Why do Dispensationalists teach Separation Theology?

[Nehemiah6]

All dispensationalists deny that death is decisively defeated at Jesus' return.

Death is decisively defeated when Death is metaphorically cast into the Lake of Fire. It means that there will be no more death and dying on earth in the New Heavens and the New Earth. But at the Second Coming of Christ followed by Armageddon death is so great that there is a river of blood outside Jerusalem 200 miles long and five feet deep.

The second phase of the first resurrection (of the saints) is at the Resurrection/Rapture. and the third phase is just before the Millennium. But there is death after the Millennium at the battle of Gog and Magog.

Ranting against Dispensationalists is common among those who are Amillenennialists, Post Tribulationists, Preterists, etc. But they wrongly divide the Word of Truth.

 

[John146]

This raises an interesting point, though..do you believe that this "rapture" happens seven years before Jesus returns, and if so, is it an audible, open event that everyone sees?

Yes and no. The rapture is a secret event seven years before His return. The return of Christ, all eyes will see, and the Church, the bride will be with Him.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Yes and no. The rapture is a secret event seven years before His return. The return of Christ, all eyes will see, and the Church, the bride will be with Him.

Now..this would be handy for me to know...

Who is resurrected and glorified, and who suffers eternal punishment, under dispensationalism, at these time intervals:

1. the rapture
2. the second coming of Christ just prior to the Millennium
3. at the end of the Millennium, just prior to the eternal state

In covenant theology, there is no separate rapture. The righteous and the unrighteous are resurrected and judged when Jesus returns prior to the eternal state.

 

[John146]

Now..this would be handy for me to know...

Who is resurrected and glorified, and who suffers eternal punishment, under dispensationalism, at these time intervals:

1. the rapture
2. the second coming of Christ just prior to the Millennium
3. at the end of the Millennium, just prior to the eternal state

In covenant theology, there is no separate rapture. The righteous and the unrighteous are resurrected and judged when Jesus returns prior to the eternal state.

1. The Church, the body of Christ. Those who have died and those who are alive and remain. The body of Christ will be judged for their labor at the JSOC.

2. Israel, God’s elect nation will be caught up from the four corners of the earth. The nations of the earth will be judged.

3. All nations that will be deceived by Satan when he is loosed for a season will suffer death. Shortly after, all men small and great will be judged according to their works at the GWTJ. The body of Christ will not face this judgment.

 

[cv5]

Is the Church under the New Covenant?

If you say yes, then you differ from other dispy teachers, as they claim it does NOT.

And that's an abominable teaching.

The Church is the RESULT of the New Covenant, not merely "under" it, though it is that also I suppose. Any other view is untenable and absurd.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Charles Spurgeon on Dispensationalism:

“Distinctions have been drawn by certain exceedingly wise men (measured by their own estimate of themselves), between the people of God who lived before the coming of Christ, and those who lived afterwards. We have even heard it asserted that those who lived before the coming of Christ do not belong to the church of God!

We never know what we shall hear next, and perhaps it is a mercy that these absurdities are revealed at one time, in order that we may be able to endure their stupidity without dying of amazement. Why, every child of God in every place stands on the same footing; the Lord has not some children best beloved, some second-rate offspring, and others whom he hardly cares about.

These who saw Christ’s day before it came, had a great difference as to what they knew, and perhaps in the same measure a difference as to what they enjoyed while on earth meditating upon Christ; but they were all washed in the same blood, all redeemed with the same ransom price, and made members of the same body.

Israel in the covenant of grace is not natural Israel, but all believers in all ages. Before the first advent, all the types and shadows all pointed one way —they pointed to Christ, and to him all the saints looked with hope. Those who lived before Christ were not saved with a different salvation to that which shall come to us. They exercised faith as we must; that faith struggled as ours struggles, and that faith obtained its reward as ours shall”

Charles Spurgeon
Devotional Classics of C H Spurgeon, p122

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Acts 3:19-21 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.


