Strom/Mowery Debate on Premillenialism
Bob Strom's First Rebuttal
Proposition:
The view of PREMILLENNIALISM, as viewed by the SEVENTH DAY
ADVENTIST, is unscriptural.
Affirm: Dub Mowery
Deny: Bob Strom
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dub
In fact, ALL religious views of a literal interpretation of
Revelation 20:1-6 are false.
Bob
I accept that your assertion is that your view is correct and all
others are false - mine is obviously that the SDA position is
correct and that your's is "not Biblical and therefore a false
theory". I am sure this was the obvious part that we don't have
to keep reviewing.
Dub with all due respect - we both know that an assertion is
merely a conclusion without evidence, without "doing the math",
without going throng the "proof", without evaluating the evidence
both for and against the assertion. Surely conclusions with their
"proofs" are more useful in our discussion.
If we really wanted to base the entire debate on assertion upon
compounded assertion - we could easily have ended it in 2
exchanges where we both assert that we are right and the opposing
view is "not Biblical", "is amusing", "is abusive", "pathetic".
But that would be pointless.
So let's reach for a more objective standard where we avoid the
temptation to "assume" the salient points rather than prove
them.
---------------------------------------------------
Some objective perspective.
I realize that while our starting assumptions are similar - our
"risk" is not the same. I lose little or nothing if you make a
logical, objective compelling Bible-based presentation that shows
my view to wrong. I did not invent Adventism and am not employed
by SDAs - my job is safe no matter where I attend church and
there are Church of Christ churches just as close to where I live
as SDA churches. A compelling Bible-based presentation on your
part would simply be to everyone's benefit.
You on the other hand risk a lot more by paying close attention
to the detail in the posts I have made and responding to each
point thoroughly - because if I am right, and you "discover" that
truth by paying close attention to each point made - your job may
be at risk. So in your case there is considerable motivation not
to carefully respond to each point, quoting it and responding to
it objectively as if you were open to the possibility that you
are in error.
======================================================
Dub
Most premillennialists believe that ..
Bob
Here your affirmative went into a review of what other
denominations other than the SDA church believe about the
Millennium. Your points on that subject do nothing to build your
case against the SDA views since SDAs do not hold to them.
next.
=============
Dub
Bob, it is my understanding, that the religious group in which
you are a member, known as the Seventh Day Adventist Church,
teaches that at the second coming of Christ, He will be
instrumental in killing off all of the unrighteous (those who
have not been redeemed by His blood); resurrect the righteous
dead and take all of the righteous back with Him to heaven for a
1,000 years. During those 1,000 years, the earth will only be
inhabited by the devil and his angels. At the end of those 1,000
years the Son of God will return to the earth with the righteous.
Wherein He will resurrect the unrighteous and conduct the general
judgment.
Bob
Indeed that is the view - correct so far. And I gave some detail
in my prior post showing how Rev 19, 20, 1Cor 15, 1Thess 4 and
John 5 provide support for that view.
I also pointed out how the Phil 3 statement of Paul endorses the
view - by showing that EVEN to ATTAIN to that first resurrection
is ITSELF a sufficient goal for the righteous. Again - there for
your consideration should you choose to respond to those
scriptures that appear to be devastating to your assertions so
far.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dub
When Satan and his host attempt to interfere, the Lord will
destroy them with fire.
Bob
Kind of accurate - the Rev 20 texts says that Satan gathers all
(both the wicked and his own followers) and the SDA view is in
keeping with that strong statement from John.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dub
Since the Seventh Day Adventist does not believe in an eternal
hell, the spiritually lost will be annihilated by the Lord.
Bob
Kind of accurate. The SDA position is that at the return of
Christ the wicked are destroyed "by the sword" of Christ as we
are told in Rev 19.
Then AFTER the 1000 years the resurrected wicked are destroyed in
the lake of fire at the great white throne judgment just as we
are told in Rev 20. We can believe what is written.
-----------------------------------------------------
Dub
Jesus will then live upon the earth with the righteous forever.
The earth will have been renovated as a new earth..
Bob
Yes - the New heavens and New Earth mentioned in Rev 21 and the
city of God coming down out of heaven - also described explicitly
in Rev 21 - are exactly the truths that the SDAs accept as
following the millennium mentioned in Rev 20.
