Strom/Mowrey Debate on Premillenialism

Bob Strom's Second Rebuttal

 
 
 Proposition: 
 The view of PREMILLENNIALISM, as viewed by the SEVENTH DAY 
 ADVENTIST, is unscriptural.
 
 Affirm:  Dub Mowery
 Deny:  Bob Strom
 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
 Dub
 Bob, I have read over and over chapters 19 through 22 of the  
 book of  Revelation and do not see anything close to a "distant 
 cousin"  pertaining  to the Seventh Day Adventist Church's 
 doctrine concerning the  end of  time  and the events thereafter. 
 
 Bob 
 I had hoped you would be a bit more objective as you studied 
 these scriptures even though it might be at some risk to job.
  
 (Though I applaud your returning to the subject of the SDA view 
 on the  millennium and 2 resurrections in this post instead of 
 directing focus to the  Adventist church in general and who 
 founded it, when etc. ).
  
 Rev 20
 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.
  
 Instead of believing this as it is written here, your choice is 
 to refuse to believe this as it is written. Your argument has 
 been that since the  book uses symbols you feel free to try to 
 get ALL details in the book relegated to mere symbols as well.
  
 You have been careful to purge any reference to my response on 
 that point regarding the absolute unquestionable facts written AS 
 IS in the book of Revelation on a number of subjects - such as 
 God being the creator and judge (Rev 14).
  
 Instructive.
  
 And here in this latest affirmative - you ignore my entire 
 response, details, points raised etc and with a broad wave of the 
 hand pronounce - another assertion - you find "nothing close to a 
 second cousin" to what we  see written about two resurrections 
 and a 1000 year period of time between the first and second that 
 it SAYS it is talking about."  when read as written. As I have 
 already stated - debate via assertion piled upon assertion is not 
 a compelling form of persuasion.
 
 God preserve Christian leaders from such a complete lack of  
 objectivity.  
 -----------------------
  
 When you read the Rev 19 text speaking of Christ's return - you 
 hope to ignore even it's symbols of Christ - used so clearly in 
 Scripture and turn this into the return from heaven of 'nothing 
 like a second cousin" to Christ and so not a reference to the 
 return of Christ with the armies of heaven- like 2Thess 1  
 describes even though this is how it reads in Rev 19
  
 Interesting,
  
 Here are the points already raised in that chapter alone - that 
 you are choosing to ignore with the "nothing like a second 
 cousin" detailed review.  
 A. Christ is identified in Rev 19 based on John's work in John 1 
 -  "the Word".
 
 Rev 19:13 He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name 
 is  called The Word of God. 
 John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with 
 God, and the Word was God.
  
 "King of Kings and Lord of Lord" - the Lamb = Christ  Rev 19 16 
 And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, KING OF 
 KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
  
 Rev 17:14 These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will  
 overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and 
 those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.
  
 John 1:29 The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, 
 Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! John 
 1:36 etc
  
 But you declare that the symbols of Christ - the Lamb, The Word, 
 The King of Kings and the armies of heaven coming out of heaven 
 and really  engaging the armies of earth - are not to be believed 
 EVEN if we take the  symbols  and admit to them referencing 
 Christ - STILL not to be believed as  written - "nothing like a 
 second cousin" to what is written in fact.
  
 God preserve our Christian leaders from such a lack of 
 objectivity.  
  -------------------
  
 Dub
 Since the book of Revelation is primarily a  book of symbolic 
 language, how in the world do you come up with such a  concept?  ....
 How do you know when something is literal or figurative?
 ...
 Again, Bob,  how do you determine when scripture is to be  
 interpreted as literal and when is it to be interpreted as 
 figurative.  I especially ask you to tell me how you make that 
 determination concerning the contents of the book of Revelation.
 
 Bob 
 Everything is to be taken literally unless there is an obvious 
 symbol employed.
  
 This makes for an objective, verifiable, repeatable rule that can 
 be used in all of scripture, so that ALL can get the SAME clear 
 meaning instead  of each person just "making up whatever meets 
 their fancy".
  
 For example - when Christ describes the separation of the sheep 
 from the goats in Matt 25:31 we need not pretend to be confused 
 by the fact  that symbols of sheep and goats are used for his 
 description of the time of  the end and his return. And just so 
 we need not be confused in Rev 14:14  when we see the earth 
 reaped and the wicked and righteous being separated or  we see 
 the declaration in that chapter that God is creator AND judge.  
 (Facts in my responses to you which you have chosen to purge in  
 your reply).  
 -----------------------------------------------------------------   
  
 As for the books of Daniel and Revelation 'pertaining to the end 
 of time' - the evidence is clear, objective and obvious.
  
