Amillennialists...Here's a chance to state your case.

See thats where your wrong

We do see what you said, We just can not see it as you see it. As we have already explained and pointed out to you.

Does that mean your mind is already made up? (See here you go again with your faulty reasoning with an argument which can be used against you as well and does NOTHING to add to the conversation, just puffs yourself up)

The fact is, You just made a point per say. Your mind is made up. Nothing anyone says will change your view.

So one must ask. WHY ARE YOU HERE? You obviously have NO DESIRE TO DISCUSS

Yes, it's quite obvious in certain responses here.

Lots of discussing on my part EG, you might not agree with what I post and I may not address every question.

I've stated my position on various scriptures that I believe point to them being fulfilled. I can't answer every prophetic nuance. That said I am against the dispensational view of things, and in places have attempted to show where it is in error.

What has happened over the past couple of pages is a degradation to what I see happening in the "not by works" thread which to a large degree has made further discussion a waste of time.

No emotionalism on my part EG.

For the record, I often use "caps" for emphasis only... to bring attention to words or phrases that are often "read past" out of habit, and I mean no offense by it, nor emotion (unless I might use an exclamation mark, once in awhile! lol )

No, they are not. Believers are not judged at Christ's judgement seat. They have to give an account for their actions and then they are either given rewards, or not, based on that behavior. You are implying that after a person accepts Christ and is saved, God will somehow punish them if their bad. Untrue. You may live an eternity bereft or rewards, but you are still going to be with the Lord. The Great White Throne is something completely seperate and it's extremely clear from the text. it's not a difficult concept.

Revelation 20:11-15 11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

A believer's name is written in the Book of Life. The very reason this group is at this throne is because their names are not in the Book of Life.

Jesus' Second coming and The Day of the Lord are not the same things.

I don't see that as "emotionalism", what I find hard about your posts is using different fonts, brackets and what not. It makes the post "busy" and hard to read.

No, amillennialists use the non-literal allegorical approach. Which is always wrong for prophecy, since prophecy has to fulfilled the way it is written in tangible, testable, provable ways. Amillennialism was invented to take specific promises away from Israel, and give them to the Church. That's the entire reason it was invented and all it is , in reality is anti semitic, and a biblical con job. If your just going to re-write the Bible to fit your own personal theology, you don't need the Bible at all. The means you use to "interpret" it becomes meaningless.

If you are saying Jesus came back in 70 AD, show me proof. Show me where any of the 1st Century Church leaders claim that happened.

You confined scripture, in regards to distress, to Israel. By your own yard stick, the destruction of the temple, and Jerusalem in 70 AD has to be taken off the list, because there were times of much greater distress yet to come in the future. "Cosmic" significance is meaningless, and it's just an excuse to not take the text as it is written. Amillennialism goes to great lengths to completely ignore what the text says. The RCC's pogroms against the Jews killed more of them than died at jerusalem in 70 AD. Hitler's pogroms killed 5 million more of them than were killed in 70 AD. So by your own system of measurement, 70 Ad can't be used as the time of greatest distress for Israel. You'll have to find another work-around.

Milton Terry, who is a preterist.

Just another false teacher trying to tell everyone that the Church replaces Israel. Replacement Theology is not a viable theology.

I've been "googling" around on prophecies relating to David's rule, while there are varied opinions on this, the following makes sense in light of the new testament:.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:

9. Instead of serving strangers (Jer 30:8), they shall serve the Lord, their rightful King in the theocracy (Eze 21:27). David, their king—No king of David's seed has held the scepter since the captivity; for Zerubbabel, though of David's line, never claimed the title of "king."

The Son of David, Messiah, must therefore be meant; so the Targum (compare Isa 55:3, 4; Eze 34:23, 24; 37:24; Ho 3:5; Ro 11:25-32). He was appointed to the throne of David (Isa 9:7; Lu 1:32). He is here joined with Jehovah as claiming equal allegiance. God is our "King," only when we are subject to Christ; God rules us not immediately, but through His Son (Joh 5:22, 23, 27).

(Isa 9:6 for a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us. He shoulders responsibility and is called: Extraordinary Strategist, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.)

(Isa 9:7 His dominion will be vast and he will bring immeasurable prosperity. He will rule on David's throne and over David's kingdom, establishing it and strengthening it by promoting justice and fairness, from this time forward and forevermore. The LORD's intense devotion to his people will accomplish this)

The above thinking comports with Luke and what Peter stated.