The earth remains desolate without human inhabitants during the
1000 years, thus accounting for the desolated depopulated earth
predictions of scripture.
---------------------------------------------------
Dub
Bob, does that pretty well sum up the basic beliefs of the
Seventh Day Adventist Church concerning the end of time and the
events thereafter?
Bob
Pretty close Dub. With just the few minor corrections mentioned
above.
Dub
It is my contention in this debate that there is NOT any Biblical
foundation for those concepts.
A nice repeat of your opening assertion - and now - finally - the
proof?
Dub
There will be a resurrection of both the righteous and
unrighteous at the same time (John 5:28-29; Acts 24:15). The
eternal home of the righteous will be in the heaven of heavens,
in which the Heavenly Father dwells (II Cor. 5:1-9).
Bob
The eternal body mentioned in 2Cor 5 and a. the two resurrections
mentioned in John 5 and Rev 20 are not synonymous. Rather - only
the resurrection of the righteous (John 5:28-29) pertains to our
eternal body of 2Cor 5. b. The ONE to which we all seek to
"attain" Phil 3, c. the one where the second death has NO POWER
over anyone raised in that first resurrection (Rev 19:4-7)
d. the one where ONLY the "Dead in Christ" are mentioned as being
raised (1Thess 4) e - only in THAT resurrection do we see the
1Cor 15, 2Cor 5 "eternal" body made in the heavens -
applicable.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dub
On a web site entitled, "Adventist Church Official Web site",
there is the following statement: "Adventists look forward to
the soon return of Jesus Christ as prophesied and as he himself
promised, but not set any date for the glorious event when he
comes to take home all who accept him as their Lord."
Although I agree that Jesus Christ will return at the end of time
to receive the redeemed, there are two things stated in that
statement in which I wish to inquire about. Although every
generation should anticipate the possible return of the Son of
God, how does the Adventists conclude that Christ will come soon?
What indications are there to cause you people to make a definite
statement that He will soon return?
Bob
Signs for Christ's soon return are outside the scope of the
proofs that the millennium is really the millennium of 1000 years
following christ's return - SINCE - the time of Christ's return
in the future has no bearing on whether or not the 1000 year
millennium that follows it - will really be a millennium of 1000
years.
Christ tells us in Matt 24 that we can know when it is near "even
at the door". Daniel tells us in Daniel 8 of events reserved for
the "end of time" and gives us a clock so we can know when that
is "near". So scripture tells us to be alert and recognize the
times. But again - this is all outside the scope of our topic.
-----------------------------------------------
Dub
the Millerites and the Second Adventist. When he (William
Miller) was humiliated, his influence wavered. As his followers
began to splinter into smaller groups, a young married woman by
the name of Ellen Gould White, who claimed to receive visions,
obtained the leadership of a larger part of that movement.
Bob
Not that this has anything to do with the Millennium or a
discussion of the Bible texts SDAs use for their views - or even
a discussion of the Bible texts you use for yours - but...
Miller's group split up in late 1844 - when the un-married Ellen
Harmon was 17.
The Millerite movement consisted of about 50,000 people nation-
wide. The group that eventually went on to form the Adventist
church consisted of about 50 of those 50,000. It would be very
unfair to that group of 50,000 to blame them for anything done by
that small group of 50 or to consider 50 people to be "the larger
part of that movement".
As I have been urging - I think the details are often where one
gets lost. In this case, you have totally wandered away from the
topic - proving/disproving the Millennium, or even the SDA view
of the Millennium.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dub
She first attempted to explain away Mr. Miller's failure in
foretelling the time of Christ's return.
Bob
Wrong again - Hiram Edson Oct 23, 1844 had a vision where he saw
Christ going into the Most Holy Place of the Heavenly sanctuary
of Heb 8 and 9. He was the first to propose an "explanation"
for the events in 1844. Ellen Harmon (16 years old at the time)
had not had any visions or made any attempt to lead out in
"anything".
A few years later - 1846 - Ellen Harmon married and became -
Ellen White.
But again - this entire discussion is well suited for an
investigation into Ellen Harmon or Ellen White (depending on when
you want to make an accusation) - but has nothing to do with the
evidence used by SDAs to determine the truth about the Millennium
being literal and following the return of Christ. And soooo...
