Відео

*QUESTION FOR AMILLENNIALISTS* I haven't spent much time studying the amillennial view and so my understanding of it might be incorrect. If so I am open to correction. But one thing I think that speaks against the millenium as being a recapitulation is the fact that throughout the book of Revelation we see the fate of satan as a progression. In the initial stage of this progression satan would have entered the tribulation period as he is today - i.e. being the ruler of the kingdom of the air, but then later on in the book we see that he is cast out of heaven. From there on he is confined to the earth, working as he does by incarnating the antichrist. In chapter 20 we see as the last stage of his descent that he is thrown into the abyss, to finally en up into the lake of fire. That, I think, makes sense. In the amillennial view however it seems that he is both in the kingdom of the air and bound in the abyss at the same time. I can't see how anyone could possibly make sense of that. But more importantly, I also struggle to see a reasonable explanation as to _why_ a recapitulation of the entire church age would be squeezed into that small passage - stuck in between the end of the tribulation and a passage explaining what happens to those who were beheaded during that time. Why put it there? It just seems disjointed from the rest of the text. Again, it doesn't make sense. What I think does make sense is that it is included there because it establishes the context of the next passage. Before we know the fate of the beheaded saints we need to understand that there will be a thousand year period during which they will reign: "They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years." (Revelation 20:5) So how could the resurrection saints come to life and reign for a thousand years if the thousand years began a couple of thousand years prior to them being beheaded? Wouldn't that involve the use of some kind of time machine? Because otherwise I don't see how that is possible. Or is there something I'm missing here?

It is interesting that it seems that some guys are unable to think about a theology critically and adjust it to Scripture. They rather throw out the baby with the bath water and look for some other total package to adopt. What are they going to do when they can't fully reconcile their new view to all of Scripture? That is what Sam has done.

He does not believe in a 1000year reign so why does he apologize for the term Amillennial? It hits the nail on the head!

The view expressed @30:30 is similar to what I've interpreted from my reading of the text. I wasn't raised in a church so I was never "indoctrinated" to view the end times in any one particular way. Have never been to a Bible study either. Born again in 2022 and still studying, listening to fellow humans all around the world and comparing notes. The micro to macro view is interesting to me especially when you consider things like fractals found in nature.

Thanks be to God that Storms escaped the teaching of Waalvord and te other dispensationalists.

I somehow agree with him when he talks about the beast being abortion etc. I also belive that part of the beast will be, that if you don't accept the flag of the LGBD or support them in anway, then you wouldn't be able to buy or sell. Remember that the scripter says that the anti- christ will despise women. So, he's either going to hate women, or he could be gay.

Great, great point(s): I was looking for a debate with Mr. DeGrasse since he says he is agnostic, but what triggered my curiosity was Mr. DeGrasse saying (teaching) that the universe is 13.8 billion years old while (in my searching) the bible would set it in the thousands….The only debate I found so far was this one (Carl Lentz)…I enjoy watching Mr. DeGrasse too and I believe science should AND would coexist with the bible as God allows it, allows our discoveries, etc., but it’s hard when you cannot always rely on the accuracy of us as human beings, no matter how scientifically smart or how smart we might be or think we are, or someone else, is!! Crazy, mysterious and awesome it sure is, eh!?!? Would like to see more debates but what is our desire in seeing these debates?? Mine is, if I’m honest, to prove that devil wrong because so much wrong teaching “out there,” possibly convert the agnostic and atheist to believing, and just hear the “awesomeness” of God in a deeper scientific way. In end, I believe whatever we and they don’t know the answers to is either a matter of “we are not supposed to” and/or “yet.”

The best 4 books I have ever read re: Prophecy in my 50 years walking with the Lord are: 1- More than Conquerors, by Wiliam Hendrickson, Commemorative Edition 1982 2-The Book of Revelation Commentary, by R.C.H. Lenski 3- Up Up and Away! Robert B. Yerby, on the Rapture. 4- Kingdom Come! by Sam Storm.

The only issue I have with purely spiritualizing the Mark is that I cant reconcile Buying and Selling. Most spiritual things have an actual counterpart. Like baptism for us is the physical action we do as a sign. I believe there will be a physical sign and I think its taking place now. I also totally disagree that Israel has any rights to displace and kill people over a land they have no biblical right to. It was given to them and fulfilled in Joshua and it was conditonal upon their obedience, which they have not upheld.

The mark of the beast, in context, as described in Revelation 13, is clearly speaking of an economic system also. Is it not? If not, please help me understand ... Yes, there is also the application that Dr Sam speaks of, but you can't dismiss the economic system, numerical, application, it's clearly there. I have not heard anyone explain why they don't believe there could be an economic system application . Instead they just run away from it.

