This study exposes the doctrine and methods of “Church of Christ, Inc.” through an examination of one of its own books, Premillennialism, Bible Resource Publications, 1998.  (The word, “premillennialism” refers collectively to various biblical doctrines pertaining to the last of “the last days”.)  The disagreement hinges on whether the scripture in the bible concerning “the day of the Lord”, “the resurrection”, the Lord’s “reign” for a “thousand years” from the “throne of David” in “New Jerusalem”, as a “kingdom” on a “new earth” at the “end of this world” speaks of things that are literally real and will be brought to pass by the Lord in the future (the “fundamentalist premillennial” belief), or, on the other hand, all such scripture is meant to be taken  “figuratively” and applied to events of the past, if applied at all (“post-millennial,” or “a-millennial” belief).

Rejection of premillennialism expresses a religious bias common to many of the daughters of the mother of harlots.  Objection to the premillennial view stems from deeply underlying apostate assumptions and preferences which have bedrock foundation in the belief that the Catholic “popes,” by virtue of ruling as the chief politicians of the world from the “papal” throne in Rome for 1700 years, is sufficient to explain all bible prophecy describing a future “thousand years” of earthly reign by the Lord, fully satisfying (or making unnecessary) all belief in any such literal kingdom, unless applied to past “papal rule.”  It is simply overlooked as trivial that the time periods do not match (It is always insisted that “a thousand years” could refer to “any period of time”  – the official “C. of C., Inc.” position.), as it is also ignored that the “popes” NEVER ruled from Jerusalem, much less from “new Jerusalem”! (The “popes,” of course, understood this problem precisely and did their best “to conquer” the land of “Palestine” to set up the “papal” throne there; but never succeeded (which is also overlooked as irrelevant in the minds of “post millennial believers”).  The anti-Israel bias of this mind set considers Christ ruling from “Jerusalem” unacceptably “Jewish” unless the government is Roman, and the thought of the world being ruled from “new Jerusalem” by the living “King of the Jews” is unbearable to them.

The denomination, “Church of Christ, Inc.,” stands directly opposed to “premillennialism” and, in fact, was formed specifically to counter increasing interest in eschatology by the large number of people believing the bible following the reformation that swept like wildfire through Europe.  Church of Christ, Inc.” pretends to be offended by premillennialism in claiming that it disparages the rightful central position and “glory” of “the church” by the teaching that the Lord will do something in the future beyond what he has done already with the church.  To put it succinctly, “Church of Christ, Inc.” denies that the Lord will in the future bring Israel into the kingdom (recruitment for which kingdom began with Israel), and considers it a grave heresy for a man to simply believe that the Lord will do what his word says he will do, “rule” on the earth (Matthew 2:6; Revelation 21:1-5; Isaiah 9:6-7).  The division always comes down to the question of what shall be adhered to for authority in regard to doctrine; man-made religion with all of its neo-fascist, satanic machinations and agendas, or the word of God by the power of the Holy Spirit?   It is becoming increasingly clear to honest men that we are approaching “the end of this world” based on bible prophecy concerning these times.  “Church of Christ, Inc.” was created to stem the tide in this growing awareness.  “Church of Christ, Inc.” is more than “just another denomination:”  like its “MOTHER”, it has pagan sacerdotal beliefs, false claims of priestcraft powers for its “elders,” and man made doctrine; but, beyond that, those who are deceived by this worldly organization believe in almost nothing with respect to the future that you, as a Christian, think all Christians believe.  Exposing this fact is the main purpose of this study.  (Note, that  “C. of C., Inc.” argues against the fallacy of believing in “pre-tribulation rapture,” which, of course, is easy to do since the “pre-trib” hoax is an obvious satanic lie.  Although “secret rapture” theories are associated with “premillennialism” in the minds of many, nothing of it exists in scripture, and prior to 1830 was completely unheard of.  This doctrine was never connected with premillennialism  for 1800 years, and it will certainly not be defended here.)

The different chapters in Premillennialism are written by different authors, and in this revue will be dealt with separately.  Not all chapters will be examined due to the fact that several authors substantially repeat previous authors or deal with matters that are not contested.  Also, an attempt to examine every biblical perversion within this book would cause this revue to become a book in itself, and I do  not believe there would be any interest in such lengthiness, nor any need.  In wresting the truth to justify its hellish doctrine, “C. of C., Inc.” uses tactics that include (1) general rejection of the old testament ranging from disregard to contempt, (2) ignoring all doctrinally inconvenient scripture (most of the old testament, the prophets, much of the new testament, and all of the book of Revelation), (3) systematically forcing prophecies of the future to attach to events of the distant past, even to the point of absurdity, (4) insisting that blatantly clear literal passages are “allegorical,” or “figurative” and therefore “mean” nothing, anything, and everything, except what they plainly state, (5) usage of “straw man” arguments to dispose of unassailable biblical truths, (6) employment of every imaginable form of Jesuit sophistry, from clever to stupid, and (7) plain old fashioned lying.  If this analysis seems harsh, the condemnation is fully established in their own words, in their own work (and it gets worse as it goes).

Deceiver #1, Billy Bland  (Page 8 in “Premillennialism”)
Bland is trying to prove a central “Church of Christ, Inc.” belief, that the Lord has no kingdom except the new testament church and never will have. (His argument is that “the church” IS the “kingdom and always will be the kingdom, and there will never be any other kingdom or type of kingdom besides the “church.”)  Specifically, in this chapter, Bland wishes to prove that there is no such thing as a future “thousand years” “reign” of Christ.  To do this, his strategy on page 8 is to “prove” that the Lord’s “kingdom” has arrived on earth already as a spiritual kingdom, making a future physical kingdom (in the thousand years reign) unnecessary.  Bland states:

“Jesus attest [sic] to the fact that He came to be king.  However, His kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36).  His kingdom is spiritual and not material in nature.  Thinking that God’s kingdom was to be material was the mistake the Jews made, and it is the mistake made by the Premillennialists!”

(1)  prior to Bland’s statement above, he had quoted John 18:37 in its entirety.
(2)  John 18:37 says nothing about the argument he’s trying to make.
(3)  he skipped verse 36 which deals exactly with the point he’s trying to make.
(4)  he refers back to verse 36 parenthetically, by paraphrasing only part of it,
(5)  while surgically removing the part that deals with the issue that he’s lying about.
[Why does he do this?  Because these are his methods as a deceiver, just as any Jesuit doing his duty:
(a)  Verse 36 tells you precisely the opposite of what he wants you to believe (containing the word, “now”)
(b)  Bland obviously knows this and doesn’t dare quote it.
(c)  He goes to so much effort to work around verse 36 because he wants to use the idea stated in the first half of the verse for his own purposes in his deception.
(d)  Bland is crooked, and is wresting scripture to make you believe something that he knows is not true.
(e)  Bland, as all “Church of Christ, Inc.” members, wants to preach that the Lord’s kingdom will NEVER come to this world physically, (nor will it in the future come in any way that it hasn’t come already).
(f)  In the minds of “C. of C., Inc.” there is nothing in the future except more of the same:  rule by men, forever!
(g)  The “C. of C., Inc.” personality likes it that way, and is enraged that you aren’t satisfied with this.
(6)  To sell his doctrine that the Lord’s kingdom is spiritual only and will never come physically, Bland is forced to use dishonest tactics; but it is easy to see through his strategy:
(a)  Both sides in the argument know that the Lord’s kingdom is not of this world NOW:  that is not the issue!
(b)  The issue is whether or not the Lord’s kingdom WILL BE of this world, IN THE FUTURE.
(c)  This is the exact issue dealt with in John 18:36, but
(d)  Bland skipped verse 36, so, let’s look at what he’s trying to hide:

John 18:33-36 (36)   “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.”
QUESTION:  What does the word, “now” do to the meaning in this sentence and context?
ANSWER:  It forces the implication that:  “the Lord’s kingdom at some time in the future WILL BE from hence.”  (You understand that perfectly and so does Billy Bland; which is why he tried to hide the Lord’s statement!)

(Matthew 6:10   “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”)
[When Bland reads this, he only sees the second half of the sentence, and he doesn’t know what that means.
[Silbano Garcia, an elder and spokesman for the corporate network of “Church of Christ, Inc.” (who appears to be Jesuit trained, if not a Jesuit himself) told me that if you keep the fourth commandment, “you’ve departed from the faith.”]
QUESTION:  What “faith” is Garcia talking about?
ANSWER:  The “faith” of the “Church of Christ, Inc.,” a daughter of the harlot, and church of the “prince of this world”.

Ecclesiastes 12:13   “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.”
Revelation 14:12   “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.”

Matthew 5:17-19   “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Luke 6:46   “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?”
John 14:15   “If ye love me, keep my commandments.”
QUESTION:  Is any king hated, disobeyed, and ignored by those in his own kingdom?  (See the above again.)
[If you think the answer is “Yes,” then its a pretty sloppy kingdom!]
[If you admit the answer is “No,” then its clear that either:
(a)  the Lord’s kingdom has not yet come to earth, or
(b)  at best, “Church of Christ, Inc.” is not a very “great” part of that “kingdom” if it has come.]

Bland takes the reader to Isaiah 2:1-4, a solid “premillennial” verse, and then associates “the mountain of the Lord’s house” and “the house of the God of Jacob” contained in Isaiah 2 with “the house of God, which is the church” in 1st Timothy 3:15, to falsely associate and define this specific old testament passage as a prophecy of the “new testament church” (or “Church of Christ, Inc.”).  Bland states,

“First observe that Paul identifies the Lord’s house as the church.”  (Emphasis mine  –tf.)

