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

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
Guojing said:


There are 3 main groups of dispy that I am aware of.

Acts 2
Acts 9
Acts 28.
One that I am aware of . And He had grace on Abel but not Cain . Abel's grace s cries out from the ground to this day as the first martyr, prophet or apostles as a sent one. .Most first mentions are found in Genesis not Revelation.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,402
113
Can I be frank too?
The tragedy is stating the God has two separate plans, when scripture is clear that God does not fail and everything He promised has been fulfilled in Christ Jesus.

It also tragic to believe that temple sacrifices are going to be reinstated in clear defiance of what is written in the book of Hebrews, in some future millennium on earth with a new temple, when the last one was destroyed as He predicted.
First and foremost quote me saying the last statement anywhere......and second.....I will say is is idiotic to deny the prophectic utterances woven all through the OT directed at Israel that have yet to be fulfilled and equally idiotic to say the end came and went in 70 A.D........be frank all you want.....and no offence, but what you are espousing does not make the grade UG
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
Who said he has two different plans. I mean seriously. I have heard this argument from ammil people so often but yet have never got a direct answer of who teaches two different plans?

The plan of salvation has been the same since adam, Grace through faith. That has been the ONLY plan. And that was fulfilled by Christ.

But we are not talking about a plan, or covenant which was given for salvation. We are talking about a covenent God made between himself and ONE nation. Which has NOTHING to do with salvation.

It is not two plans they are. Not even related.



So when prophesy says that a new temple will be rebuilt and the jews (in sin mind you) start sacrificing again, (Again in sin) We should just ignore it, and consider it false and not scripture. Just because we do not think it should happen?

This is called selective reasoning from scripture.

If we reson from the scripture there is only one dispensation of faith beginning in Geneisis . A work of God faithfully purifying the hearts of men of all nations to show us its never been about the flesh of one. . Demonstrated at Calvary according to that work of Christ's faithfulness working in the Son of man .The one time demonstration is over that did point to the actual works of the lamb of God who was slain from before the foundation of the world, The demonstration gives as a look back when he was working the first 6 days. we enter the seventh day work, our rest. It still works

Even the Son of man refused to stand in the holy unseen place of the glory of God,

Why would we build another temple and again set aside a time period as a parable of the reformation to Come . The first century reformation is here , restoring the government of God as it was during the period of Judges. Its as it is written is the reforming agent in any idea of dispensations.

Acts 15:8-10 King James Version (KJV)And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
First and foremost quote me saying the last statement anywhere......and second.....I will say is is idiotic to deny the prophectic utterances woven all through the OT directed at Israel that have yet to be fulfilled and equally idiotic to say the end came and went in 70 A.D........be frank all you want.....and no offence, but what you are espousing does not make the grade UG
The fig tree was cut off by Christ, signaling the time of reformation has come. The end of the use of Jewish flesh to signify beleive (faith) and unbelief (no faith ) in respect to all of mankind (not their flesh )It came at the time of reformation. Not 70 AD.

The reformation from my experience seems to get put under a bushel basket hiding the representative glory of God .

There are no promises remining in respect to the outward flesh of the Jew. That flesh served its purpose as a metaphor in various parable.

The new ceremonies are in respect to all nations, men and woman alike as the new kingdom of priests as ambassadors for Christ from a foreign land (the new heavens and earth. No longer a 15 foot wall to separate the woman from the men. No longer after the temporal order of Levites.

The last one used was John the Baptist. Jesus is our high priest is after the new order Melchedik.He sends us out with our new tongue (the gospel) two by two. .
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
First and foremost quote me saying the last statement anywhere......and second.....I will say is is idiotic to deny the prophectic utterances woven all through the OT directed at Israel that have yet to be fulfilled and equally idiotic to say the end came and went in 70 A.D........be frank all you want.....and no offence, but what you are espousing does not make the grade UG
Well I was referring to the teaching in general not to you when I wrote "stated" .....which "end" are you referring to since "end" can be the end of many things but not necessarily the "end" of others?
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Who said he has two different plans. I mean seriously. I have heard this argument from ammil people so often but yet have never got a direct answer of who teaches two different plans?

The plan of salvation has been the same since adam, Grace through faith. That has been the ONLY plan. And that was fulfilled by Christ.

But we are not talking about a plan, or covenant which was given for salvation. We are talking about a covenent God made between himself and ONE nation. Which has NOTHING to do with salvation.

It is not two plans they are. Not even related.