Back on topic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hoping that you have not lost interest entirely in our topic -
some thoughts on your last rebuttal.
Your main point that nothing of substance can be taken as literal
from any book using symbols
1. Is it true that whenever we find a symbol used in scripture we
are free to ignore everything in the chapter or letter or book of
scripture where this is found - in the sense of actual literal
facts?
A. It is obvious that Revelation employs symbols in it's
narrative - Can we assume this means it is lacking in explicit
fact? Does it provide license for us to simply "make-stuff-up as
it pleases us" or to ignore any fact from a book that happened to
use symbols? The answer is obvious.
By choosing to believe John and to accept symbols only when it is
clear that a literal view can not possibly work we get the most
accurate understanding of the book. In fact even the
interpretation for the symbols (as John provides the keys to the
symbols in the book of Revelation) is found by believing the
details of the book relating to how those symbols are to be
understood.
Rev 17:15 When John tells us that the symbol of water - stands
for many languages/nations/people - we can believe it.
Rev 17:9-20 The 7 heads are seven kings/kingdoms - we can believe
it.
Rev 17:12 - The 10 horns represent 10 kings who have not received
a kingdom yet (at the time of the book) - we can believe it.
Rev 1:7 When John tells us Christ is coming in the clouds and
every eye shall see him - we can believe it.
Rev 1:18 When John tells us that Jesus was dead and is now alive
forevermore - we can believe it.
B. Literal truths found in the book of Revelation.
In Rev 19 John tells us that the wicked are destroyed by Christ
at His return - we can believe it.
In Rev 20 John tells us that the righteous are resurrected at the
return of Christ -
In Rev 21 John tells us that God actually does judges the wicked
and throws them into the lake of fire after the millennium we can
believe it.
Clearly when John calls Christ the Lamb of God in John chapter
one we DO see a symbol used.
When John references the "2nd death" in Rev 20 we CAN expect to
find a REAL "second death".
When John references "resurrection" we can expect that REAL
resurrection is being spoken of.
When John speaks of God in Rev 4 we CAN expect to find that there
REALLY is a God.
When God declares that He DID make the "heavens and the earth the
sea and the springs of water" in Rev 14 we need not speculate
that "these can ONLY be symbols and can not possibly be really
true as stated". Rather we are assured that God REALLY did make
the earth JUST as Rev 14 REALLY says.
The idea of abolishing all truth in Revelation - turning even the
plain statements into symbols, is unknown to all methods of Bible
interpretation - and certainly unknown to me.
For us to read the chapter of Rev 19 and 20 describing the return
of Christ, the resurrection of the righteous, destruction of the
wicked and the 1000 year interval between the resurrection of the
righteous and the resurrection of the wicked - and then deny it,
inserting our own made-up views to it, requires that we come to
it with pre-conceived bias. It requires that we inject into the
text our own bias rather than looking for the text itself to
serve as it's interpreter.
-------------------------------
Dub
as pertaining to the literal second coming of Christ and the real
resurrection of the righteous dead. Not only have you failed to
provide a single passage elsewhere to uphold your theory
Bob
1Thess 4 has already been given in detail showing it's
devastating case made against your assumptions here. It shows
that in fact the resurrection of the "dead in Christ" is what
takes place at the return of Christ. No question.
The only thing that remains is for you to finally address the
issue of the fact that ONLY the dead in Christ are mentioned as
rising in 1Thess 4 at Christ's return - when in fact you believe
that ALL the wicked rise then. Your silence on this point speaks
volumes.
Dub
It is definitely in a literary form known as apocalyptic, which
means that it is put forth by a series of visions in symbolic
language. For a person to give lip service in acknowledging that
truth and then turn right around and attempt to force literal
interpretations to symbolic language is inexcusable.
Bob
With all due respect - it is inexcusable to assume that nothing
in Rev is literally true - and that ALL words/statements in ANY
book of scripture are not actually literally true but are 100%
symbols.
Dub
Jesus Christ did not promise to prepare us a place in heaven for
only 1,000 years. He promised to prepare for us a place in His
Father's house (John 14:1-6). Where did the Son of God go to
prepare a place for the redeemed? The answer: "So then after
the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven,
and sat on the right hand of God" (Mark 16:19).