I'm about to cause the premillennarians' heads to spin. They will run to their dens, grab their calculators, charts and graphs and diligently persevere until they form their rescue device to save their precious theology

This verse proves Peter was not a premillennial guy. He says that Jesus stays in heaven until the "restoration of all things".

The Millennium, as premillennialists consider it, is NOT the restoration of all things. Sin and rebellion still continues to rear its' ugly head toward the end of the Millennium.

But, Peter, instead, says that when Jesus returns, the complete restoration will occur.

Now, if this was one verse out of many that prove premillennialism, I would have a problem but it is not. If you read the NT carefully, you do not find a premillennial view. Their whole position relies on Revelation 20, which is obscure and can be explained in an amillennial context.

This is what I began to see about 5-7 years ago, when a friend of mine became amillennial through his association with a Reformed Baptist church. I thought he was whacky when he brought it up to me, but the Scriptures become so much more clear after you escape their faulty views.

And the fact that most of them deny the New Covenant is for believers today is totally absurd. I didn't even understand they taught that as a premillennialist. But, it is the natural conclusion of their theology.

 

[John146]

Acts 3:19-21 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.


I'm about to cause the premillennarians' heads to spin. They will run to their dens, grab their calculators, charts and graphs and diligently persevere until they form their rescue device to save their precious theology

This verse proves Peter was not a premillennial guy. He says that Jesus stays in heaven until the "restoration of all things".

The Millennium, as premillennialists consider it, is NOT the restoration of all things. Sin and rebellion still continues to rear its' ugly head toward the end of the Millennium.

But, Peter, instead, says that when Jesus returns, the complete restoration will occur.

Now, if this was one verse out of many that prove premillennialism, I would have a problem but it is not. If you read the NT carefully, you do not find a premillennial view. Their whole position relies on Revelation 20, which is obscure and can be explained in an amillennial context.

This is what I began to see about 5-7 years ago, when a friend of mine became amillennial through his association with a Reformed Baptist church. I thought he was whacky when he brought it up to me, but the Scriptures become so much more clear after you escape their faulty views.

And the fact that most of them deny the New Covenant is for believers today is totally absurd. I didn't even understand they taught that as a premillennialist. But, it is the natural conclusion of their theology.

First off, let's get the right wording.
19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

The passage deals with the Second Advent and the political promises to Israel, as well as the spiritual ones (vs. 26). The word "when" is the key to the verse and interestingly it has been altered in 99% of Biblical works! Why? The verse says that the sins of Israel will be "blotted out, WHEN the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord."

Peter said exactly the same thing that Jeremiah said (Jer. 50:20) and Isaiah (Isa. 46:2) and Amos (Amos 9:14,15). This is talking about the Lord's return. This is what Paul had in mind in (Rom. 11:26-28 & Heb. 8:10).

It is the nation of Israel's sins that are blotted out (Isa. 43:22-28; 44:21,22). This is not speaking of an individual salvation as given in (Col. 2:14).

Jesus Christ is now in heaven (Col 3:1-3; Heb. 12:1,2). "The times of restitution" are spoken of so many times in the O.T. (Gen. 15,22,49; Deut. 29,32; Judges 5; Sam. 22; Isa. 2,11,65,66; Eze. 27, 40-48; etc., etc.) that the only way the modern bible translators can change "when" to "so that" is to steal these promises from Israel and apply them to the Church.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

First off, let's get the right wording.
19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

The passage deals with the Second Advent and the political promises to Israel, as well as the spiritual ones (vs. 26). The word "when" is the key to the verse and interestingly it has been altered in 99% of Biblical works! Why? The verse says that the sins of Israel will be "blotted out, WHEN the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord."

Peter said exactly the same thing that Jeremiah said (Jer. 50:20) and Isaiah (Isa. 46:2) and Amos (Amos 9:14,15). This is talking about the Lord's return. This is what Paul had in mind in (Rom. 11:26-28 & Heb. 8:10).