(1)  First, this is a false statement.  Paul, in 1st Timothy 3:15, specifically connects the “church of the living God” with “the house of God”, NOT the “the mountain of the Lord’s house” or “the house of the God of Jacob”.  This association by Bland is unscholarly, crooked, and childishly stupid.
(2)  The new testament NEVER uses the term “the Lord’s house”, much less “the mountain of the Lord’s house” or “the house of the God of Jacob”.
(3)  Similar such terms used in the new testament, are dramatically expanded in their meaning beyond old testament definition, and cannot be applied retroactively to old testament usage or to similar terms, without destroying the meaning and forcing ludicrous conclusions.  Consider the verses below and the example argument which follows them.

1st Corinthians 3:16,17   “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?  If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”
1st Peter 2:5   “Ye also . . . are built up a spiritual house. . .”
1st Corinthians 3:9   “For . . . ye are God’s building.”
6:19   “. . . your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God. . . .”
EXAMPLE:  Being a deranged deceiver, I would capitalize on 1st Corinthians 6:19 by stating, “See, Paul says ‘your body is the temple’ and since the ‘temple’ was destroyed twice in the old testament, you’ve already died twice!”  Would you buy that logic?  Would you think this was the way to handle the words of life?  Is believing the bible and its doctrine a supposed to be a Jesuit game of fast shuffle the way you see it?
(4)  Isaiah 2:1-4 is prophetic of the Lord’s kingdom in the thousand years reign that “C. o  C., Inc.” claims does not exist.
(5)  Isaiah 2:1-4 does NOT mention “the church.”
(6)   Isaiah 2:1-4 does NOT prophesy about “the church.”
(7)  Isaiah 2:1-4 DOES, in fact, prophesy concerning the following:
(a)  “Judah and Jerusalem” (v. 1);
(b)  “the mountain of the Lord’s house”  (v. 2)  [this is “Jerusalem”!];
(c)  “the mountain of the Lord”  (v. 3);
(d)  “the house of the God of Jacob”  (v. 3);
(e)  “Zion”  (v. 3);
(f)   the going forth from Zion of “the law”  (v. 3);
(g)  “Jerusalem” again  (v. 3);
(h)  the Lord “shall judge among the nations”  (v. 4);
(i)  “and shall rebuke many people”  (v. 4);
(j)  “and they shall beat their swords into plowshares”  (v. 4);
(k)  “and their spears into pruninghooks”  (v. 4);
(l)  “nation shall not lift up sword against nation”  (v. 4); and
(m)  “neither shall they learn war any more.”  (v. 4)
QUESTION:  Does this sound to you like a prophecy of (A) the new testament church in this present wicked world? or (B) the physical reign of the Lord in the New Jerusalem?  (That’s the issue here and that’s the argument.)
(8)  The term, “the Lord’s house”, is used 21 times in the old testament and is NEVER a reference to the church, but ALWAYS refers to a material temple “made with hands”.  Here’s a partial list:  (I’m just going to do this enough so you get the idea.)]

Λ        2nd Chronicles 7:2   “And the priests could not enter into the house of the LORD, because the glory of the LORD had filled the LORD’s house.”
Λ            Psalm 116:19   “In the courts of the LORD’s house, in the midst of thee, O Jerusalem.  Praise ye the LORD.”
Λ        Isaiah 2:2   “And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.”
Λ        Jeremiah 7:2   “Stand in the gate of the LORD’s house, and proclaim there this word, and say, Hear the word of the LORD, all ye of Judah, that enter in at these gates to worship the LORD.”
Λ        19:14   “Then came Jeremiah from Tophet, whither the LORD had sent him to prophesy; and he stood in the court of the LORD’s house; and said to all the people. . . .”
Λ        26:2   “Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD’s house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD’s house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word. . . .”
Λ        v. 10   “When the princes of Judah heard these things, then they came up from the king’s house unto the house of the LORD, and sat down in the entry of the new gate of the LORD’s house.”
27:16   “Also I spake to the priests and to all this people, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Hearken not to the words of your prophets that prophesy unto you, saying, Behold, the vessels of the LORD’s house shall now shortly be brought again from Babylon: for they prophesy a lie unto you.”
(9)  The term, “the Lord’s house”, is used interchangeably with “the house of the Lord” (213 times); “the temple of the Lord” (20 times); and “house of God” (81 times)
(10)  On no occasion are any of the above terms ever used to refer to “the church,” or to “the Church of Christ, Inc.”
(11)  Bland spiritualized “the Lord’s house” (and “the house of the God of Jacob”) by connecting it to 1st Timothy 3:15:
(a)  ignoring the way the term is always used in the old testament,
(b)  ignoring the way that the term is always used by Isaiah,
(c)  ignoring that the term in 1st Timothy 3:15 is not the same term as either term given in Isaiah, and
(d)  ignoring the definition of the term, “the mountain of the Lord”, even as it’s used in Isaiah 2:3.
QUESTION:  What is “the mountain of the Lord”?
ANSWER:  The “mountain of the Lord” is “Jerusalem”.  (See Zechariah 8:3.)  [This is too “Jewish” for “C. of C., Inc.”]
Λ        What could be more hypocritical than to claim that the term, “the house of the Lord” in Isaiah, refers to “the church” when you’ve already advertised that “Church of Christ, Inc.” doesn’t use musical instruments in its “services” because “The bible never tells the church to use musical instruments.”  (See Isaiah 38:20)
Λ        Isaiah 38:19-20   “. . . we will sing my songs to the stringed instruments all the days of our life in the house of the Lord.”  (No “Church of Christ, Inc.” member in the world would admit that the “house of the Lord” here is the church!)
(Note that the term, “house of God”, is used 3 times in the new testament, referring to “the household of God”  – as in Ephesians 2:19.)
Ephesians 2:19   “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God. . . .”
(12)  Notice that the church becomes part of something that existed before them:
(a)  there were “citizens” before the church existed,
(b)  there were “saints” before the church existed,
(c)  and the church becomes “fellow” with what already existed; being “graffed” into it (Romans 11:17-18).
Deceiver #2, Lester Kamp  (Page 28 in “Premillennialism”)

Kamp states,

“But when He comes there will be no signs to indicate His imminence.  Paul tells us, ‘. . . that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night; (1 The. 5:2b)  . . .  Thieves do not give us warning signs before they come.”  [Emphasis added – tf]

(1)  Kamp pretends not to understand that the Lord is not a thief:  he only said that he will come as a thief to the world.
(2)      The Lord will indeed come upon “them” as a thief, but it is clearly his intent to have us ready and awake to his coming when the time approaches, and, for that reason, he gave us all kinds of “signs:”

1st Thessalonians 5:1-3   “But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.  For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.  For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.”  (When they all say “Peace and safety”, there’s a sign for you.)
Λ            [Kamp, himself, previously referred to 1st Thessalonians 5, but of course, left out the pertinent verse 3.]
Joel 2:31-32   “The sun shall be turned into darkness . . . before the great and the terrible day of the Lord come.”
[There’s another sign.   You couldn’t possibly miss it.]
Malachi 4:1,3,5   “I will send you Elijah the prophet before . . . the great and dreadful day of the Lord. . . .”
2nd Thessalonians 2:1-3   “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. . . .”  [Here’s two more signs.)
Revelation 13:13   “And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. . . .”  [What part of “in the sight of men” does Kamp not understand?]
Luke 21:25-26   “And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”
Matthew 24:29-30   “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light . . . and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”  (Here’s more “signs.”)
vs. 32-34   “Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:  So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.”
[The Lord has obviously given enough information so that you can “know that it is near” when the time comes.]
Λ                (Kamp, as all members of “C. of C., Inc.” and other dead religions tries to destroy the above passage by insisting that “This generation” (in verse 34) refers to the generation to whom the Lord then speaks, rather than the generation that “shall see all these things” and be warned.  The problem here is a spiritual condition.)

Λ        Matthew 16:1-4 (3)   “O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?”
[Why would the Lord say this, except to show his displeasure at those who refuse to see “the signs of the times?”]

Kamp makes this further statement,

“But when Jesus comes, He will not come to establish a kingdom as the premillennialists declare.  His kingdom already has been established (Col. 1:13-14).”

(1)  Kamp is helping his argument with imaginary opposition.]
(2)  That the Lord is ruling over a heavenly kingdom already is agreed by both sides, and is not the issue:
(3)  Earth is the issue!
(4)  As to the doctrine of “premillennialism,” we defend it only insofar as we defend what is written (and the bible defends itself just fine):  we defend that the Lord will in the future reign over a physical kingdom, with himself ruling physically for a thousand years, from a physical throne, on planet earth.  The Lord’s territory as a king over a population who will serve him, will in the future be extended to include planet earth for a thousand years (and after that, earth will be disposed of altogether).
(5)  Kamp is simply creating a straw man so that he can knock down truths he falsely associates with it for that purpose.
(6)  Kamp wishes to contradict “premillennialists” by this statement, but refers the reader to “Col. 1:13-14”:
(a)  which says nothing about his statement,
(b)  which says nothing for or against establishing an earthly kingdom,
(c)  which says nothing about any tenant of “premillennialism.”
(7)  Kamp is trying to get away with using Colossians 1:13-14, which is a positive statement (and, as is agreed, clearly implies that the Lord has a kingdom already), to serve as a negative and limiting statement to the effect that the Lord will Not in the future have a greater kingdom that for a thousand years includes planet earth:  Colossians 1 does not state that, doesn’t imply that, and has nothing to do with what Kamp is discussing.  Kamp is committing the fraud of “bait and switch.”  (He advertised oranges but slipped apples into your sack, if you weren’t paying attention.)
(8)  The truth is that the Lord’s kingdom PRESENTLY includes everything EXCEPT planet earth, which is ruled over by Satan who is NOW the god thereof.