 A. There can be no doubt among any Christian group that Daniel 
 and Revelation are both apocalyptic books linked together in that 
 Revelation  uses many of the  symbols in Daniel. They are 
 companion books.
  
 B. Daniel makes it clear that the subjects do apply to the end of  
 time.
  
 Daniel 8:17 tells us that we need to see these events as 
 pertaining to  the time of the end. Daniel 12:4 says it pertains 
 to the "end of time"  Rev 13 uses the same symbols as we see used 
 in Daniel 7 in it's composite beast.
  
 C. Revelation itself leaves us with no doubt about the end of 
 time and the return of Christ as we have seen in Rev 19, 20, 21 
 as well as Rev 6 and  14.
  
 Rev 6:14-17 describes the great day of wrath, the sky split as 
 scroll the wicked crying for the rocks and mountains to fall on 
 them because they seek to hide from the PRESENCE of Him who 
 sits on the throne.
 
 Rev 19:15 declares that it is speaking of the day when the 
 heavens open and armies which are in heaven come down with Christ 
 who rules with a  rod of  iron (judgment). Specifically in the 
 destruction of the wicked.
 
 Rev 14 shows us the same separation of the sheep and goats - that  
 Christ describes in the gospels and tells us that it takes place 
 at the end  of time.
  
 You may choose to address this point - or ignore it in your 
 response, but I will remember it.  
 --------------------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 Did you just swallow "hook, line, and sinker" the Seventh Day  
 Adventist's teaching pertaining to the end of time and their 
 claims concerning those last four chapters of Revelation? 
 
 Bob 
 While I am happy to discuss the detailed evidence provided so far  
 regarding Rev 19, 20, 21 etc. I do not want to make the 
 impression  that the Adventist church is the only Christian 
 church recognizing the  truth of Rev 19-end as pertaining to the 
 time of the end. Indeed almost all of Christianity recognizes 
 that obvious fact. That is the part held in "common" - that 
 obvious 'end of time, return of Christ, resurrection of righteous 
 and the subsequent millennium" is not in any way unique to  
 Adventism.
  
 We both know that.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------
 
 Dub
 How would the average person, who reads the Bible, come to the 
 conclusions held by the Adventist on the things pertaining to the 
 end of time and the events thereafter?  I do not see how 
 anyone would draw such conclusions by just reading the entire New 
 Testament.
 
 Bob 
 First they would NOT have to come to it with the bias of "I will 
 NOT believe what it clearly says".
  
 Second they would choose to BELIEVE what is said is literal 
 unless an  obvious symbol is employed (as in the Matt 25 sheep 
 and goats).
  
 This is so obvious that they would have had to be doing this all  
 through their reading of scripture.
  
 Third - AS IT TURNS OUT - not all Christian churches are SDA - 
 yet almost all recognize the truth of Rev 19-22 pertaining to the 
 return of Christ and the following millennium and New Earth 
 etc. Soooo the idea that ONLY Adventists would figure this out 
 because they have SDA doctrines - is totally false.
  
 And of course - we both agree here as well.  
 -----------------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 My entire adult life has been devoted to learning, applying,  and 
 teaching Biblical truths.  There is not anything in this world in  
 which I would place above the truths found in the inspired Word 
 of God.  Whether you or someone else presented a Biblical truth 
 unto me, in which I had not known before, then I would not 
 hesitate to readily admit it and thank the person for doing so. 
 
 Bob 
 Dub that is a big statement - and I appreciate your be willing to 
 make it even though it could really cost you a lot - to carefully 
 review each point I have raised and show a compelling response to 
 each point raised.
 
 But the proof of whether you are willing to follow that statement 
 up with actions in support - is lacking. You need to quote the 
 points made and response to each one or at least half of them to 
 put "feet" to that statement above.
  
 Dub
 Bob, do you really hunger and thirst for a clearer knowledge of 
 God's Word?  It is my prayer that both you and me would not 
 hesitate to accept a Biblical truth that has been presented unto 
 us, regardless of who presented that truth unto us.  
 