It is the nation of Israel's sins that are blotted out (Isa. 43:22-28; 44:21,22). This is not speaking of an individual salvation as given in (Col. 2:14).

Jesus Christ is now in heaven (Col 3:1-3; Heb. 12:1,2). "The times of restitution" are spoken of so many times in the O.T. (Gen. 15,22,49; Deut. 29,32; Judges 5; Sam. 22; Isa. 2,11,65,66; Eze. 27, 40-48; etc., etc.) that the only way the modern bible translators can change "when" to "so that" is to steal these promises from Israel and apply them to the Church.

Well, first I disagree with you on your point.

However, that's irrelevant because my point is this: all things will be restored at Jesus' return. This is in part "b" of the verse.

This idea that the Millennium is some kind of period of time where the curse is almost, but not totally removed, is not described by the "restitution of all things". If the premillennial view is true, then it is an incomplete, partial restoration where death still exists, although the curse has been mostly removed.

That is the premillennial view of the Millennium. It is not the eternal state (New Heavens/New Earth/New Jerusalem) but is an intermediate state, which dispensationalists seem to love.

When I read the NT, I see that at Jesus' return, death is defeated and the Curse is removed. Premillennialists fundamentally deny this, instead claiming that there is a Millennium period where this curse still exists, and culminates in a gigantic battle where evil is decisively defeated at the END of the Millennium. All along, though, they believe that evil men will continue to exist, but they are suppressing their evil due to fear, not conversion.

So, I don't see the world that they propose, based mainly on their view of Revelation 20 (which can be explained in an amillennial context as talking about the entire Church age in summary form).

 

[John146]

and culminates in a gigantic battle where evil is decisively defeated at the END of the Millennium

Really? The bible says when the thousand years are fulfilled, ended, not during.

2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Really? The bible says when the thousand years are fulfilled, ended, not during.

2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

You are splitting hairs here, and it is to align with dispensationalist doctrine. If this event happens on the last day of the Millennium, or it happens the day after the Millennium, what difference does it make? You are simply throwing a red herring into the mix, like you did with the Acts 3 Scripture.

If I remember right, the dispensation ends, then punishment for breaking the dispensation commences in your theology.

In the amillennial view, Satan is restrained now, in the sense that he cannot deceive the nations (Gentiles or non-believers) AS A WHOLE, but that does not mean he cannot deceive individuals or entire groups of people, until the Gospel liberates them.

Just prior to Jesus' return, Satan will be allowed to deceive entire nations, and Jesus will destroy all unbelievers at his return.

One of the biggest issues I have with the premillennialist reading of Scripture is the fact that their view proposes such a battle prior to the Millennium, and after the Millennium.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

First off, let's get the right wording.
19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

The passage deals with the Second Advent and the political promises to Israel, as well as the spiritual ones (vs. 26). The word "when" is the key to the verse and interestingly it has been altered in 99% of Biblical works! Why? The verse says that the sins of Israel will be "blotted out, WHEN the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord."

Peter said exactly the same thing that Jeremiah said (Jer. 50:20) and Isaiah (Isa. 46:2) and Amos (Amos 9:14,15). This is talking about the Lord's return. This is what Paul had in mind in (Rom. 11:26-28 & Heb. 8:10).

It is the nation of Israel's sins that are blotted out (Isa. 43:22-28; 44:21,22). This is not speaking of an individual salvation as given in (Col. 2:14).

Jesus Christ is now in heaven (Col 3:1-3; Heb. 12:1,2). "The times of restitution" are spoken of so many times in the O.T. (Gen. 15,22,49; Deut. 29,32; Judges 5; Sam. 22; Isa. 2,11,65,66; Eze. 27, 40-48; etc., etc.) that the only way the modern bible translators can change "when" to "so that" is to steal these promises from Israel and apply them to the Church.