2nd Corinthians 4:4   “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not. . . .”
(Kamp knows all this:  he just pretends he doesn’t.  The reason his scriptural references are so hopelessly misapplied and his arguments so pathetic is because he’s desperate in his attempts to wrest scripture.)

Kamp interjects that the Lord:

“will deliver this kingdom over which He now reigns to the Father (1 Cor.15:24-25).”

(1)  Kamp is outright lying.
(a)  The passage referenced says nothing about “this kingdom” or “this kingdom over which He now reigns:”
(b)  the passage states exactly, “the kingdom” (which is “the kingdom” that the Lord will rule over at that future time)
(c)  which is “the thousand years” reign of Jesus Christ on Earth, as proved by verse 26,
(d)  which is why Kamp intentionally left out verse 26.
(2)  The Lord made manifest that he is in every way subject to his Father, and everybody knows it:  the only reason Kamp mentions this here is to change the subject and make himself sound spiritual.  He refers the reader to “1 Cor. 15:24-25” which proves exactly the opposite of what Kamp intends.  (Kamp wants to hide verse 26 and so we expand the passage to include it):

1st Corinthians 15:24-26   “For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.  The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.”
(a)  This verse standing alone tells you that the “reign” being discussed COMES TO AN END:  (“till”)!
(b)  This verse by itself tells you WHEN that “reign” comes to an end.  (When the “last enemy” is “destroyed”.)
(c)  This verse by itself implies WHY that “reign” comes to an end.  (Because the last enemy IS destroyed.)
[The purpose of the thousand years “reign” is to destroy all enemies, and to finish in the recruiting of the missing one third of the host of heaven:  when that is accomplished, project “earth” is concluded.]
QUESTION #1   “ How long does the Lord “reign” before he destroys the “last enemy”?, or put another way,
QUESTION #2   “ When is “death” destroyed?
ANSWER:  Revelation 20:7-14   “And when the thousand years are expired . . . death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.”  [And there it is!]  (“Church of Christ, Inc.” refuses all of this.)
[This isn’t “figurative and allegorical,” it simply tells you exactly what is going to happen and when!]

Kamp states,

“There is no indication that Jesus will ever set foot on this planet again.”

(1)  Kamp, like his friends, (1) can not read, or (2) does not read, or (3) is a liar:

Λ        Zechariah 14:1-4 (4)   “And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.”
Λ        Acts 1:9-12   “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.  And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.  Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day’s journey.”
(A)  That is where they were when the Lord was “taken up from” them into the clouds.
(B)  That is where he will return when he comes in the clouds:  “the mount of Olives”.
(C)  You get to decide who’s a liar:  the two angels, or Church of Christ, Inc.
QUESTION:  What is it about “his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east” that Kamp doesn’t understand?
ANSWER:  It isn’t that Kamp doesn’t understand this:  he just hates the idea, and so he lies to himself and you.
Λ        (Note:  “the mount called Olivet” is the same “mount” as “the mount of Olives” in Zechariah 14; as for example:
(a) “Noah” in the old testament (Genesis 6:8-9) is occasionally “Noe” in the new (Matthew 24:37-38);
(b)  “Melchizedek” in the old testament (Genesis 14:18)  is “Melchisedec” in the new (Hebrews 5:6);
(c) “Elijah” in the old  testament (1st Kings 17:1) is “Elias” in the new (Matthew 17:3-4); etc.
Matthew 24:30   “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
26:63-64   “Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”
Revelation 1:7   “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him. . . .”
[There’s nothing “secret” about any of this, and he doesn’t “stay in the clouds:”  “his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives”!]

Kamp states, “The bible tells us, in fact, that when Jesus comes, this world will be consumed by fire.”
(1)  Kamp makes a partially true statement, misleading the reader by insinuating that the Lord’s destruction of the world by fire has to be the end of the matter.
QUESTION:  Don’t you find it revealing that Kamp is familiar with 2nd Peter 3:10, but does not know about v. 13?)

2nd Peter 3:13   “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”
Revelation 21:1   “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.”
Isaiah 65:17   “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered. . . .”
65:22   “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.”
Psalm 102:25-28   “. . . the earth:  and the heavens . . . shall perish . . . yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed. . . .”
Revelation 3:12   “the name of the city of my God . . . is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven. . . .”
21:5   “And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.”
[“C. of C., Inc.” says this will not happen, there will be no new earth, and that all who believe this are “blind” and “deceivers” and fallen from grace.”  As it’s written, “Ye shall know them by their fruits.”]
(Romans 3:4   “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.”)

Kamp concludes by saying, “The purpose of His coming will be judgment (2 Cor. 5:10).”
(1)  Kamp’s statement is a lie by reason of being a partial truth that pretends to be a whole truth.
(2)  2nd Corinthians 5:10, as referenced here by Kamp, suggests exactly the opposite of what Kamp intends.  The Lord would not have to come to earth at all if his only” purpose” was to bring men “before the judgment seat of Christ” unless that “judgment seat” would be on earth, and, of course, IT WILL BE ON EARTH!
(3)  When the Lord comes back to earth his “purpose” will ALSO be:
(a)  “vengeance”;

Jeremiah 46:10   “For this is the day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries: and the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood: for the Lord GOD of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river Euphrates.”
(Romans 12:19   “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”)  [He wasn’t kidding.]
2nd Thessalonians 1:7-8   “And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . .”
(b)  to “raise up” his servants, both from the dead, and also them “which are alive and remain”;

John 6:39   “And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.”
1st Corinthians 6:14   “And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.”
1st Thessalonians 4:16-17   “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:  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.”
(c)  to take the “government” to “his shoulder”;

Isaiah 9:6-7   “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.  Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever.  The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.”  (“C. of C., Inc.” says “No.”)
(d)  to bring his “reward” unto his servants.

Revelation 22:12   “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.”
(e)  to “put all enemies under his feet”, and destroy “death and hell” and all those who will not “obey him”

1st Corinthians 15:26   “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.”
[Kamp avoided this verse while trying to use the two verses before it.]

Revelation 20:13-14   “And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.  And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.”
Deceiver #3, Andy McClish (Page 65 in“Premillennialism”)

A sampling follows of the straw man arguments used by McClish to falsely describing what premillennialism claims:

“Christ is not now reigning as king, nor does He have a kingdom in which to reign.”
“According to premillennial teaching, since the Jews rejected Christ as king, the kingdom was post-poned [sic] and Christ returned to heaven as nothing more than someone who had a claim to the throne  – someone who hoped to be king in the future.  Therefore, He is not a king now and will not really be king until He can comes [sic] back to earth and manage not to get rejected.”  [Emphasis added  – tf]

(1)  I know of no one calling himself a “premillennialist” that claims the Lord does not now have a kingdom.  If there are such persons they are sadly ignorant:  the Lord is king over a very large kingdom, the kingdom of heaven (which is presently short its original number by a third, however).
(Page 67 in “Premillennialism”)

“Just after promising to build His church Jesus promised to give to the apostles the keys of the kingdom (Mat. 16:19), a figure which clearly implies terms of entry.  If the kingdom is yet to be established, however, then the apostles never used the keys, and it was nonsensical waste of time for the Lord to provide them.  It should be obvious from even a casual study of this passage that the terms church and kingdom are being used interchangeably here (just as they are throughout the New Testament).  In John 18:33-37 (when asked about His being the king of the Jews), Jesus stated, My kingdom is not of this world . . . my kingdom is not from hence.  Pilate asked, Art thou a king then?  Christ responded, To this end have I been born and to this end have I come into this world (emph. mine, AM).  Jesus established His kingdom all right, but it was not an earthly kingdom.”

(2)  McClish is as slippery as any Jesuit when it comes to wresting scripture.
(a)  Notice the twisted and ignorant logic used by McClish to “prove” that the new testament church is all there is of God’s plan.  (One must be spiritually dead to corrupt scripture in this way.)
(b)  Notice McClish insists that the “church” is equal to the “kingdom,” and then pretends that scripture implies this “(. . . throughout the New Testament).”  [When the fact is, this heresy is implied nowhere. – tf]
(c)  Notice that McClish, as all “Church of Christ, Inc.” deceivers, refers to the passage in John 18:33-37 to make his point by wresting scripture, but neatly paraphrases around “now” in verse 36; quoting part of this very verse, while leaving out the one word that makes all the difference and forces the opposite conclusion of his intent.
(3)  Observations and Conclusions:
(a)  All of “C. of C., Inc.” wrest scripture in this exact same way!
(b)  It can’t be done accidentally.
(c)  It can’t be done without understanding how to do it.
(d)  Either someone trains them in this wickedness, or they learn it “naturally.”
(e)  A “Church of Christ, Inc.” seminary school is obviously a den of vipers.
(Page 68 in“Premillennialism”)

“The church is just an ill-timed accident – an interim substitute for what Christ really had in mind (i.e., an earthly, political kingdom).”

