A Top Russian Official Quoted the Book of Revelation to Describe What Will Soon Happen to America
(noqreport.com)
B I B L I C A L
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (213)
sorted by:
So you've been taught but that's not what holds up when we look at the entirety of scripture.
Pre-millennial dispensationalism is the greatest lie the devil ever told and has done more damage to the church than anything else.
Here's a playlist of sermons, discussions and debates on the subject that I suggest you check out because Theology matters. Eschatology matters. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLm4vxYfDpoYaWjqK76eZukIyKtyX5Xa-J
Yes, it's because eschatology and theology do matter so much that I hold to a biblical, pre-millennial, dispensational position. It's the position that's most consistent with the totality of scripture.
Then why did that eschatological position only become popular after the Schofield reference Bible was published a couple of hundred years ago and it was the first Bible with footnotes that taught that very much uncommon and unpopular astrological position?
I used to be a dispy. The amount of leaps and logic that you have to take for dispensationalism versus post-millennialism or even a millennialism versus what the scriptures say especially in conjunction with historical events is night and day.
Your position doesn't even reconcile with Daniel 9, let alone the rest of the Bible. Daniel's 70th week would have to already have happened for the Millennial Reign of Christ to have commenced. It has not happened yet.
Daniel 9:24 gives 6 specific conditions that will come about at the conclusion of the 70th week, which commences the Millennial Reign:
"Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place."
Do we have everlasting righteousness? Nope.
Has all iniquity been atoned for? Nope.
Have we seen the end of sin? Nope.
Case closed.
First off you COMPLEATY disregarded the big question I asked you. Why is that? Is it because your view of End Times is so new it still wears diapers and wets the bed?
Oh yeah? How would you know? You didn't ask me what my position on those were or how the fall into post-mill eschatology DID YOU? No. The case is "closed" only because YOU didn't look past the log in your eye. YOU put YOUR timeline into the scripture and wanted instant gratification...... kinda like the Jews that rejected Jesus as the Messiah because he wasn't doing it the way they thought it would happen. God loves to replay the same mistakes over again so people take the lessons to heart. Thanks for being the lesson today.
Oh and hey playa, if you recall I posted this in a comment YOU replied to:
and guess what playboi? Daniel 9 and practically everything else you brought up is covered there.. If OnLy It CoUlD rEaD!
AND if you have an issue you don't see covered AFTER you review those lectures and DEBATES that bring up the same things you did..... yet didn't bother to look at..... THEN we can continue and cover anything that wasn't covered.
Here's the kicker though, not a single Apostle or one of our founding fathers shared your view of end times because.. it was FRINGE and hardly anyone was pre-mill.
The medieval doctrine of the millennium by referring to it as “the church of God which, by the diffusion of its faith and works, is spread out as a kingdom of faith from the time of the incarnation until the time of the coming judgment”.[32]
A notable exception to normative medieval eschatology is found in Joachim of Fiore (c. 1135–1202), a Cistercian monk, who to an extent, stressed premillennial themes. Joachim divided earth's history into three periods. He assigned each age to a particular person of the Trinity as the guiding principle of that era. The first era was the Old Testament history and was accordingly the age of the Father; the current age of the church was the age of the Son; and still in Joachim's future was the age of the Spirit. For Joachim, year 1260 was to mark the end of the second and the beginning of the third and final golden age of earth's history.[33]
During the Reformation period, amillennialism continued to be the popular view of the Reformers. The Lutherans formally rejected chiliasm (millennialism) in The Augsburg Confession. “Art. XVII., condemns the Anabaptists and others ’who now scatter Jewish opinions that, before the resurrection of the dead, the godly shall occupy the kingdom of the world, the wicked being everywhere suppressed.’"[34] Likewise, the Swiss Reformer Heinrich Bullinger wrote up the Second Helvetic Confession, which reads "We also reject the Jewish dream of a millennium, or golden age on earth, before the last judgment."[35] Furthermore, John Calvin wrote in Institutes that millennialism is a "fiction" that is "too childish either to need or to be worth a refutation".[36] The Anglican Church originally formalized a statement against millenarianism in the Anglican Articles.
Go watch the playlist. You'll learn something.