# I Think I am Becoming Post-Millenial



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 3, 2008)

After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...

Must say Iain Murray's "The Puritan Hope" and Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" have been the most help. Also in a negative way Robert Strimple's essay in "Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond" on Amillenialism was sadly weak and convoluted. 

Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jun 3, 2008)

4 good Amil recommendations: 
Cornelius Venema, The Promise of the Future. 
William Hendricksen, More Than Conquerors. 
Geerhardus Vos, Pauline Eschatology (a hard read but good). 
Herman Ridderbos; An Outline of Paul's Theology, and, The Coming of the Kingdom


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 3, 2008)

Thanks. I have read _The Coming of the Kingdom_, others I'll check out.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 3, 2008)

Russell Moore's _The Kingdom of Christ_ presents a good case for historic premil in an indirect way. 

Rushdoony's _Systematics_, when you get past some of the unnecessary rhetoric, has some interesting insights.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 3, 2008)

I assume Rushdoony is Post-Mill...


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 3, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> 4 good Amil recommendations:
> Cornelius Venema, The Promise of the Future.
> William Hendricksen, More Than Conquerors.
> Geerhardus Vos, Pauline Eschatology (a hard read but good).
> Herman Ridderbos; An Outline of Paul's Theology, and, The Coming of the Kingdom



Ridderbos is better than Vos. I used Ridderbos when I was both pre and postmil.



> I assume Rushdoony is Post-Mill...



Yes. Go to The Chalcedon Foundation - Faith for All of Life and you can download his book on postmil for free.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jun 3, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...
> 
> Must say Iain Murray's "The Puritan Hope" and Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" have been the most help. Also in a negative way Robert Strimple's essay in "Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond" on Amillenialism was sadly weak and convoluted.
> 
> Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 3, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > 4 good Amil recommendations:
> ...



It is a good sized PDF so I'll read it soon enough.


----------



## servantofmosthigh (Jun 3, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...
> 
> Must say Iain Murray's "The Puritan Hope" and Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" have been the most help. Also in a negative way Robert Strimple's essay in "Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond" on Amillenialism was sadly weak and convoluted.
> 
> Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?



I will pray for your salvation, brother, so that you will be free from Satan's bondage of Post-Mill lies and deceits...


----------



## toddpedlar (Jun 4, 2008)

All that came to mind as I read the thread title was a song... "I think I'm turning post-millenial, I think I'm turning post-millenial, I really think so!..."


----------



## N. Eshelman (Jun 4, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...



Amen, brother, amen.


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 4, 2008)

Isaac Watts, Jesus Shall Reign


Jesus shall reign wherever the sun
Does his successive journeys run;
His kingdom stretch from shore to shore,
Till suns shall rise and set no more. 

2. To Jesus endless prayer be made,
And praises throng to crown His head;
His name like sweet perfume shall rise
With every morning sacrifice. 

3. People and realms of every tongue
Dwell on His love with sweetest song;
And infant voices shall proclaim
Their young Hosannas to His name. 

4. Blessings abound where'er He reigns;
The prisoner leaps to lose his chains;
The weary find eternal rest,
And all the sons of want are blessed. 

5. Where He displays His healing power,
Death and the curse are known no more:
In Him the tribes of Adam boast
More blessings than their father lost. 

6. Let every creature rise and bring
Its grateful honors to our King;
Angels descend with songs again,
And earth prolong the loud amen! 

7. Great God, whose universal sway
The known and unknown worlds obey,
Now give the kingdom to Thy Son,
Extend His power, exalt His throne. 

8. The scepter well becomes His hands;
All heaven submits to His commands;
His justice shall avenge the poor,
And pride and rage prevail no more. 

9. With power He vindicates the just,
And treads the oppressor in the dust:
His worship and His fear shall last
Till the full course of time be past. 

10. As rain on meadows newly mown,
So shall He send his influence down:
His grace on fainting souls distills,
Like heavenly dew on thirsty hills. 

11. The heathen lands, that lie beneath
The shades of overspreading death,
Revive at His first dawning light;
And deserts blossom at the sight. 

12. The saints shall flourish in His days,
Decked in the robes of joy and praise;
Peace, like a river, from His throne
Shall flow to nations yet unknown.