“Premillennialism teaches that the church was a temporary, emergency measure (instituted with no forethought or design), hatched up on the spur of the moment in response to the Jew’s rejection of Christ.”

(4)  These people are spiritually quite sick, in addition to being treacherous liars.
(Page 69 in“Premillennialism”)

God is neither all-powerful nor all-knowing.

“At the very heart of Premillennialism is the idea that, when the Jews rejected Christ, God was unprepared and caught off guard; that He was powerless to stop the crucifixion.  Premillennialism holds that this unforeseen turn of events caused God to have to scramble around and throw together a back-up plan (i.e., the church).”

(5)  Premillennialism embodies nothing like this.
(6)  The above is not merely ignorant exaggeration, it is a false witness to set a straw man argument.
(Page 71 in “Premillennialism”)

“It does not really take an in-depth study of the scriptures to see that Premillennialism is not just some harmless theory or an alternate viewpoint regarding some peripheral matters of opinion.  Premillennialism is a completely and inherently false viewpoint concerning some of the most fundamental and essential truths that God has revealed to us.  To embrace the doctrine of Premillennialism is to contradict all that the Bible teaches about the kingdom and the reign of Christ.  To believe the teachings of Premillennialism is to make a liar (or an incompetent fool) out of the Son of God, not to mention numerous other prophets of God.  To accept the doctrine of Premillennialism is to deny the value, the importance, and the glory of the church for which Jesus died.  To embrace the Premillennialism system of religion is to deny the power and knowledge and wisdom of the God who created us, along with everything else in this universe.  A person cannot do any of these things without involving himself in fatal error (i.e, [sic] without putting his eternal soul in jeopardy).  The doctrine of Premillennialism needs to be recognized for exactly what it is and exposed for what it is.”

Deceiver #4, Bob Berard  (Page 126 in “Premillennialism”)

Berard states authoritatively, “The single entrance to the kingdom is described as born of water and of the Spirit in John 3:5.”
(1)  This is classic “Church of Christ, Inc.” ignorance and a patently false statement.
(2)  This is an absurd statement.
(3)  John 3:5 associates itself with no such description.
(4)  The entire gospel of John never uses the word “single.”
(5)  The entire gospel of John never uses the word “entrance.”
(6)  Berard, as all “C. of C., Inc.” ignores the definition for verse 5 plainly given in verse 6:

“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”  [John 3:6]

(a)  These are TWO “births.”
(b)  There is NO single “baptism” anywhere.
(c)  There is no “baptism” of any kind anywhere.
QUESTION:  What is it with these people?
(7)  Berard further ignores verse 7, which places emphasis on the latter birth, NOT the former:

“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”  [John 3:7]

(a)  There are TWO “births” considered here
(b)  It is the SECOND “birth” that “must” occur!
(b) “Baptism” is never mentioned.
QUESTION:  Would it help these people if the Lord had said “born of water and born of the Spirit”?
ANSWER:  No, because then they would still ignore the definition in verse 6 and the emphasis in verse 7 and say, “Obviously two births here are described as one water baptism.”

Berard asks, “But, just what is meant by being born of water and of the Spirit?”
(1)  First, he ignorantly insists on understanding two births as a single “baptism” (water “baptism”), so that John 3:5 is now impossible for him to understand,” and then he pretends to be honestly inquiring as to “what is meant by” it.
(2)  You will notice that although Berard asks the above question, seemingly searching scripture for an answer, he never once looks to the defining answer given in verses 6 and 7, immediately following the verse in question.
(Page 127 in “Premillennialism”)
After a ridiculous dead-end rambling through wrested scripture, Berard states, “Thus, being born of the water and of the Spirit and water baptism are apparently the same process. . . .”
Berard is utterly clueless.
Referring to Romans 6:3-4, Berard states, “After emerging from baptism’s waters, Paul says that one walks in newness of life.”  (Emphasis added – tf)
(1)  This is a lie and a complete fabrication.
(2)  Paul never said anything to indicate anybody “emerged” from anything:  Observe:

Romans 6:3-4   “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?  Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”
(3)  Paul never used the word “water” (let alone “baptism’s waters”) ANYWHERE IN THIS PASSAGE!
(4)  Paul never used the word “water” (let alone “baptism’s waters”) ANYWHERE IN ROMANS!
(5)  Paul never used the word “water” connected with the word “baptism” anywhere in ANY OF HIS EPISTLES!
(6)  Paul never raised up water baptism:  he purposely placed it low in importance in comparison to life giving matters:

1st Corinthians 1:13-17   “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. . . .”
QUESTION:  Why are these water dogs willing to wrest scripture to make water baptism the saving formula?
ANSWER:  Because it is an act that they can “perform,” giving themselves the power to bring “newness of life.”  (In their sick minds they have the same priestcraft power as any Catholic priest when he offers the biscuit, so you can “eat Christ” and get spiritual life, THROUGH THEM.)  [This is the exact essence of “sacerdotalism.”]

Berard then asks, “Where does one experience newness of life, but after birth?”
(1)  A more pathetic and foolish question cannot possibly be imagined.
(2)  “Where” is NOT THE QUESTION at issue here, but rather
(a)  “when” does the new birth happen,
(b)  “why” does it happen,
(c)  and “what” is it!

Berard, effecting a most ridiculous spiritual air, then states a completely stupid, humanistic, and devilish load of hog manure as though it were a scriptural truth:

“The new birth, a birth of water and of the Spirit, consistent with the metaphor, involves a walk in newness of life; water baptism, taught by the Holy Spirit through inspired men, is declared by Paul to be followed by newness of life.”

(1)  Berard lifts a term from John 3:5 and hopelessly bastardizes it, trying to credit the Lord and Paul with his nonsense:
(a)  first, he associates a singular “new birth” with a bastardized version of TWO births (one old, one new),
(b)  then, to cover his tracks, he places the word “a” in front of “birth” (slickly forcing the two to become one),
(This is called “wresting scripture,” which he does unto his own destruction.)
(b)  then he connects his newly created singular “birth” with the Lord’s statement concerning TWO births,
(c)  then he associates this abomination with “newness of life”,
(d)  then he identifies this sick abomination with “water baptism, taught by the Holy Spirit through inspired men”,
(Where do you suppose such a devilish lie could come from?)
(e)  then he accuses Paul of authoring this blasphemy.
(2)  The Lord (in John 3:6-8) is defining two “births,” NOT one “baptism;”
(3)  Neither Paul nor the Lord ever attached “newness of life” to “water baptism.”
(4)  Berard’s statement is a lie.
(5)  Berard’s statement is ridiculous.
(6)  There is no such thing as “a birth” (singular) “of water and of the Spirit”.
(a)  This is exactly the same thing as the “Pentecostal” attempt to make a “baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire” out of two baptisms given by John saying, “he shall baptize you [1] with the Holy Ghost, and [2] with fire. . . .”

Matthew 3:11   “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire. . . .”
(b)  Ignoring both the verse that went before (Matthew 3:10) and the verse which came after (v. 12) that define the “fire” in verse 11 as “hell fire” and “the lake of fire”!
(c)  These people just take out the comma and the word, “with”, from between “Holy Ghost” and “fire” to create a SINGLE baptism that does not exist!
Matthew 3:10   “. . . every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.”
Matthew 3:12   “. . . but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
(d)  John Baptist was telling everybody who would listen to him, that the Lord will Baptize EVERYONE with one of these two baptisms.  Everyone will get at least ONE of them:  if you don’t get the first you WILL get the second.  If you REFUSE the baptism of the Holy Ghost, YOU WILL GET THE BAPTISM OF FIRE!  (Pentecostals never read verses 10 and 12; just as “C. of C., Inc.” refuse to read verse 6 in John 3, both camps corrupting scripture in the exact same way!)
(7)  Berard’s statement makes the Lord out to be a liar who says, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” which is two births:  you must be “BORN” twice.
(8)  The “new birth,” which is the second birth, does not come from water or flesh, it comes by the “Spirit” (John 3:3,7) which is defined by the Lord as “born of the Spirit” (v. 6)  which verse is ignored by “C. of C., Inc.,”:
(a)  This second “birth” is truly also a “baptism,” but only the Lord can give this baptism, which is by his Spirit.

Matthew 3:11-12   “. . . he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. . . ”
(i)  A Church of Christ, Inc. “elder” cannot do this.
(i)  “Water” has nothing to do with this!
(ii)  Just because the word “baptize” is in the sentence doesn’t mean “water” has anything to do with it, and
(iii)  just because “water” is in the sentence doesn’t mean there’s a “baptism.”]
(b)  The new “birth” is what brings “newness of life”(and only the Lord can do this).
(c)  The Lord mentioned “water” (referring to the FIRST birth, which is by “flesh”); NOT “baptism” or “water baptism.”
(d)  Paul never mentioned “water” or “water baptism.”
(e)  “Church of Christ, Inc.” just balls all of this together willy nilly with no regard for what’s being said.
(f)  The gentiles entering into the church did NOT “get baptized in water in order to get the Holy Spirit:” they were baptized in water because they had ALREADY received the Holy Spirit!