Bob
Indeed - Christ went to heaven to prepare THERE a place for us -
and then - as He promised He WILL come again and RECEIVE US TO
HIMSELF - instead of coming here to JOIN US HERE WERE WE ARE - He
comes to RECEIVE us to HIMSELF - to take us up off the earth - we
GO to meet him up in the air - and are then "guided safely to His
heavenly kingdom".
=============================
Dub
... We are not left in the dark in this matter. We are not to
set our affection upon a physical earth, but in glory where
Christ sitteth on the right hand of God (Col. 3:1-4; Matt. 6:19-21).
Bob
Matt 5:5 ""Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the
earth.
Revelation 21
1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven
and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea.
2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of
heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, ""Behold, the
tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and
they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them, ...
10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high
mountain, and showed me the holy city, Jerusalem, coming down out
of heaven from God,
Is 66:
22 ""For just as the new heavens and the new earth Which I make
will endure before Me,'' declares the LORD, ""So your offspring
and your name will endure.
23 ""And it shall be from new moon to new moon And from sabbath
to sabbath, All mankind will come to bow down before Me,'' says
the LORD.
24 ""Then they will go forth and look On the corpses of the men
Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm will not die And
their fire will not be quenched; And they will be an abhorrence
to all mankind.''
Is 11
6 And the wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will 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 will graze; Their young will lie down
together; And the lion will eat straw like the Ox.
8 And the nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, and
the weaned child will put his hand on the viper's den.
9. They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, for the
earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord
------------------------------------------------
Dub on 1Thess 4
Talking about perverting a passage of scripture, this is exactly
what you did with I Thessalonians 4:16. It would be amusing
except it deals with eternal matters. Grammatically, you are
abusing the context of verses 16 and 17 by bringing in a second
resurrection that is not even being discussed in I Thessalonians.
That is a pathetic way of attempting to prove two resurrections
of the dead.
Bob
Ok - let's see your assertions here - "amusing", "abusing",
"pathetic" - all wonderful assertions - and the "math", the
proof?, the "show your work" section? the portion of my
affirmative you are not-quoting?
Dub
Again, the Apostle Paul was dealing with a misconception within
the church at Thessalonica as to whether or not the righteous
dead would miss out on the eternal home in heaven at the second
coming of Christ. The Apostle Paul answers that misconception by
pointing out that "...the dead in Christ shall rise first:"
Bob
Indeed - this is the part all agree on - in fact - "all the
people in all the denominations said - amen".
The key is to "show your work" with something that we do not both
agree to but can be "shown", "proven", "demonstrated" to support
your view and refute mine.
Dub
We inquire: "First before what?" Paul answers in the immediate
context that it is before the righteous living rises in the air
to meet the Lord. Both the resurrected dead and those righteous
who were living at the second coming of Christ shall rise
together to meet the Lord in the air.
Bob
Too bad you are not making a point for your case. You 'should' be
arguing that "SOME of the resurrected dead rise while MOST remain
here since they are wicked".
But as are now using the language of MY VIEW - that in fact "THE
RESURRECTED dead AND those living righteous" are caught up
together. Instead of SOME - it is all those resurrected at that
time - no "others" are mentioned.
As you say "the resurrected dead RISING FIRST" are not preceded
by the LIVING "righteous".
In 1Thess 4 the resurrected dead are all referenced as "the dead
in Christ".
Dub
Hear the inspired Words of verse 17, "Then we which are alive and
remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to
meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the
Lord."
Bob
You have yet to make your case for "abuse" "pathetic" etc. Where
is the 'show your work' section of your conclusion? Based on the
above - it remains merely a string of assertions without actually
getting to some section in 1Thess4 that makes - your case.
------------------------------------------------------
Dub on John 5
The scripture definitely teaches that the resurrection of the
dead at the second coming of Christ will be a general
resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.
Bob
A wonderful assertion - and the proof? The mention of the second
coming of Christ in John 5 telling us that the wicked are raised
then??
Dub
There is not any way that you can discredit the words of the Lord
concerning the resurrection of both the righteous and the
unrighteous dead taking place at the same time
When He uses the word "hour", it refers to a precise time.
Consider again the Words of our Lord, "Marvel not at this: for
the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall
hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good
unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto
the resurrection of damnation" (John 5:28-29).