Notice that he is throwing a red herring into this explanation..it is irrelevant whether Jesus is sent, in a sense, at the moment of salvation, or whether this is talking about people being saved at the point when Jesus returns.

red herring - something, especially a clue, that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting.

The point is, that when Jesus returns, the restoration of all things occurs. They would likely claim this is a reference to the Millennial reign of Christ, but the problem is that their view of the Millennium includes the continuance of death and unrighteous people. That is not what the "restoration of all things" involves. The restoration of all things involves the ELIMINATION of all of these things.

They deny that death and unrighteous people cease to exist at Jesus' return.

This is not what 1 Corinthians 15 teaches.

And, yes, I have seen theDivineWatermark's dispensationalist efforts to squeeze the Millennium into his explanation of 1 Corinthians 15. It reminds me of the efforts that cultists make to defend their doctrines, only usually they are a lot more clearer and have refined their technique more.

As I read the NT, I simply do not see the gaps in Scripture that dispensationionalists expect us to believe are there.

Another example is the gap of the 70th week. They claim that the prophetic clock stopped ticking at the end of Daniel's 69th week, and re-starts seven years prior to Jesus' return. However, there's nothing in Scripture to prove this, yet they insist it is true. If anyone else would attempt to claim such a thing, they would be having a hissy fit, claiming it violates sound hermeneutics, yet when they make such claims, it is established fact that cannot be disputed. They are very much theological hypocrites.

It's comical when you see these things, yet they will continue to resolutely deny their inconsistencies and errors.

 

[John146]

One of the biggest issues I have with the premillennialist reading of Scripture is the fact that their view proposes such a battle prior to the Millennium, and after the Millennium.

The battle of Armageddon is not the same as the battle of Megiddo.

 

[John146]

You are splitting hairs here, and it is to align with dispensationalist doctrine. If this event happens on the last day of the Millennium, or it happens the day after the Millennium, what difference does it make? You are simply throwing a red herring into the mix, like you did with the Acts 3 Scripture.

If I remember right, the dispensation ends, then punishment for breaking the dispensation commences in your theology.

In the amillennial view, Satan is restrained now, in the sense that he cannot deceive the nations (Gentiles or non-believers) AS A WHOLE, but that does not mean he cannot deceive individuals or entire groups of people, until the Gospel liberates them.

Just prior to Jesus' return, Satan will be allowed to deceive entire nations, and Jesus will destroy all unbelievers at his return.

One of the biggest issues I have with the premillennialist reading of Scripture is the fact that their view proposes such a battle prior to the Millennium, and after the Millennium.

Isiah 11 is prophecy concerning the Millennium reign of Christ. It is very similar to Matthew 5 as the Lord prepares the Jews for the coming of the kingdom.

11 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;
3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth: with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. There's Hebrews 8:11 right there.
10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious. In that day, the day of the Lord, the 1,000 year reign.
11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. The remnant of his people is Israel, not the Church.
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. Matthew 24:31.
13 The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.
14 But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them.
15 And the Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dryshod.
16 And there shall be an highway for the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria; like as it was to Israel in the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.

 

[Kolistus]

Now..this would be handy for me to know...

Who is resurrected and glorified, and who suffers eternal punishment, under dispensationalism, at these time intervals:

1. the rapture
2. the second coming of Christ just prior to the Millennium
3. at the end of the Millennium, just prior to the eternal state

In covenant theology, there is no separate rapture. The righteous and the unrighteous are resurrected and judged when Jesus returns prior to the eternal state.

I dont know if i subscribe to what you called covenant theology, but I believe God does make covenants and keeps them.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

I dont know if i subscribe to what you called covenant theology, but I believe God does make covenants and keeps them.

Actually dispensationalists would believe that too.

Covenant theology teaches that the organizing principle of God's work with man centers around covenants, and dispensationalism teaches that the organizing principle of God's work with man centers around dispensations. Classic dispensationalism teaches that there are seven dispensations, all of which ultimately fail and result in punishment.