Acts 10:44-48   “And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished . . . because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.  . . .  Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?  And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.”
11:1_16   “. . . [Peter] shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.  And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.”  (Nobody has been “dunked,” “sprinkled,” or “dribbled” yet.)
9:1-18   Here, Paul ALSO gets the Holy Spirit baptism first and afterward gets water baptism.
(This is the baptism plan for the church.)
QUESTION:  Why does Paul, being a Jew, get the gentile baptism.
ANSWER:  Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles:
Romans 11:13   “For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles. . . .”

Acts 18:24-26   “This man . . . knowing only the baptism of John.  . . . whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.”  (Apollos was raised “Church of Christ, Inc.” (so to speak) and was completely ignorant of what he should know.)

John 1:12-13   “. . . born, not of blood . . . nor of the will of man, but of God.”
(Two people deciding to go down to the river can’t accomplish the new birth.  If you disagree, then you believe in Voodoo!  You are a papist, “Church of Christ” (Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc.) “sacerdotalist.”)
Philippians 3:3   “For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit . . . and have no confidence in the flesh.”  (“priests,” “elders,” and witch doctors dunking, sprinkling, and “performing the sacraments.”)

1st Corinthians 12:13   “by one spirit are we all baptized into one body. . . .”  (There is NO “water” here at all.)
Galatians 3:26-27   “as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”
[There’s NO “water” in the entire book of Galatians.]

Berard then states, “Clearly being born of water and the Spirit is a term equivalent to water baptism; thus baptism is the entrance, or the threshold, to the kingdom of God.”
(1)  Berard’s statement is a stupid and ignorant satanic invention.
(2)  His statement is a bald-faced lie.
(3)  His statement is ridiculous.
(4)  What Berard claims is “clear,” is plainly false and patently evil.
(5)  Berard contradicts the Lord who defined two “births,” NOT one “baptism;” (John 3:6-8); and it is the second “birth” that is significant.
(6)  It’s true that no one could be “born again” (by “Spirit”, the second birth) who was not FIRST “born” of FLESH, but the first birth didn’t get you saved to any degree, it just got you into the world and doomed to die.
(7)      (Your mama’s “water” broke, and out you came:  you were “born” of water, not “baptized” of water, much less “baptized of the water and of the spirit!”)

John 3:6-8   “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.  Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.  The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.”
(Page 129 in “Premillennialism”)

Berard concludes:

“The church and the kingdom have [a] the same Head, [b] the same authority, [c] the same entrance, [d] the same members, [e] the same worship, and [f] the same destiny; therefore, the church and the kingdom are the same institution.  This being the Bible truth of the matter, all contrary or contradictory conclusions are false.  Since one of premillennialism’s fundamental and indispensable claims is that the  church is present and the kingdom is future, thereby requiring that the church and the kingdom not be same institution, which the Bible teaches they are.  Premillennialism is a false system.”  [emphasis and bracketed insertions mine  – tf]

(1)  Berard is entirely sloppy with his terms, and appears to be genuinely ignorant of what he’s talking about.  If he’s not ignorant, then he is surely a Jesuit deceiver working from inside “Church of Christ, Inc.”
(2)  In the paragraph quoted above, the goal is to make you think that “the church” and “the kingdom” are the same, when the church and the kingdom are definitely not the same.
(3)  In trying to create a list of things that these two different things have in common, Berard demonstrates his own ignorance and sloppiness, or that he simply believes his audience to be retarded.
(4)  While Berard wishes to appear as projecting basis in logic for his assertion that these two different things are one and the same, he is not actually using ANY form of logic at all.
(5)  The list that he provides is bogus for two reasons:
(a)  his list is a false list to start with, and even if his list were true,
(b)  two things are not shown to be the same, much less “proved” to be the same, simply because they have a few things in common.
(6)  In regard to (5b) above, let’s suppose I wish to “prove” that my color printer IS my vacuum cleaner, that they are both “one and the same” thing, because:
(a)  they both are beige in color,
(b)  they both have a power cord,
(c)  the power cords on each are black,
(d)  both are powered by electricity,
(e)  both run on 115 volts nominal current, AC,
(f)  they both have internal circuitry,
(g)  they both have an on/off switch,
(h)  both of them are bigger than a flea, but smaller than a Boeing 757. . . . and so on.
or, suppose I wished to “prove” that my dog, Ginger, and a tick on Ginger’s nose, do not express a parasitic relationship, but, in fact, they two are really “one and the same” organism, and all is well.  It’s easy to “prove:”
(a)  they both share the same space at the same time,
(b)  both of them are brown,
(c)  both of them travel across the field at the same speed,
(d)  both of them are members of the animal kingdom,
(e)  both of them sleep in the same place,
(f)  both of them eat in the same place,
(g)  both of them live off the same blood supply
(h)  both of them have legs,
(i)  both of them can crawl on me,
(j)  both of them can latch on to my leg,
(k)  both of them HAVE latched on to my leg. . . .  (Are you convinced yet?)
(7)  In regard to (5a) above, let’s look at the list of elements in Berard’s absurd concluding paragraph:
(a)  No one here disputes that both “the church” and “the kingdom” have the same “head”.
(b)  Berard has previously argued that “the word of God” is “the authority” for both “the church” and “the kingdom,” and on that basis, no one here disputes him.
(c)  As observed previously, and in typical “Church of Christ, Inc.” fashion, Berard has defined the “entrance” common to both the church and the kingdom thusly, “The single entrance to the kingdom is described as born of water and of the Spirit in John 3:5.”
(i)  This is false, blasphemous, and ridiculous:  further
(ii)  The Lord made himself personally to be the entrance:

John 10:7   “Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.”
v. 1   “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.”
(d)  Berard now claims that the church and the kingdom have “the same members.” This is ignorance beyond belief!

Λ        1st Corinthians 12:27   “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”
[If you are in Christ, you are, in fact and by definition, a “member” of “the church,” however YOU are not yet “in the kingdom” unless you’re an angel posing as human.]

Λ        1st Corinthians 15:49-53 (50)   “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”
[ Being “in Christ” isn’t the same as being “in the kingdom,” and you are not “in the kingdom” if you are still “flesh and blood”.  You are still “in the world”, even though not “of the world”!]

Λ        John 17:11   “And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee.”

Λ        John 17:15   “I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.”
[“We” certainly ARE in the church, but we definitely are NOT “in the kingdom”, the kingdom is in us!]

Λ            Luke 17:21   “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.”
[This is a reference to the Holy Spirit that is in you, given as the earnest of the kingdom you will inherit later.]
Λ        Ephesians 1:9-14 (13-14)   “In whom . . . also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession. . . .”
Matthew 25:34   “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. . . .”
(i)  The inheritance of the kingdom is FUTURE.
(ii)  We have the “earnest” of that inheritance NOW, which is the Holy Spirit.
(iii)  The “earnest” is “a thing given to show good faith in a bargain until the contract is completed and the goods are handed over,” but
(iv)  the “inheritance” has not taken place yet, and you have not yet entered the kingdom.
Acts 26:18   “. . . that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”

1st Corinthians 6:9   “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?”  (See, it’s later!)
Galatians 5:21   “Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”
(i)  Paul warns that being “in the church” does not even guarantee that you will later inherit the kingdom if you live like the world lives in this world.
(ii)  To be in “the church” NOW means you are promised an inheritance of the kingdom LATER, and
(iii)  you CAN BE in the kingdom later,
(iv)  if you endure until the end.
Matthew 24:13   “But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.”
Mark 13:13   “And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.”
(v)  None of this is difficult unless you’re intent on wresting scripture to salvage your religion.
Matthew 11:11   “Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.”
(i)  John is not in the kingdom of heaven.  (He is in prison.)  (Can Herod keep an angel in prison?)
(ii)  John is flesh and blood.
(ii)  Whether you try to claim that John IS, or is NOT, in the church, doesn’t even make any difference at this point:  John the Baptist is greater than everyone born of flesh, he belongs to the Lord, and he is the Lord’s servant, but John is not “in the kingdom”, because he is still “flesh and blood.”
Revelation 4:6-8   “. . . and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.  . . .  And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.”
(i)  These beasts are “members” of the kingdom of heaven and occupy the throne room.
(ii)  These beasts are not “members” of the church!
(e)  Berard now claims that the church and the kingdom have “the same worship.” This is silly!  Let’s pretend for the moment, for argument’s sake, that “Church of Christ, Inc.” is “the church” of the bible and compare its claims for “worship” with “worship” in “the kingdom:”
“WORSHIP in the kingdom”

Matthew 5:19-20   “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.  For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

15:9   “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”  (Exactly!)

Mark 7:7   “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”)
Λ        [“Church of Christ, Inc.” declares that the commandments are done away with, and specifically, that if you keep the fourth commandment, “you’ve departed from the faith.”  (I’m quoting what Silbano Garcia, an elder and spokesman for the corporate network of “Church of Christ, Inc.” told me, when I said I didn’t think the fourth commandment was done away with.)]
“Musical Instruments used in worship in the kingdom”

Revelation 14:2   “And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps. . . .”
Isaiah 38:19-20   “. . . we will sing my songs to the stringed instruments all the days of our life in the house of the Lord.”
[Remember that “house of the Lord” means “the church” in Isaiah, according to “Church of Christ, Inc.]
Λ        [Yet, “C. of C., Inc.” demands that singing should be “a capella” because the church was never told to use instruments, but the cold reality is:
(a)  in “the kingdom of heaven” they use instruments, and
(b)  in “the kingdom of Israel” they use instruments,
(c)  (as was instructed by the king of that kingdom and the King of kings of that kingdom, but)
(d)  Berard claims:
(i)  there’s only one kingdom,
(ii)  the kingdom is the same as the church, and
(iii)  worship is the same for both,
(iv)  as “proof” that the church and the kingdom are the same thing!
(e)  You can’t explain how these shysters manage to fool so many people, unless you admit it’s by devils?
“Worship on the sabbath day”

Acts 17:2   “And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures. . . .”