(Luke 1:32-33 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will never end.")

(Acts 2:30 So then, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants on his throne)

Yeah, and I do that because of how words and phrases can be understood in a different way than what I'm endeavoring to convey, so I just cut to the chase and put it in the middle of what I'm saying INSTEAD of having to do something like the following:

me [in one post]: "the kingdom of the heavens"

another poster [next frame]: [(thinking): *oh yeah, he means 'Heaven' / 'UP IN Heaven'* like is commonly said of it, and then responding in THAT fashion]

me [backtracking in a further post or posts]: "uh, no, I didn't mean 'Heaven'/'UP IN Heaven,' I mean 'on the earth' when He 'returns' to the earth" [except I many times lose track of a thread and where I've posted something, so the "meaning-I-didn't-mean" just takes off from that person, still thinking I meant something I didn't... ]



…and there are just way too many [definitions, explanations, etc] to have to keep going that

Yeah, I have 2 or 3 of his books (along with a ton of other eschatologically-based books of all viewpoints). I have to agree, here.

THIS!

Revelation is a pesky item that has to be completely re-worked and turned into something else if you are a Preterist, or an Amillennialist, or an SDA, or a JW, or a Mormon, or even a Catholic. Because it really messes up your doctrine if you take it as literal. prophecy. God made promises to Israel that are going to be fulfilled, eternally, just as He said, instead of allowing the Church to usurp them? The Amillennial, the Preterist, and the Replacement Theology Junkies say:

"No Way! We'll fix that!"

We'll turn Revelation into a parable. Or we'll say all that stuff already came true, even though that doesn't fit anything we know historically, as defined by the book itself. Or we'll just ignore it. ANYTHING to keep from taking it literally.

They want the Church to replace Israel. They want Israel, and the Jews relegated to the dust bin and give God's promises to Israel to the Church. The fact that the Church Age is basically a parenthetical speed bump in God's overall plan disturbs them so they have to find a way to pretend that isn't true. Replacement Theology is always the core error that allegorical, or preterist interpretation of prophecy is based on.

So . . . you found that dispensationalism was "wrong," and then adopted a doctrine that was even worse? I'm not a hyper-dispensationalism, but there is no doubt that God deals with different groups of people, in different ways, throughout the history we have to examine. There is no debate otherwise. It is clear that the Church Age has a definable end and that at that point, the focus of God's plan returns to Israel. There is no credible debate otherwise there either. Re-working prophecy to make it fit your doctrine does not solve your problem.

Oh, throwing out the dispensational "replacement" card again.

Already answered this previously:

In regards to the "land" promise:

Joshua had to circumcise all the males to enter the promised land:

(Josh 5:3 So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites on the Hill of the Foreskins)

(Psa 80:8 You uprooted a vine from Egypt; you drove out nations and transplanted it.)

Jesus calls himself the true vine:

(John 15:1 "I am the true vine and my Father is the gardener")

What we have is a replacement (here's the true replacement theology for you) of the vine that was brought out of Egypt with the true vine (Jesus) wherein circumcision tied to the physical land is negated (1 Cor 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision ).

This is why Paul suffered greatly with his non-circumcision gospel as the Jews tied circumcision to the land.

The physical land is no longer significant as the true vine was planted in the heavens when Jesus entered the most holy place.

Therefore to look to land promises in the supposed "millennium" is an argument against Paul's non-circumcision gospel and Jesus as the true vine to which Paul stated was heir to the promises

(Gal 3:16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his descendant. Scripture does not say, "and to the descendants," referring to many, but "and to your descendant," referring to one, who is Christ.)

And to which Hebrews agrees:

(Heb 1:2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world.)

(Heb 11:13-14 These all died in faith without receiving the things promised, but they saw them in the distance and welcomed them and acknowledged that they were strangers and foreigners on the earth. For those who speak in such a way make it clear that they are seeking a homeland.)

(Heb 11:15-16 In fact, if they had been thinking of the land that they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they aspire to a better land, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.)

Hebrew is basically stating the land promises found there fulfillment in the "heavenly one " as type and antitype.

Agree with everything except the last line......

Coming is Parousia and both Paul and Peter tie ALL three days together as ONE day <---Day of the Lord, Day of Christ and Day of God....JESUS is all three..Lord, Christ and God....

also........everything must jive with ONE coming...

was
is
is to come <----coming -->Parousia = BODY PRESENCE

Okay, now I cannot remember if I've already posted the following, in this thread yet:

[quoting my post... about Joel 2/Acts 2]


Here's what I believe about the Joel 2 passage...