 Bob 
 Agreed. But the "process" we must adopt to pursue that goal needs 
 to be objective, thorough and compelling. Merely tossing unproven  
 assertions back and forth without examining the texts raised - 
 would  accomplish  little  or nothing. We would need to carefully 
 quote the other person's points and respond to each one. As you 
 see I have done consistently.
  
 And I think we both know this is true as well.
 ----------------------------------------------------------
 
 Dub
 However, you have not provided a single verse of scripture that 
 proves the teaching of the Seventh Day Adventist Church 
 concerning its teaching on  premillenialism.  Not one!
 
 Bob
 A wonderful assertion - and the evidence? the proof? the 
 compelling response to those dozens of points with explicit 
 quotes of scripture???
  
 Surely we both agree that if we simply trade assertions - we 
 prove little or nothing.  
  --------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 Scriptures do not contradict one another;  therefore, any 
 understanding of the book of Revelation that would contradict 
 plain teachings elsewhere in the Bible must be rejected.  After 
 all, God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33). 
  
 Bob
 Fortunately we both agree here as well.  
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 You claim  that there will be two literal resurrections of the 
 dead separated by a 1,000 year period.
 
 Bob 
 That was from the explicit text of Rev 20 which I quoted - I 
 notice you have deleted the text of scripture and my quote.
  
 Dub
 The Bible recognizes only one literal resurrection 
  
 Bob
 This is not a quote of Rev 20, nor of the points I presented nor 
 of the supporting points I raised from John 5, 1Thess4 and 1Cor 
 15.
 
 Clearly we can not simply talk past each other in making our 
 points and hope to accomplish real understanding of truth in the 
 dialogue.  
  ------------------------------
  
 Dub
 of all the physically dead at the second coming of Christ (John  
 5:28-29;
 
 Bob
 As already pointed out - John 5 does not mention the return of 
 Christ explicitly but it DOES explicitly NAME two resurrections. 
 This has been pointed out several times - you are free to 
 carry the discussion forward by referencing those quotes and 
 actually responding to the points already raised.
  
 For example I have mentioned the case Paul makes in Phil 3 that 
 ANYONE who makes it to that resurrection - has obtained eternal 
 life. You apparently do not consider Paul's reference to that 
 resurrection worth responding to for this discussion, it is clear 
 why you might want to keep deleting the reference.  
 ----------------------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 The Day of Judgment will transpire at the second coming of  
 Christ.  There will not be a third advent of the Son of God (II 
 Thess. 1:7-10; Matt. 25:31-46). 
 
 Bob
 There is no mention of "second advent" or 'third advent" in 
 scripture.  This does not mean Christ will not return or that the 
 return of Christ described in Rev 19 and the return that we see 
 in Rev 21 are not real or are not "really" separated by 1000 
 years just as John tells us they are. Rather they are quite real 
 and really separated by 1000 years. This is what scripture says 
 and it is so clear and  obvious that many more Christians other 
 than Adventists read and understand this without help from SDAs 
 at all.
  
 So far your assertion above stands without proof or response to 
 the case already presented on this point.
  
 Again - your method is still, assertion upon assertion. To get to  
 compelling response we need a detailed look at the points raised 
 in our discussion and a direct response.  
  -------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 Your claim that Christ will ultimately reign here upon a  
 renovated earth forever with the righteous has absolutely no 
 foundation. 
 
 Bob
 Another good assertion.
  
 The way to build your case when making that kind of assertion is 
 to quote actual claim I made along with what I provided as 
 evidence and SHOW that it does not support my view. Unless you 
 take the time to actually do that, you  won't be able to support 
 your assertion above - a conclusion without the required  
 "proof" worked out.  
  ------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 Our Lord has completed His work here upon earth.  As our Lord 
 prayed unto the Heavenly Father, He said, "I have glorified thee 
 on the earth:  I have finished the work which thou gavest 
 me to do" (John 17:4).  After the Son of God was resurrected from 
 the dead He ascended back to heaven to prepare an eternal home 
 for the redeemed (John 14:1-3; II Cor. 5:1).
 
 Bob
 - the part we all agree with.  
 ------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 At  the end of time He will return to resurrect all of the 
 physically dead  (John 5:28-29; Acts 24:15).
 
 Bob
 This was already covered in my last response. Should you care to 
 carry the point forward by responding to that response - I am 
 waiting.
 
 The space used in your second affirm might have included a 
 response to this - but it did not. 
 -------------------------------------------------------
 
 We know - Paul tells that simply to ATTAIN to the first 
 resurrection at Christ's return - the resurrection of the 
 righteous (John 5:28-29, Luke 14:13-14 is to  arrive at eternal 
 life (Phil 3). 
 
