bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

1. Jesus did not lie dead in the streets of Jerusalem for 3 and a half days.
He died outside of the city walls and was buried near the end of that day.
2. Jesus is mentioned in verse 8 so he cannot be either of these two prophets.
3. John the Baptist can't be one of them either since he was buried the same day he died, Matthew 14:12.
4. John the Baptist died in a prison, not in the streets of Jerusalem, Mark 6:27.

Since Rev 11 is talking about things to come, and the death of the two witnesses at that future time, it makes
no sense to say where or how these two die in future cannot be any two who died differently in the past.

In other words, their deaths in the past have nothing to do with what is being conveyed in chapter 11.