Bob
I applaud your switching to a method of actually trying to prove
an assertion thus showing it to be a valid conclusion based on
real evidence in the text. This is the form of dialogue I much
prefer.
Now let's see where you are in error in your "proof".
Some argue that the idea of 'an hour' indicates that both
resurrections named by Christ in John 5 happen in the same hour,
the same 60 minutes - perhaps even the same 60 seconds.
Does this mean that both resurrections will occur within "60
minutes"? OR is this an idiom, a common expression referring to
a future time when God will take over and the Rev 19-20 events
will transpire - with both resurrections taking place, in their
order as scripture describes them? It does not once you agree to
read the book of John and other NT writers and notice their
frequent use of this idiom.
I will provide only the first half DOZEN examples that directly
refute your assumption that this must be the same instant because
of John's term "an hour".
The many hours of the Christian age - "an hour" to worship God in
spirit and truth. Instead of telling us that God's people have
only worshipped in spirit and truth for 60 minutes over the last
2000 years - John/Christ means that the age - the time-span for
that has now come. And in fact that "hour" has continued for
almost 2000 years.
John 4:22-24 ""But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true
worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such
people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.
Are we to think that the last hour on earth ended with the
writing of 2John 2? No clearly John shows that it is a time span
- all that takes place after the ascension of Christ was
considered "the last hour". A time span of almost 2000 years.
John 2:17-19 Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard
that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have
appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour
Does Paul expect us to conclude that evangelism of earth
consisted only of one hour during the writing or Romans 13? No,
Paul is also using this term to indicate a time-span - in this
case one that has been lasting for about 2000 years.
Romans 13:10-12 Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the
hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to
us than when we believed..
It John telling us that the great time of testing to come upon
the earth will only last 60 minutes? Hardly.
Revelation 3:9-11 "Because you have kept the word of My
perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing,
that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test
those who dwell on the earth.
Revelation 14:6-8 and he said with a loud voice, Fear God, and
give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come;
worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and
springs of waters.
The many hours of Christ's betrayal and trial - are considered
"The hour" of his betrayal.
Mark 14:40-42 And He came the third time, and said to them, Are
you still sleeping and resting? It is enough; the hour has come;
behold, the Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of
sinners.
Christ's hour covers the entire time - he was given over into the
hands of wicked men. The term was not meant to indicate - 60
minutes.
John 7:29-31 So they were seeking to seize Him; and no man laid
his hand on Him, because His hour had not yet come.
Here the 'hour' is considered to include both the betrayal -
trial, crucifixion abut also the 40 days until Christ was taken
up out of the world - certainly not just "60 minutes".
John 13:1-2 Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing
that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to
the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He
loved them to the end.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dub
At Acts 24:15, the Apostle Paul speaks of a resurrection in the
following words, "And have hope toward God, which they themselves
also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both
of the just and unjust." Note that he speaks of a resurrection
of the just and unjust. It is a singular resurrection rather
than two resurrections.
Bob
In the name of objectivity - this is the first actual text that
could in some way be viewed as supporting your theory.
Acts 24:15 is the FIRST text that you have found in your favor -
and I applaud you for finally coming up with one. Though it is
the ONLY text in the array mentioned so far to make anything
like your point - it IS at least one.
To my benefit it does NOT say that the resurrection of the just
takes place at the return of Christ - nor does it provide ANY
time factor (except the future tense) to that resurrection. This
is helpful since the ADDED detail of the many other texts
already given shows that in fact the wicked are raised - after
the 1000 years NOT before. That the ones raised BEFORE the 1000
years are not subjected to the 2nd death - and this is said only
of those raised BEFORE the 1000 years that start with the return
of Christ.
For this reason - the resurrection at the return of Christ is the
one were the just, "the DEAD IN CHRIST" are raised - it is the
FIRST resurrection, the "resurrection of the righteous". And by
attaining to that ONE resurrection - at the return of Christ
(Phil 3) we have accomplished our goal - eternal life.
You have had to go through great lengths to either avoid or "talk
over" the explicit texts that DO speak of two resurrections, AND
of the fact that at the return of Christ - the only ones
mentioned as being raised are the righteous AND (then ignoring)
the quote from Phil 3 that just to ATTAIN to that resurrection
alone is sufficient to admit eternal life.
That speaks volumes.
Sincerely,
Bob