Many dispensationalists deny that the Church is under the New Covenant, as they believe this new covenant is only made with Israel, and not the Church.

My strong conviction is that they are very ignorant about union with Christ and other conflicting teachings that reduce dispensationalism to nonsense. The ordinary dispensationalist doesn't know the underlying presuppositions of their view, though. They have simply been taught dispensationalism by their pastors or others, and accept it without understanding its' repercussions.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Isiah 11 is prophecy concerning the Millennium reign of Christ. It is very similar to Matthew 5 as the Lord prepares the Jews for the coming of the kingdom.

11 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;
3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth: with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. There's Hebrews 8:11 right there.
10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious. In that day, the day of the Lord, the 1,000 year reign.
11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. The remnant of his people is Israel, not the Church.
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. Matthew 24:31.
13 The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.
14 But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them.
15 And the Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dryshod.
16 And there shall be an highway for the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria; like as it was to Israel in the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.

Notice that he is practicing eisegesis in order to tell you what to believe about these passages.

And, he is claiming again that the New Covenant is not for the Church, but only for Israel. That is why he references Hebrews 8:11. He utterly rejects the idea that believers in the Church are under the New Covenant.

Notice this folks, as it is the obvious result of dispensationalism. Be aware of their inconsistencies. Yes, I know that some dispensationalists will disagree and claim that the Church is under the New Covenant in some sort of way, but those guys themselves are not applying their hermeneutics in a manner consistent with dispensationalism.

Jesus is, in fact, gathering his people NOW. And, they are from all nations.

And, wolves are lying down with lambs in the sense that historical enemies are at peace within the Church, and are cooperating.

The rod of his mouth is the gospel message going forth, correcting those who are in opposition to Him and humbling them into submission.

But, none of this will be acceptable to dispensationalists because they cannot reason in this way. It is beyond their abilities. The followers of Darby and Scofield have not been taught this manner of understanding Scripture. They can only handle a wooden literal interpretation that disallows them from reading it in this manner.

In fact, if you read it in this manner, they will say you are "spiritualizing" or "allegorizing"...they may allow you to, if it doesn't interfere with their theology, though. In fact, they will use it themselves if it suits their purposes.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

The battle of Armageddon is not the same as the battle of Megiddo.

I am positive that it is, and this is one of the first points that caused me to realize premillennialism is nonsense.

It is the same battle being described in two sections of Revelation. Revelation 20 is nothing more than an inset chapter that reviews events that have already occurred.

More than that, Revelation is a series of visions with overlapping content, and not one long sequence of events like Dispensationalists teach. If someone reads it, they can see that there is overlapping content as the return of Christ is described in more places than just Rev 19. Dispensationalists have to re-work those sections in order to maintain their belief system.

 

[John146]

I am positive that it is, and this is one of the first points that caused me to realize premillennialism is nonsense.

It is the same battle being described in two sections of Revelation. Revelation 20 is nothing more than an inset chapter that reviews events that have already occurred.

More than that, Revelation is a series of visions with overlapping content, and not one long sequence of events like Dispensationalists teach. If someone reads it, they can see that there is overlapping content as the return of Christ is described in more places than just Rev 19. Dispensationalists have to re-work those sections in order to maintain their belief system.

Names are important. Names of places are important. You need to learn this. They have different names because they’re not the same.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Names are important. Names of places are important. You need to learn this. They have different names because they’re not the same.

All are enemies of God. Revelation uses names of the historical enemies of Israel as types of the enemies of God and Christ. Yet, you guys somehow think historical enemies are going to reappear out of the dust at the end times

Either that, or you assign their identities to modern nations with little or no real proof.

By the way, some dispensationalist pastors are ashamed of the "pin the tail on the AntiChrist" antics of dispensationalists. They are to the point where they don't even want to be associated with the weirder people in their midst. However, my position is that the weird ones are a more sizeable number than these pastors will admit.