So when prophesy says that a new temple will be rebuilt and the jews (in sin mind you) start sacrificing again, (Again in sin) We should just ignore it, and consider it false and not scripture. Just because we do not think it should happen?

This is called selective reasoning from scripture.
Several people have told me on this very message board that God still has a plan for the Jews?

So are you postulating that God made a promise to a whole nation that has yet to be fulfilled....is this the land promise?

Also the "in sin" portion is counterfeit fabricated fulfillment and is not connected to biblical prophecy.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
You missed my whole point, Since I have studied and been part of dispy churches (multiple) and have never heard this view before. I think it can be considered to be a minority view

It has nothign to do with my limited knowledge dude, My knowledge of dispensational teaching is by no means limited!
Yah, if YOU have not heard of it, it is a minority view. Thanks for clarifying.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
So when did understanding writing modes become "mental gymnastics" :unsure:

What you are basically stating is that best to avoid the intent, purposes, style and audience of the author so that I do not have to do the real work of understanding scripture.
If one does not use the plain, normal method of interpretation, then all objectivity is lost.

What check would there be on the variety of interpretations which man's imagination could produce if there were not an objective
standard which is what the plain, normal principle of interpretation provides? To try to see meaning other than the normal one would result in as many interpretations as there are people interpreting.
 
Jun 4, 2019
183
12
18
I don't see an Eschatology section, so I'll post this here...(Mods, if there is a more appropriate section, please move the thread there).

Revelation 20:4-5 NASBS
[4] Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. [5] The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.

For those who hold to an Amillennial position, (usually stated as an indefinite amount of time starting from the cross to Christ's return), who are those in v.4 and are they reigning now with Christ?
Who are those in v.5 (rest of the dead)?
Which of these two is the 'first resurrection'? Both?
Read this excellent bible study that describes what the millennial kingdom of the Messiah will be like, http://www.wisdomofgod.us/2019/03/1...-god-will-be-like-in-the-millennial-shabbath/ , and then this one that explains why the rulership of the Messiah on earth is for 1,000 years http://www.wisdomofgod.us/2018/11/0...-yb-jubilees-and-the-12901335-days-of-daniel/ .
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
Dispy's also consider the context, and in this case the context of not just a chapter or a book but of the Bible as a whole. With your interpretation you would have James contradicting Paul, and since the Holy Spirit doesn't contradict Himself, your interpretation must be wrong.
Apparently you are not 'rightly dividing' but wrongly selectively taking verses that nicely fit your preconceived formula.
We must take Scripture as a whole and seek the interpretation that does not contradict other parts of Scripture, and if it does, it"s our interpretation that needs adjusting...not Scripture.
Simple, James is writing to the Jews, who subscribe to faith + works for justification. Paul is writing to the Gentiles, which is faith only for justification. One is the GOK, the other is GOG.

Similarly, Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38, is for Jews to preach to Jews, which is the GOK. So is that troublesome verse that Protestants largely ignore, John 20:23, is also not written to us but the original 11.

Once you understand who the various passages are written to, there is no contradiction.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
It also tragic to believe that temple sacrifices are going to be reinstated in clear defiance of what is written in the book of Hebrews, in some future millennium on earth with a new temple, when the last one was destroyed as He predicted.
Daniel appear to have predicted that animal sacrifices will be reinstated during the Great Tribulation. Daniel 9

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

And Daniel 12
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The Jewish Temple has to be rebuilt once again in order for all of the prophecies in the Bible to be literally fulfilled. The Jewish people have already made plans as to how they will rebuild it should they ever get the chance. Apparently it will only take them about 2 years to rebuild it once God supernaturally clears the way for them to be able do it.

The Antichrist cannot seat himself up in this Temple unless it has already been rebuilt. The consensus is that in the first three and half years of the Tribulation, the Antichrist will establish some kind of peace treaty or covenant with Israel.

He will then allow the rebuilding of the Temple, and once that is completed, he will then break his pact with Israel and seat himself up in the Temple proclaiming himself to be God.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,770
3,679
113

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,770
3,679
113
Simple, James is writing to the Jews, who subscribe to faith + works for justification. Paul is writing to the Gentiles, which is faith only for justification. One is the GOK, the other is GOG.
Interesting, I never asked a question, but true to form, you answered a non existent question. James is writing to Jewish believers who are under the same Gospel as Gentile believers. They both were concluded under sin by Paul in Romans and both receive the gift of eternal life as a free gift by faith. Your distinctions are bogus, and amounts to another Gospel which Paul also warned against in Gal 1:6-8.
What is GOK and GOG?