 For Paul describes those raised at Christ's return as "the dead 
 in Christ"  1Thess 4.  
 -----------------------------------------------------------------  
  
 Rev 20 says that the great white throne judgment deals with the 
 dead 1000 years after Christ returns for the righteous  - Matt 25 
 deals with the living without any reference to the dead or to 
 resurrection or to separating the good dead from the wicked dead.
   
 Your argument is that if the wicked living at the time of 
 Christ's return are judged - then they can't be literally judged 
 at the end of the literal 1000 years as John literally says - 
 literally raised from the dead and judged as those over whom the 
 second death literally has power.
 
 No such contradiction exists between a REAL literally reading of   
 Rev 20 and Matt 25 SINCE Matt 25 makes no reference to the dead 
 being judged and Rev 20 makes no reference to the living being  
 judged.
  
 The Matt 25 judgment destroys all the living wicked - just as Rev 
 19 describes Christ doing. The Rev 20 judgment raises the wicked 
 dead and judges them.
  
 I agree that chapters of Rev 19-21 give us FAR more detail than 
 the 10 vs of Matt 25 - but other than that - no other 
 differences.  
 ---------------------------------------------------
 II Thess. 1:7-10).  
  
 Both views agree that God judges the living wicked at Christ's  
 return - where we DIFFER is your assertion that God RAISES the  
 wicked BEFORE the 1000 years that starts with the return of 
 Christ vs raising them AFTER the 1000 years as God's Word states 
 in Revelation.
 
 Dub
 This Great Day of Judgment will take place on the last day  (John 
 12:48).  When will that be? 
 
 Bob
 Indeed - when - scripture shows us that the great white throne 
 judgment is after the 1000 years IF we agree to read and accept 
 scripture AS it is written - otherwise we find nothing like a 
 second cousin to what Rev 20 actually says in our own doctrines.  
 ---------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 At Matthew 24:36, the Son of God refers to the end of time when  
 the physical universe will pass away in the following words:  
 "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of 
 heaven, but my Father only."  It is obvious that He is referring 
 to a specific time with the words "day and hour". 
 
 Bob 
 I agree that Matt 24 describes the day of Christ's return - I do 
 not agree that it describes the destruction of the physical 
 universe. This is simply another addition you have made to the 
 text.  
  -------------------------------------------------    
  
 Dub
 You did not even deal with  Acts 24:15, which states, "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."  That passage definitely speaks of a singular 
 resurrection of both the just and unjust.  It says, "a  
 resurrection", not "first resurrection and second resurrection", 
 or "resurrections".
 
 Bob 
 Ahhh - you sound like me with my two dozen points waiting to be  
 addressed, you have found your one.
  
 Though I did address Acts 24 in my last post - you are free to 
 quote that and then move the discussion on that text forward.
  
 Surely you would agree that not addressing the points raised - is 
 not working.  
 ---------------------------------------------------------------
  
 Dub
 Why do you suppose the Lord would take the righteous back to  
 heaven for 1,000 years if the earth is to be their eternal home? 
 
 Bob 
 Because I choose to believe God's Word as it reads in Rev 20 -  
 Scripture tells us that they sit on thrones and judgment is given 
 to them during that time.  Read it for yourself in Rev 20:4. 
 Though you may object to believing it AS it reads - getting "the 
 idea' from God's word by believing what we  read - is something  
 Christians have been doing for quite some time. Paul tells us 
 that the saints will judge angels (1Cor 6).
  
 Dub
 And why would  He resurrect the unrighteous if He is going to 
 annihilate them anyway according to the Adventist there will not 
 be an eternal hell  (Gehenna)? 
 
 Bob 
 Same reason - because I choose to believe God's Word as it reads 
 in Rev 20. There we find that the 2nd death is the lake of fire. 
 The first death is NOT the second death and the first death is 
 NOT the wages of sin - or else all the saints would have paid 
 their OWN DEBT of sin (needing no savior) if they had died. God  
 shows that he does not count the first death as paying that debt 
 - on the second death.
  
 Jude tells us that God will come to convict the ungodly of all 
 their deeds before destroying them in that judgment.
  
 In any case, you have already stated your own reluctance to 
 accept God's Word as it reads in Rev 20, but the answer to your 
 questions is found there just the same.
  
 Sincerely,  
 Bob Strom