Didn’t Jesus called Israelites the children of Satan?! Then how they can be people of God?!

My main caveat here is that I think the postmillennialists are right in that as a whole, the world does get better. You can't look at today's society, compare it to the world prior to the fall of Israel and say we're _worse_ off than the Christians at that time. They faced far more severe persecution that we ever have in the modern day. Throughout human history, the spread of Christianity has had a huge positive impact on the world as a whole. I disagree with postmillenialists for multiple reasons: 1. I don't believe the world will be fully or even mostly Christianized. 2. I don't believe the millennium is referring to the Earth at all, but Heaven. I also don't believe things will inherently get better or worse. I lean on the optimistic side of things, though, believing that things will, as a whole, improve, but we'll still have recurring waves of bad and good times, and both increases in persecution of the church at time which them will shift after into a revitalization of the church again. Right now we're in the lull period again, and things are going to get worse for a while before they get better. And even when things do get better, its not going to be consistent the way postmills believe it will.

Bill Maher hmmmm...he's a joke. He has know knowledge no logic ..no life no happiness no nothing

To be as angry as Eli and to make accusations constantly that he's being misrepresented yet, he is only representing his views of his own interpretation of The Word shows why he has flip flopped about this issue.

I have been struggling with my belief in my will versus the will of our Devine Lord. Sure as can be a "non-popular" video comes up to remind me of where I was originally lead (Molinism). God blows me away. I don't deserve a Lord so amazing!

There is a big Clanger for Amill, Postmill and Preterites’ in that they deny Christ to rule over the earth and bring all the nations under His authority. There is a revealing of the Millennium that John speaks of in Revelation 11, 19 and 20 that has direct link with Daniel 7. We note in Daniel 7: 12 and 13 speaks of the destruction of the beast by Christs coming but the beasts empire is allowed a season and a time, going down to about verse 27 the dominion of the beasts kingdom is given over to the Saints and to Christ to rule over them. This is the millennium the early Christians understood would bring the nations under Christ.

As a Historical Millennialist, I reject all Augustinian based teachings and eschatological views that have derived after Augustine. Dr Storm is not correct when he says that the Premillennial view is not dominant amongst the early Christians. There were Gnostics heretics who taught a form of Amill in the first century through the false teachings of Cerinthus in fact I believe Augustine got his ideas from him. Note that the first 300 years before Augustine is saturated in writings on the Millennium week by prominent Church Fathers who have direct line to the Apostles, there are no other eschatological view apart from the heretics who apposed the physical resurrection of the body and the regeneration of the earth. In fact they rejected the consummation of Christ ruling over the nations of the earth 1 Corinthians 15: 23-27. 1 Corinthians 15:23-27 ESV [23] But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. [24] Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. [25] For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. [26] The last enemy to be destroyed is death. [27] For “God c has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. …

I believe the revelation can be interpreted by one scripture why do the nation rage and imagine a vain thing the point is no one is innocent both fallen angels and man are guilty for its God and his anointed who is offended as Pilate says I find no fault God is not at fault yet he is challenge by all things

Please read Rev. 17:14 - 18 where God uses the beast and 10 kings to destroy the Harlot described in Rev. 18. In Rev. 17:18 this harlot is described as the "great city". Now who is the "great city"? Go to Rev. 11:8. And their bodies will lie in the street of the "great city", which mystically is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. Where was their and our Lord crucified? = Jerusalem. Persecution of Christians, did not begin in Rome.

I hate Mr. Storms.

The big spectrum of different beliefs is the problem .

Cults brainwashing children leading through fear creates people who behave and act how the cult wants them to. This doesn’t create good people it creates scared 🐑

Wonderful! Very helpful!

I love Sam. But I disagree with that view. No dispensationalist believe in two different gospels. Or two different people of God. At the same time we understand that there many Old Testament prophecies that have not come to past concerning the nation Israel. And when the time of the gentiles are fully come then God is going to bring about his promises to the nation Israel not through another Gospel but through the Death Burial and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Two hold any other view than historic premillennialism does injustice to the text of scripture. I say this with respect.

This was good! I thought Eli did an excellent job. I’m Calvinist because I believe that’s what scripture teaches but I still have love for my non Calvinist brothers and sisters and ultimately what really matters is that we trust in Christ for our salvation. God bless.

The calvinist is wrong about psa 51. David is speaking of his dead baby born from his adultery. There is no (zero) scripture that states humans are born sinful or with sin.Jesus made it clear that the Kingdom of God is made up of children like innocence. John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb because he was innocent. This calvinistis weak in the scriptures.

‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Ezekiel 33:11

The Biblical concept of "hate" is a purposeful opposition to someone or something just as Biblical love is not a warm squishy feeling. Thus, when God says he hates sinners, he is NOT using the term like we do, but is saying He is opposed to them because of their evil choices. It never means he wants the lost to STAY lost, or that He has MADE them to sin. The Calvinist uses a non-Biblical definition of hate when they try to prove God hates sinners, just as they accuse non-Calvinists of using a non-Biblical definition of what Love is.

Calvinist: If God chose to not love any human and offer them forgiveness, would that make him less loving? Me: If I refuse to be generous, does that make me less generous? Can't I rob the poor instead of giving to them and still be generous? Some questions are dumb enough to answer themselves.

You guys have misunderstood the reasons why Gervaas doesn’t believe in God. It is not that fact that there is a natural explanation for a severed leg regrowing (your example), it is he because he is not convinced with the evidence for God. If you researched more on Gervais’ beliefs you would know that he would believe in God if the evidence was compelling. For example in his case if he were to witness a miracle then he would believe. Notice there is NO reference that this miracle would be predicated on any scientific method

How do take the leap to "therefore god?"

30:00 Revelation is just speaking about the events of 70AD? Revelation 1:1 "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place --> FUTURE. "

I have no idea what Bible you're reading. God isn't saying I want you to want me. He's commanding them to obey. It was that way from the very beginning. Don't eat that. And when you do, not if you do, you'll die. You're treating God like a puny little old Gandhi man.

So so good

The calvinist didn't represent real calvinism. He talked about God knowing we will sin because He's omniscience. Calvinists always make sure to say God knows the future not because He's omniscient but because He decreed everything. Even the sock example he gave was off. Calvinism teaches that if you wear blue socks it's because God decreed your desire to be to wear blue socks. Consistent calvinsm is rarely properly explained by the calvinist because it's silliness would be too evident.

Y

The biggest problem with these conversations is they both use the Bible to support. There is a paradox here and that is the issue!

144,000 is symbolic number of God's saints. The saved of among 12 tribes of Israel's Old Testament Saints x 12 apostles of the Lamb Jesus Christ x 1000, the fullness of New Testament Righteous in Christ. Seal of Spirit is spiritual mark of saved Rev 7&14 and mark of beast is unrepentant and apostates unto death in all church age unto Second Coming on Last Day. Two witnesses is Jew and Gentile in Christ and Old and New Testament. .

Excellent commentary by Sam storms that the Heir of salvation is Jesus Christ and those who are “in Christ“ as those who were in Noah’s Ark were saved. Jesus Christ is the “Israel of God“. The word Israel means prince of God and we as Christians are the bride of the prince of God, Jesus Christ.

I like Sam storms views on eschatology but I completely disagree with him about us being in complete support of the nation of Israel… The nation of Israel is an illegitimate nation, truly a stolen land from the Palestinians… The nation of Israel is a zionist, Rothschild creation just as Dispensationalism was a zionist creation. The Zionists are trying to deceive there lesser Jewish brethren that they can actually return to Israel without repenting of their sins as the old testament mandates. Kind of like a Christian that disregards repentance in the salvation cake.

One danger on being completely dogmatic on a particular view of eschatology is spiritual pride… spiritual pride van lead to bitterness and separation. I don’t think anybody can be really dogmatic on eschatology at all… I have my own opinions and The rapture and the millennium have never sat right with me, so I would say that I agree most with this view of eschatology then any other.

I really tried to listen, but in the end, the twisted, apologetic rhetoric and illogical thought just drove me away. Just chatter, no substance. Idiots talking to themselves.

We’re in the Bible specifically. Does it say no more death after his second coming?

No one was destroyed. Stop exaggerating. Besides Dawkins challenged Justin by asserting non of his claims gives a ghost in the sky as an answer.

I was listening to Voddie about this subject and it seems to make the most sense of the text to me, especially when you look at the key of God an Magog mentioned after the millennium. I think God needs physical Israel in place for the fulfillment of prophecy purely for that reason.

Methodological naturalism is accepting that we are BLOCKED from knowing things beyond the natural, not that there IS nothing beyond the natural.

Richard Dawkins says we are machines for propagating our DNA, so then rape is good.

I don't see how free will is compatible with Molinism. God knows all counterfactuals and he puts you in a scenario, he must then know what you will do in that scenario, no? If not, what does it mean to have counterfactual knowledge? If yes, then you couldn't possibly have done otherwise so in what sense do you have free will? I know that if I type 2+2 into my calculator, it will say 4. I also know that if I had instead typed 2+3 it would have said 5, 2+4 it would have said 6, etc. Since I set up the scenario, ie. I type in the numbers in the same way god chooses which womb to put you in, I know what the calculator will say in the same way that god knows what you will do. In that scenario, free will is an illusion. What am I missing?

Amill is according to human thinking, not Gods word

Wow