Exodus 20:8   “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.”
1st John 2:3-4   “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.  He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.”  (But, but, but. . . .)
Λ    [“C. of C., Inc” claims “The church gathers on the first day of the week.”]
“Celebration of the Lord’s Supper”

1st Corinthians 11:20   “When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper.”
[Communion and “the Lord’s supper” are two entirely different things:  you can eat one, but not the other.]
Λ    [The church, according to “C. of C., Inc.,” regularly “observes the Lord’s supper”!
(8)  The “Church of Christ, Inc.” (spoiled children who think themselves to be the center of the universe) wish to portray “the church” (of which they fancy they are a part), as the only glory of the universe, and synonymous with “the kingdom” in its entirety.  Their false assumptions are not supported by scripture and do not proceed from scripture, but from their own egos and anti-Israel bias.
(9)  To create the illusion that the bible supports them in their folly, that “the church and the kingdom are the same institution” they must deny that the church, which came AFTER Israel is “wild by nature and graffed contrary to nature into” something existing previously:  Israel.

Romans 11:24   “. . . thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree. . . .”
QUESTION:  If the church is all there is, then what is it that you are grafted into contrary to nature?

Ephesians 2:12   “That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. . . .”
[The “commonwealth of Israel” is the “kingdom of Israel”:]
1st Samuel 15:28   “And Samuel said unto him, The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.”
QUESTION:  If “the church” is the same thing as “the kingdom,” where were Gentiles and the church when the kingdom was in Israel, and ONLY in Israel?
ANSWER:  Gentiles circumcised themselves in the flesh in order to be part of the kingdom of Israel, and “the church” didn’t even exist.
[“Church of Christ, Inc.” thinking is exactly what is condemned in Romans 11:15-21.]
(10)  The“kingdom” did not start and end with “the church” as maintained by “church” fascism:  the kingdom
(a)  existed from eternity in heaven;
(b)  then reduced in its size to two thirds following Satan’s rebellion;
(c)  recruitment for the shortage started from scratch with two souls, Adam and Eve;
(d)  started again from scratch with Noah and 8 souls, following destruction of the world by water;
(e)  then established in Abraham; and
(f)  passed through his seed:
(i)  inherited by Isaac,
(ii)  inherited by Jacob,
(iii)  whose name became Israel,
(g)  the children of Israel were prepared 400 years in the furnace of Egyptian slavery;
(h)  delivered by a water “baptism” through the Red Sea;

1st Corinthians 10:1-2   “And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea. . . .”
(i)  then, essentially the whole generation was rejected of the Lord and destroyed in the wilderness;
(j)  the next generation entering into the promised land;
(k)  led, defended, and established by the Lord;
(l)  raised up and glorified to be a mighty people, by “the glory of Israel” personally (Micah 1:15);
(as also in the new testament)
Luke 2:32   “A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.”
(m)  expanded to include the church (which gets grafted into the kingdom and becomes part of the recruitment plan);

Acts 13:46   “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.”
(n)  but eventually, further recruitment will be returned exclusively to Israel;

Luke 21:24   “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”
Romans 11:26   “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. . . .”
(o)  established in the “new earth” from the “throne of David” in the “new Jerusalem” for a “thousand years” following destruction of the world that once was by “fire”.  (At this time there a throne on earth being occupied by God.  The Son will rule on earth.  Those who belong to the Lord from the old world will serve as “kings and priests”.)

Revelation 5:10   “And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”

Zechariah 14:8-9   “And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD. . . .”
(p)  the earth and heavens are removed completely, then the kingdom (ruled by the Lord) is given over to his Father.

1st Corinthians 15:24   “Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.”
(Note:  “the church” was grafted into the kingdom and existed during the time between (m) and (n) above, which comes to an end (yet the kingdom never ends):  it is ridiculous to say the church and the kingdom are the same thing.)
Deceiver #5, Carl B. Garner  (Page 148-149 in “Premillennialism”)
(1)  Garner refers to solid premillennial passages that relate to future prophecy, “Isaiah 2, Daniel 2 and Joel 2,” and then in typical “C. of C., Inc.” manner, tries to get rid of them by sweeping them into the past.  Watch this guy.  (See if you can keep from laughing out loud.)

“By finding the New Testament fulfillment of these passages, we can discover when these things were fulfilled, and we will be well on our way to knowing what the day of the Lord is or was to be [can you believe this guy? – tf], and what man may anticipate in the days to come.   In observing the events surrounding the day of Pentecost discussed in Acts 2, we begin to see the connection between these verses and these writers.  Upon the conclusion of our study, we realize that the prophecies of Joel 2, Isaiah 2 and Daniel 2 are all fulfilled in Acts 2.  Truly, the great Day of Pentecost discussed in Acts 2 is a focal point in both Old and New Testament study.  Concerning the kingdom of God, all passages discussing the time prior to that day are still anticipating their fulfillment.  However, passages that discuss the time period after that day speak of those matters as having been brought to fruition or their fulfillment having begun.  This point cannot be over-emphasized, for its truth tells us that these great prophetic statements concerning God’s kingdom have been fulfilled.”

(2)  See how these cats think:  they have decided beforehand that prophetic scriptures are already fulfilled, and
(3)  the trick now is to make it look like they’re trying to “discover” something when they’re trying to bury it all.
(4)  How could anyone “discover when” they are to happen when he’s already decided they’ve been “fulfilled” already?
(5)  How could anyone “discover” “what man may anticipate in the days to come” if prophecy is automatically relegated to history?
(6)  “. . . we will be well on our way to knowing what the day of the Lord is or was to be. . . .”  [WHAT!??!]
(7)  This is classic circular reasoning that will never “discover” anything but continued ignorance.
(Page 163 in “Premillennialism”)

Garner concludes:

“Over thirty years ago, I recall Johnny Ramsey giving us this brief, yet effective refutation to the doctrine of premillennialism:

When Jesus returns, there will be no saints on earth to reign with (1The. 5:13-18), there will be no wicked to reign over (John 5:28-29); and no earth to reign on (2 Pet. 3:9-12).

If any one of these is true (and they are all true), the doctrine of premillennialism falls of it [sic] own weight.”

(1)  NONE of the above assertions is true, NOT EVEN ONE!
(2)  Nothing said above serves as an “effective refutation” of anything except the contention that “Church of Christ, Inc.” has anything to do with Jesus Christ.
(3)  What Ramsey provides is a “sound byte:”
(a)  it tickles the ears, and
(b)  sounds good to those who are ignorant,
(c)  but is entirely lacking in substance.
(4)  There will of course be lots of “saints on earth to reign with”
(a)  Ramsey referenced, 1st Thessalonians 5:13-18, which says nothing about the issue, one way or the other.
(b)  A large number of old and new testament scriptures speak of the thousand year reign on earth, but without mentioning the length of time involved:  such verses are to be combined not separated.

Jude 1:14   “And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints. . . .”
Revelation 5:10   “And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”
1st Corinthians 6:2   “Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?”
(c)  None of these verses speak of the old earth, but rather the “new earth”.
(d)  The “new earth” then ends in the same wicked condition as the old earth did, in rebellion against the Lord and Jerusalem surrounded with armies, as it was (and always would be)
(i)  the first time  (under Titus)
(ii)  the second time (at the end of this world)
(iii)  and again the third time, (at the end of “the thousand years” on the “new earth”):
Revelation 20:9   “And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”
(iv)  which is the final end of “earth”, period!
verse 11   “And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.”
(5)  Also, and contrary to Ramsey’s contention, there will be “wicked to reign over:”

Revelation 19:15   “. . . and he shall rule them with a rod of iron. . . .”
12:5   “And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. . . .”
2:27   “And he shall rule them with a rod of iron. . . .”
Psalm 2:9   “Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”
(a)  Ramsey refers the reader to John 5:28-29, apparently showing that he is familiar with the terms “the resurrection of life” and “the resurrection of damnation”, but, again, insists on ignoring that “the resurrection of life” takes place BEFORE “the thousand years”
Revelation 20:6   “Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.”
(b)      whereas, the “resurrection of damnation” does not take place till the end of the thousand years (Revelation 20:13-14).
Revelation 20:7-8   “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.”
(i)  The wicked are as the sand of the sea  (For you “C. of C., Inc.” people, that means “lots.”)
(ii)  at the end of the thousand years; and
(iii)  Satan can deceive them easily (for the same reason he can deceive “Church of Christ, Inc.”)
(iv)  and so they all end up doing exactly what you would expect them to be doing, according to scripture:
(v)  rebelling against a visible literal ruling King, and surrounding Jerusalem to destroy it, AGAIN!
(vi)  (It’s “new Jerusalem” this time, on a “new earth”
(vii)  but unconverted MEN are the same as always,
(viii)  which is why they are not fit for the kingdom,
(ix)  and will never go there,
(x)  even if they were “in the Church of Christ, Inc.”!
(6)  Lastly, Ramsey states that there is “no earth to reign on” and then refers the reader to “2 Pet. 3:9-12.”
(a)  Like all “C. of C., Inc.,” Ramsey knows enough to refer to 2nd Peter 3:9-12 while pretending that the Lord can’t possibly rule for a thousand years over a world that he has “already destroyed;” and
(b)  like all “C. of C., Inc.” deceivers, Ramsey is sharp enough to see he has to ignore verse 13 which flatly states that the Lord has promised a “new earth”!
(c)  like all “C. of C., Inc.” deceivers, Ramsey simply hopes that
(i)  you don’t realize what a liar he is,
(ii) and that you won’t actually read the verse that comes immediately after the verse WHERE HE STOPPED:
2nd Peter 3:13   “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”
(d)  “Church of Christ, Inc.”
(i)  does not “read” this verse,
(ii)  will not read this verse,
(ii)  would not “believe” this verse if they did read it, and
(iii)  absolutely do not “look” for this “promise”;
(e)  but “we” do!
(f)  “Church of Christ, Inc.” officially claims that premillennialism makes God out be a liar by believing the Lord, that “according to his promise” he will do what he said he will do.
(g)  “Church of Christ, Inc.” uses sick and crooked techniques to wrest scripture that a child could see through and that would make a grown man want to vomit.
Deceiver #6, Mark K. Lewis  (Page 189 in “Premillennialism”)