Similarly, Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38, is for Jews to preach to Jews, which is the GOK. So is that troublesome verse that Protestants largely ignore, John 20:23, is also not written to us but the original 11.
Protestants don't ignore John 20:23, Lutherans use it all the time in Confession and Absolution. That is used to give the 'priest/pastor authority to absolve others of their sins.

Once you understand who the various passages are written to, there is no contradiction
The typical condescending line. There is no contradiction, but for the reasons I had mentioned earlier. It has nothing to do with who was being addressed.
There is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in soteriology, for ALL (both Jew and Gentile) have sinned and are shut up unto Judgment but for the grace of God found in Jesus Christ.
Methinks you need to set aside that twisted views of yours, they definitely are not classical dispensational teachings and all in all preach a different Gospel to the Jew and Gentile.

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
(Gal 2:7-9)
These aren't speaking of two different Gospels but two different directives given to two different messengers (Paul and Peter).
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
He was the first person to be saved under the grace dispensation.

lol, no when, where and how how has nothing to do with when Paul began to realize it and then to believe in it and then speak of it. Paul was saved at the very same place, the very same way and at the very same time as the rest of us. It had absolutely nothing to do with anything he did he was just as dead to sin until the cross as you and me,our Lord gets all the credit and is why he is the only one called Savior.
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
One key difference in CT and dispy is that the latter take the bible at its literal meaning, taking note of context, while the former tend to allegorize scripture. So for example, when we encounter a passage like Hebrews 11:31

By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

Dispy would interpret that as Rahab did not perish because she showed her faith by receiving the spies with peace.

While CTs would say, that Rahab, like us, put her faith in Jesus's dbr, and she did not perish because of that.

check the Greek,,, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/11-31.htm
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
Can I be frank too?
The tragedy is stating the God has two separate plans, when scripture is clear that God does not fail and everything He promised has been fulfilled in Christ Jesus.

It also tragic to believe that temple sacrifices are going to be reinstated in clear defiance of what is written in the book of Hebrews, in some future millennium on earth with a new temple, when the last one was destroyed as He predicted.

How be it you will not determine the sacrifice of our Lord as not being the final sacrifice among those and will always hold it up at the end of them all right?
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
Interesting, I never asked a question, but true to form, you answered a non existent question. James is writing to Jewish believers who are under the same Gospel as Gentile believers. They both were concluded under sin by Paul in Romans and both receive the gift of eternal life as a free gift by faith. Your distinctions are bogus, and amounts to another Gospel which Paul also warned against in Gal 1:6-8.
What is GOK and GOG?


Protestants don't ignore John 20:23, Lutherans use it all the time in Confession and Absolution. That is used to give the 'priest/pastor authority to absolve others of their sins.


The typical condescending line. There is no contradiction, but for the reasons I had mentioned earlier. It has nothing to do with who was being addressed.
There is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in soteriology, for ALL (both Jew and Gentile) have sinned and are shut up unto Judgment but for the grace of God found in Jesus Christ.
Methinks you need to set aside that twisted views of yours, they definitely are not classical dispensational teachings and all in all preach a different Gospel to the Jew and Gentile.

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
(Gal 2:7-9)
These aren't speaking of two different Gospels but two different directives given to two different messengers (Paul and Peter).
Nobody said you were asking a question so chill. I was addressing your comment that was directed at me "With your interpretation you would have James contradicting Paul, and since the Holy Spirit doesn't contradict Himself, your interpretation must be wrong."

GOK: Gospel of the Kingdom, GOG is gospel of grace. They are 2 distinct gospels, one is meant for the Jews before Acts 9, the other is meant for everyone, Jews and Gentiles after Acts 9.

If you regard them as the same gospel, you are free to do so. We can agree to disagree about bible interpretation. People rarely change their minds in online debate anyway.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
Protestants don't ignore John 20:23, Lutherans use it all the time in Confession and Absolution. That is used to give the 'priest/pastor authority to absolve others of their sins.
Guess you did not see the uproar when I used John 20:23 in my thread about the relevance of the Great Commission. Readers were so quick to insist that only Jesus had the power to forgive sins, and were trying to do mental gymnastics to make that verse say something else.

As far as I know, only the Roman Catholic take that verse seriously now, but it is interesting hearing from you that the Lutherans also use that.