I believe when Peter said "THIS is that," that he spoke in specific reference to that which the others "saw" [and heard] that day (and which they had made specific comment in reference to), but not to the entire text he quoted (and I base this on what he then goes on to say further in Acts 3). Here's a commentary I fairly agree with, on this (with my comments below that, in the brackets and that which follows):

[quoting Wm Kelly commentary]

"As usual [speaking of the context of those persons in Acts 2], men arrange themselves in more than one class, some astonished, others hostile and scornful. Peter takes the lead in explaining with gravity and distinctness. He explicitly denies the unworthy thought of intoxication, which the early hour itself should have silenced as against God-fearing souls. It was really what Joel spoke of: not of course the fulfilment as it is to be in the last days, but an effusion of that nature. Indeed, the words of the prophet went in this beyond what that day saw accomplished; for 'all flesh' cannot fairly be limited to Israel, and God, Who was soon about to bring in Gentiles to the name of Christ, will bless the nations in the future kingdom, when all the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord, and all the kindred of the nations shall worship before Him [Daniel 7:27 (following the specific time period of v.25 [see also vv.20-21])]. The gospel now makes good the indiscriminate grace of God even more profoundly than will be under His future government, when He will show that the kingdom is Jehovah's, and that He is the governor among the nations.

"In the latter day, when Joel's words will be fulfilled as a whole, the Spirit will be poured out, and if Israel enjoy the blessing freely, it will flow far beyond their narrow limits. God's ways will then be known upon earth, His saving health among all nations. Temporal blessing is then to be vouchsafed to Israel (Joel 2:19-27), and their great northern enemy is to be for ever disposed of, for Jehovah will do great things for His people and land, whatever the enemy may have prepared to do. 'My people', He says emphatically, 'shall never be ashamed.' Then as a distinct intimation the prophet [Joel] presents two announcements: the first, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (vers. 28, 29); the second, external signs of judgment ushering in the days of Jehovah, the circumstances of which are detailed in Acts 3, till we come down to the closing account of their blessings once more. As the wonders above and below precede that day, so does the repentance of Israel prepare for their deliverance and blessing, and especially for the gift of the Spirit. We see the same principle here also.

"For God, in pouring out of His Spirit now, does thereby associate believers with Christ exalted on high. Given in virtue of redemption the Holy Spirit sheds the love of God in their hearts, seals them for the day of redemption, and is the earnest of their inheritance. He dwells in them now, and will quicken their mortal bodies soon at Christ's coming. Besides, He is the blessed and divine bond, constituting them Christ's body and God's house. [...]"

--William Kelly, Acts 2 Commentary [source: Bible Hub]

[end quoting; bold, underline, and bracketed insert mine; paranthesis outside my brackets original]


Acts 3:21 [speaking to "ye men of Israel," v.12 (unsaved persons as noted in v.13-15,17,19)] then states: "whom indeed it behooves heaven to receive until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from the age." [in contrast to that which He had heretofore kept "hidden in God"/was as of yet undisclosed]


In vv.13 and 26 the phrase "His Servant Jesus" (they had not been expecting the "suffering servant" aspects of His Person, only the "reigning-in-power King" aspects, though both aspects had been prophesied in the OT); and...

...there are TWO "raise" senses spoken of in Acts 3... v.15 speaking of His being "raised from the dead," but the other being "raised" to a position of prominence BEFORE His death (that is, to the position of 'a Prophet like unto Moses'...'raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me [Moses]; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you' and 'UNTO YOU FIRST God, having raised up [to a position of prominence BEFORE His death] His Servant Jesus, SENT him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities'). The "ALL things which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets" (meaning, OT prophecies) have not yet been fully fulfilled, but remain for a yet-future time (and I believe Joel is one such prophecy).

The word "King" is only used [re: Jesus] TWO times in all of the epistles, and both of them are "future" [see Rev19:15b still speaking in "future tense"], 1Tim6:15 being one of those, says, "which IN HIS TIMES He SHALL SHEW [openly manifest], who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords"

[end of that quoted post]

____________

In Acts 3, Peter is just pointing out how they missed/overlooked the "suffering servant" aspects, he wasn't [in Acts 2] saying all is fulfilled (or soon-to-be) [in the Acts 2 events, there]

They attack when they have nothing substantial to offer.