Lewis begins his chapter with this:

“Two of the more interesting personages in the Bible are the “man of sin” and the “antichrist.”  There could hardly be, over the centuries, more disagreement among authors, commentators, and Bible students over the identity of these two fellows, the range of guesses and hypotheses being too numerous to mention.  At present, probably the most popular idea equates the two.  [Lewis then outlines the basics of the premillennial view, with “rapture” added, all ostensibly as according to Hal Lindsey; then later quotes “St Augustine” and several others to get their worthless opinion; and then bases his argument on the lack of agreement in other deceivers like himself; and then he sums up:] . . .  Right before mankind self-destructs, the Lord will return, destroy this wicked beast, and inaugurate a reign of peace and tranquility which will last for a literal 1,000 years.  If such a scheme sounds suspiciously unbiblical, it is only because it is.”

“Thus, the premillennial view is that the “man of sin” and the “antichrist” are one and the same, and yet future.  It is the position of this paper that, Biblically, they are not the same, and they are not future.  . . . the diverse views that have been expounded give us clear warning that the solutions will not be easy ones.  . . .  This is only a partial listing of the extreme range of speculations and surmises regarding the identity of the man of sin.  As the reader can see, unanimity of opinion is wanting.”

(1)  The “C. of C., Inc.” position boils down to this:
(a)  We don’t believe in a future “man of sin” OR future “antichrist,” BUT
(b)  we don’t want to make it obvious that we’re an apostate, believe-in-nothing, atheistic, bunch of daughter harlot, money-loving, political hyenas, so
(c)  if we paint the issue as ridiculously as possible, we can succeed in
(i)  making the facts look ridiculous, so we won’t look so bad for throwing our hands up and ignoring it, and
(ii)  insofar as anyone believes our spiel, they won’t be able to figure it out, either, and
(iii)  we can all just go back to our nice comfortable antiseptic religious atheism, and
(iv)  not have to bother with Jews and Satan and God and all those kinds of real issues.
(2)  I personally know of 314 different biblical names for Jesus Christ, besides “Jesus Christ”:  (Ask me for the list.)
(a)  Does this fact mean that there are 314 different men involved?  (No!)
(b)  Does this fact mean that there is more than one “Christ”?  (No!)
(c)  Does this fact mean that Jesus Christ is not real?  (No!)
QUESTION:  Now that I’ve got you thinking, what do you suppose is the purpose behind “C. of C., Inc.” creating two men out of two names?
ANSWER:  The truth is impossible to understand, once you let the enemy tamper with the ground rules.
(3)  Have you noticed a pattern here on the part of “C. of C., Inc.” deceivers?:  that
(a)  where there are two things they make one thing out of them,  (the kingdom and the church)
(b) and where there is one thing it turns into two things?  (the antichrist and the man of sin)
(4)  Pretending that there are “two men,” by referencing two names for one man is only a straw man argument:
(a)  “Antichrist” is only one name among many names for the same enemy warned of:
(i)  “a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences”  (Daniel 8:23-25)
(ii)  “a little horn”  (Daniel 8:9)
(iii)  “another [horn]”  (Daniel 7:24)  (Before dismissing “another” you might want to look at John 5:43 below.)
(iv)  “antichrist”  (1st John 2:18)
(v)  “him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders”  (2nd Thessalonians 2:9)
(vi)  “the son of perdition”  (2nd Thessalonians 2:3)  (Judas Iscariot was also called by this same title.)
(vii)  “that man of sin”  (2nd Thessalonians 2:3)
(viii)  “that Wicked”  (2nd Thessalonians 2:8)
(ix)  “the beast”  (Daniel 7:11 & Revelation 13:3; 17:8; 19:20; 20:10)
(x)  “the beast that was, and is not, and yet is”  (Revelation 17:8)
(xi)  “the horn”  (Daniel 7:11)
(xii)  “the mystery of iniquity”  (2nd Thessalonians 2:7)
(xiii)  “the prince that shall come”  (Daniel 9:26)
(b)  These names are all given to “antichrist” by the word of the Lord.
(c)  None of these names are what “antichrist” will call HIMSELF.
(d)  Like the Lord, this copycat also has a name that you don’t know yet:

John 5:43   “I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.”
(5)  There are three places where “antichrist” is called by two names in the same sentence, providing clear definition.
(a)  2nd Thessalonians 2:3   “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition. . . .”  [There’s two names.]
(b)  2nd Thessalonians 2:8-9   “And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:  even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. . . .”  [There’s two more!]
(c)  Daniel 7:11   “I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.”
(6)  If you used the logic of “C. of C., Inc.,” from just three verses you would have to believe in SIX men.
(7)  Using “C. of C., Inc.,” logic you would have to believe in THIRTEEN men, based on all of the above verses.
(8)  “C. of C., Inc.” believes none of these verses:  NOT EVEN ONE!
(Page 199 in “Premillennialism”)

Lewis ignorantly writes:

“Notice some things that John says about  “antichrist.”  First, there are “many antichrists,” not just one.  Hal Lindsey, does this mean there will be “many” future fuhrers, many  future “men of sin”?  Extremely important to note is that the inspired writer does not limit the number of  “antichrists” to just one; there are “many” of them.”

QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “gods” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “God” of which there is only “one”?

1st Corinthians 8:5-6   “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”
QUESTION:   Does the fact John and Paul use the term “sons of God” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the Son of God” of which there is only “one”?

“sons of God”  (John 1:12;  Romans 8:14,19; Philippians 2:15;  1st John 3:1,2  )
“the Son of God”  (43 times in new testament)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “lords” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the Lord” and “one Lord” of which there is only “one”?  (See above.)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “doors” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the door” of which there is only “one”?

“the door”  (John 10:1,2,7,9)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “lambs” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the Lamb” of which there is only “one”?

“the Lamb”  (Revelation 15:3; 17:14)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “rocks” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the Rock” of which there is only “one”?

“the Rock”  (Deuteronomy 32:4)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “words” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the Word” of which there is only “one”?

“the Word”  (John 1:1,14; 1st John 5:7)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “devils” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the Devil” of which there is only “one”?

“the Devil”  (Revelation 20:2)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “dragons” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the dragon” of which there is only “one”?

“the dragon”  (Isaiah 27:1; Revelation 20:2)
QUESTION:   Does the fact that the bible uses the term “enemies” of which there are “many” prove that there is no such thing as “the enemy” of which there is only “one”?

“the enemy”  (Matthew 13:39)
QUESTION:  Should it have to be different with the word “antichrist”?

1st John 2:18   “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.”
[Unfortunately for “C. of C., Inc.,” antichrist shall come!  (And they will worship him, and take his mark!)]
Deceiver #7, Lynn Parker  (Page 221 in “Premillennialism”)

Parker begins his chapter like this:  (You just won’t believe your eyes.)

“The book of Revelation is certainly one of the most challenging portions of Holy Writ and, at the same time, one of the most comforting to the faithful child of God.  [What a liar!  – tf]  Many shy away from a study of this portion of the Sacred Text because of the difficulty and in so doing miss out on one of the most beautiful, sublime, and profound letters of exhortation to be found in the Bible.  While Revelation does indeed . . .”

(1)  Horse manure!
(2)  These fakers don’t believe a word of Revelation.
(3)  They hate the book of Revelation
(4)  “C. of C., Inc.” preaches against the book of Revelation in every way it can dream up.
(5)  (Their contempt of the book of Revelation should be the first clue that this organization was created by the Jesuits.)
(Page 228 in “Premillennialism”)

(You have to read this page to believe it.)  Parker finishes his chapter like this:

The late Eldred Stevens [“C. of C., Inc.”] described the first resurrection of Revelation 20 this way:

. . .  The book [Revelation] was written to give hope and courage to first century Christians who were suffering severe persecution.  The beheaded saints are probably the martyrs of the Domitianic purge.  . . .  John wanted them to know that out of their death would come life  – a resurrection!  It is called the first resurrection to distinguish it from the general resurrection before the judgement.  Their cause would be resurrected!  Those who had been martyred would share in reigning because their witness won the victory which made it possible.  Their death was the death of the cause they represented; what is their resurrection but the resurrection of their cause?

(1)  If this doesn’t make you sick, nothing can make you sick.
(2)  Those deceived by “C. of C., Inc.” believe in almost nothing:  their heros and leaders believe in even less.

Isaiah 3:12   “O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”
Deceiver #8, Eddie Whitten  (Page 231 in “Premillennialism”)

Whitten finishes his chapter like this:  (Read the whole page for more laughs.)

“The thousand-year reign is not a literal reign upon the earth.  The concept of premillennialism teaches that, when the Jews decide they will accept Jesus as the Messiah; He will come back from His exile in heaven and set up His earthly throne, David’s throne, in the city of Jerusalem, and will reign for a thousand years upon the earth.  During that thousand years, all of the saints will reign with Him, the faithful saints – those that were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and all of those who had died would come back with Him and reign for a thousand years in a literal kingdom upon the earth.  Nothing is further from the truth.  [Think about that! – tf]  Yet, people flock to that kind of logic, that kind of thinking.  Now, to embrace that kind of thinking is rather ludicrous.  Out of all the teaching of the Bible, nothing is said about a literal reign upon the earth; nothing is said, except in Revelation 20, about a thousand year reign.  And why have they settled on the thousand years, and how it fits into the overall scheme of redemption and the plan of God is another kind of problem that we have with premillennialism.  This is so difficult to understand when the teaching of the Bible is clearly contrary to that.”  [emphasis and insertions added  – tf]

(1)  Has anybody here said or thought that the Lord is EXILED in heaven?
(2)  Did you notice that this deceiver quoted several phrases exactly from the bible, and then followed it with, “Nothing is further from the truth.  And then he called it “ludicrous.”
(3)  I repeat his words:  “Out of all the teaching of the Bible, nothing is said about a literal reign upon the earth. . . .”

Revelation 5:10   “And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”
QUESTION:  Do you see the problem with these people?
QUESTION:  Do they want us to believe Revelation 5:10 isn’t about a “literal” “reign” because it doesn’t say, “. . . and we shall reign literally on the earth.”
QUESTION:  Did you know that nothing in the bible is ever stated as happening “literally”?
QUESTION:  Did you know that the words “literal” or “literally” are not in the bible anywhere?
QUESTION:  Does this mean that nothing in the bible is literal?
(4)  I repeat Whitten’s words:  “And why have they settled on the thousand years. . . .”?
(Let me think!  Now, where did I dream up the idea of a thousand years?  It must have come from somewhere?)

Revelation 20:2  “And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. . . .”
v. 3   “ . . . till the thousand years should be fulfilled. . . .”
v. 4   “And . . . they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”
v. 5   “. . . until the thousand years were finished.”
v. 6   “. . . and shall reign with him a thousand years.”
v. 7   “And when the thousand years are expired. . . .”
QUESTION:  What do you think it would take to get “C. of C., Inc.” to read this and just believe it?
ANSWER:  “C. of C., Inc.” cannot possibly do that, but a man who is born of the Spirit can.
(Page 239-240 in “Premillennialism”)

Whitten continues:

“When we talk about a thousand-year reign, we are not talking about an earthly reign; we are not talking about a thousand years, as has been so vividly and graphically pointed out during this lectureship.  It has been emphatically shown that the term “a thousand years” is merely a figurative expression, but in reality it covers the entire spectrum of the dispensation of Christianity.   . . .  That reign is not going to be on the earth.”

“In the second coming, there will be a great noise; the earth is going to be destroyed, as well as all the works that are in it, (2 Pet. 3:10)  . . .”

“We need to be know [sic] how to read the Bible.  It is not right to assume that this thousand-year reign is going to be on the earth.  There is not going to be any earth here for it to be on.”

(1)  We are cruising through an endless twilight zone of sick ignorance (or intentional deceit):
(a)  Yet again, 2nd Peter 3:10 is referenced to “prove” that the world comes to an end,
(b)  hoping to  “prove” that there will NOT be any thousand year reign of the Lord because,
(c)  the Lord simply will not have a world to reign on,
(d)  and he can’t reign on it once he destroys it,

Revelation 21:5   “And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.”
QUESTION:  If “C. of C., Inc.” believes the Lord made heaven and earth the first time, why would they have any difficulty believing he can do it again?
ANSWER:  How do you know they really believe the Lord did it the first time?  These are the same people teaching “evolution” to children in the federal public school system.
Revelation 5:10   “And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”
(d)  all done to the tune of the three stooges having a slap fight while ignoring 2nd Peter 3:13, YET AGAIN;
(e)  claiming that premillennialists are ASSUMING the Lord’s reign is on earth, while
(f)  refusing to care that the bible specifically and simply states it as a fact, and in detail!  (Revelation 5:10; 2nd Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1-5; Psalm 102:25-28; Isaiah 65:17-25; Revelation 3:12; Isaiah 9:6-7; 2nd Samuel 7:8-16; Jeremiah 3:16-17; Revelation 21:23-26; Zechariah 14:16-18; Revelation 19:15; 12:5; 2:27; Psalm 2:9; etc.)
(Page 241-242 in “Premillennialism”)

Whitten continues:

Now, when a person dies, the body is going to go back to the ground.  That is all there is to it.  The soul has no more need of it. . . .   . . . but the spirit goes back to God.  [the “soul . . . shall die” (Ezekiel 18:4)  – tf]

That is confirmation of the fact that those in the kingdom who are going to reign for a thousand years, are not the literal, fleshly bodies of people on the earth.  They are the souls of those who die in Christ.  . . . The thousand years is not a literal thousand years; it is for all of this age – the Christian dispensation.  The thousand-year reign takes place in heaven, not on the earth.  . . .  It was determined before the foundation of the world that this thousand-year reign would be in heaven.  It would consist of the souls of the righteous.  When we compare the mundane, physically- oriented doctrines of premillennialism with the beauty of the church of our Lord, the contrast is obvious.

(1)  Summing up Whitten (he states it is CONFIRMED that):
(a)  “The thousand-year reign takes place in heaven,”
(b)  but it is not a thousand years:
(c)  it is for people who have no bodies,
(d)  but “is for all of this age – the Christian dispensation.”  (?!?)  [Did you follow that?]
(2)  Whitten ignores the detailed explanation given by Paul in 1st Corinthians 15 which explains exactly the issue that he prefers to be ignorant about:  we will have a BODY at the resurrection.  (We’re not floating around the kingdom of heaven as a “soul” with no body.)  (For crying out loud, read chapter 15 in 1st Corinthians.)

1st Corinthians 15:35-44   “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.”
(3)  Eddie Whitten is as ignorant as a box of hammers concerning his topic.
(4)  Whitten is contradicting his own organization which claims the thousand years, as the “Christian dispensation” is here and now, not future.
(5)  Whitten is contradicting himself.
(6)  The only thing CONFIRMED here by Whitten is that “C. of C., Inc.” will tolerate any theory (no matter how bizarre or contradictory it might be to the rest of their theories) AS LONG AS THE TRUTH IS DENIED!
Deceiver #9, Rex A. Turner  (Page 255 in “Premillennialism”)

“The doctrine of premillennialism is a very dangerous and devastating doctrine.  Unfortunately, a considerable number of the conservative sectarian scholars of the English speaking world are advocates of the doctrine.  . . .  Brethren everywhere will do well to arm themselves against this devastating evil.”

[I include these quotes in case you might think I’m speaking too harshly against people who are only a little confused.]
Deceiver #10, Curtis A. Cates  (Page 285-286 in “Premillennialism”)

“The theory of premillennialism is fatal error; it will damn one’s soul in hell.  It takes away the authority of Jesus Christ; it deprives Him of being served as King on His throne.”  [Cates has written this about himself.  – tf]

[Did you get that?  You take away the authority of Jesus Christ and deprive him of being served as King on His throne if you believe his word is true and that he will indeed sit on his throne.”

Λ            “Premillennial fiction misapplies countless clear prophecies in the Old Testament, as well as in the New Testament.  Why, the prophets state very clearly that it is impossible for Christ to reign on earth.”

(1)  You’re giving yourself away, Satan  –  methinks thou dust protest too much!  (Somebody really rattled his cage!)
(2)  It is Curtis A. Cates trying to do exactly what he accuses premillennialists:  depriving the Lord “of being served as King on His throne.”  He says the prophets state very clearly it is “impossible.”
(3)  Curtis A. Cates is a liar.
(4)  NO PROPHET ever said it is “impossible for Christ to reign on earth”
[You notice that Cates did not even PRETEND to have a scripture to reference in regard to this assertion.]

Luke 1:37   “For with God nothing shall be impossible.”
Revelation 2:2   “I know . . . how thou canst not bear them which are evil: [“C. of C., Inc.”] and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars. . . .”
(5)  Further, the Lord has already reigned on earth as a king and a priest:
Genesis 14:18   “And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.”

Hebrews 7:1-4   “King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.”
(6)  which should (but won’t) “prove” to liars like Cates that it is NOT impossible for the Lord to reign on earth, since the Lord has already done it.
(7)  “proving” that “C. of C., Inc.” doesn’t know anything about the old testament,
(8)  while pretending to assign all prophecy into the past, they are determined to remain ignorant of the past,
(9)  making it difficult for them to see that those who lead them into the future are liars.
Deceiver #11, Tom Wacaster  (Page 293-294 in “Premillennialism”)

[I haven’t finished the book yet.  Stay tuned for more when I can work up the stomach for it.  – tf]