Psalm 72 gives me my post-millenial hope.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 4, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> 4 good Amil recommendations:
> Cornelius Venema, The Promise of the Future.
> William Hendricksen, More Than Conquerors.
> Geerhardus Vos, Pauline Eschatology (a hard read but good).
> Herman Ridderbos; An Outline of Paul's Theology, and, The Coming of the Kingdom



Cornelis Venema's book is very good; it is optimistic amillennial, and would not be that far from postmillennial. I think he makes some good criticisms of the Puritans "golden age" postmillennialism.

Vos' book _The Pauline Eschatology_ accepts the conversion of the Jews in Romans 11.

You can be a Postmillennialist and accept William Hendricksen's interpretation of Revelation (though I don't), I think RJ Rushdoony did.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 4, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> Yes. Go to The Chalcedon Foundation - Faith for All of Life and you can download his book on postmil for free.



Reading Rush's God's Plan For Victory might not be the best for someone studying the issue as he is _very_ hard on other views. It reflects some of his frustrations/bitterness with the failures of the modern Reformed faith, so perhaps it is best left till later.


----------



## larryjf (Jun 4, 2008)

I would highly recommend
The Bible and the Future
by: Anthony A. Hoekema

You can read it online here...
The Bible and the Future


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 4, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...
> 
> Must say Iain Murray's "The Puritan Hope" and Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" have been the most help. Also in a negative way Robert Strimple's essay in "Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond" on Amillenialism was sadly weak and convoluted.
> 
> Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?



How are you defining amillennialism and postmillennialism?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 4, 2008)

toddpedlar said:


> All that came to mind as I read the thread title was a song... "I think I'm turning post-millenial, I think I'm turning post-millenial, I really think so!..."





Great minds think alike. It was the impetus for typing the title as I did.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 4, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...
> ...



By the traditional manner.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 4, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> By the traditional manner.



There are myriads of different forms of both a- and post-mill views. Some post mills see the millennium as having already happened, some see it as still future, some see it as having already started. Some amills are pessimistic, some are optimistic etc. Hence my question


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 4, 2008)

*Vos:*
"Eschatology of the New Testament"
"The Second Coming of Our Lord and the Millennium"
"The Pauline Eschatology and Chiliasm"
"Eschatology of the Psalter"


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 4, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > By the traditional manner.
> ...



Traditionally, amillennialism has been pessimistic about the future. I often say that optimistic amillennialists are not really amillennialists.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 4, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Traditionally, amillennialism has been pessimistic about the future. I often say that optimistic amillennialists are not really amillennialists.



That depends upon how you are defining amillennialism though. All amillennialist believe that Christ shall return after the millennium and so are _post-millennial_.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 4, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > Traditionally, amillennialism has been pessimistic about the future. I often say that optimistic amillennialists are not really amillennialists.
> ...



Amillennialism as it originally distinguished itself from postmillennialism.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 4, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Amillennialism as it originally distinguished itself from postmillennialism.



Could you explain?

Kim Riddlebarger in his _Princeton & the millennium: A Study of American Postmillenialism_:

"Defining the term "postmillennial" and identifying its distinctives is an important place to begin such a study. From the outset, one finds that this is not an easy task...Another critical factor which must be kept in view is that the term postmillennial is usually understood today as an eschatological position quite distinct from "amillennialism." In fact, it is generally understood that one who adopts a postmillennial eschatology self-consciously rejects the amillennial understanding of the millennial age and nature of the reign of Christ. However, the term amillennialism, as we will see, was not used in the nineteenth century, and the origin of the term is shrouded in mystery. Accordingly, Gaffin asks the poignant question in this regard, "Who coined the term amillennial?"4 The problem is that apparently there is not a clear-cut defining moment when the term amillennial comes into standard usage and the position is recognized as something quite distinct from postmillennialism. This problem is illustrated by the treatment given this subject by Louis Berkhof. Berkhof, himself a Princeton graduate, and a student of B. B. Warfield, pointed out in 1938 that "the name [amillennialism] is new indeed, but the view to which it has applied is as old as Christianity."5 And yet, virtually all historians of doctrine agree that what is now known as amillennialism is generally the eschatology of historic Christianity. Even B. B. Warfield, usually portrayed as postmillennial in his eschatology, remarked to his friend Samuel G. Craig, that amillennialism of the type held by his esteemed Dutch colleagues Herman Bavinck and Abraham Kuyper "is the historic Protestant view, as expressed in the creeds of the Reformation period including the Westminster Standards."6 What then are the differences between "amillennialism" and "postmillennialism," and how do these terms develop unique distinctives?"​
He continues:

For Briggs, the distinctives of postmillennialism are as follows:

*(1)* Through Christian agencies the Gospel gradually permeates the entire world and becomes immeasurably more effective than at present. 
*(2)* This condition thus reached will continue for a thousand years. 
*(3)* The Jews will be converted either at the beginning or some time during this period. 
*(4)* Following this will be a brief apostasy and terrible conflict of Christian and evil forces. 
*(5)* Finally and simultaneously there will occur the advent of Christ, general resurrection, judgment, and, the old world will be destroyed by fire, the new heavens and earth will be revealed (Westminster Confession, xxxii., xxxiii).18​
There is clearly an optimistic thrust here - so much so that many orthodox amillennarians would have trouble affirming points one and two above, if these points required a strict and literal interpretation. Point one would be problematic for the amillennial position if this "permeation" is understood purely as a spatial, political and physical kingdom wrought by the church, and if this is the condition of the earth required before Christ can return to earth. Point two is problematic for contemporary amillennarians for several reasons. The first is that if this thousand-year period is understood to be a literal one-thousand years of universal peace upon the earth wrought by the gospel before the second coming, then the millennium cannot span the entire interadvental period. The second, and related problem, occurs if this age is still yet to dawn - that is, the millennial has not yet begun, that it is exclusively future. It must be mentioned however, that both of these points have been understood to be open to interpretation, and not all postmillennialists are in agreement about this. Kik, for one, is of the opinion that...

The term thousand years in Revelation Twenty is a figurative expression used to describe the period of the Messianic Kingdom upon earth. It is that period from the first advent of Christ until His Second Coming. It is the total or complete period of Christ's Kingdom upon earth.​
Many contemporary postmillennialists would not agree with Kik on this point, however, seeing the millennial age as something yet ahead for the church. Points three, four and five, that Briggs lists above, are amenable to both the amillennial and postmillennial positions.​
Oswald T. Allis in his _Prophecy and the Church_ writes:

It is to be noted that all forms of the Augustinian view, by which we mean, all views which discover the millennium in the inter-advental period or in some part of it, whether that part be past, present, or future, may properly be called both amillennial and postmillennial. They are amillennial in the sense that they all deny that after the present dispensation has been terminated by the resurrection and rapture of the saints, there is to be a reign of Christ on earth with the saints for 1000 years before the last judgment. But since they identify the millennium as a whole, or with some part, of the present gospel age, they may also be called a postmillennialist. In this sense Augustine was a postmillennialist.​
So returning to Riddlebarger:

"...while all amillennialists are postmillennial, not all postmillennialists are amillennial. Neither are all postmillennialists in agreement about the timing of the millennium, since to further complicate matters, not all postmillennialists argue that the millennium is exclusively future. The common denominator then, among postmillennialists is the understanding that: one, the world will be progressively overcome by the gospel, and two, that Christ will return to a Christianized earth."​
Then the key difference between amill and postmill is that the latter do not see a brief apostasy at the end of the 'golden age', but I know some who do!!

All very confusing


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 4, 2008)

> There is clearly an optimistic thrust here - so much so that many orthodox amillennarians would have trouble affirming points one and two above, if these points required a strict and literal interpretation. Point one would be problematic for the amillennial position if this "permeation" is understood purely as a spatial, political and physical kingdom wrought by the church, and if this is the condition of the earth required before Christ can return to earth. Point two is problematic for contemporary amillennarians for several reasons. The first is that if this thousand-year period is understood to be a literal one-thousand years of universal peace upon the earth wrought by the gospel before the second coming, then the millennium cannot span the entire interadvental period. The second, and related problem, occurs if this age is still yet to dawn - that is, the millennial has not yet begun, that it is exclusively future. It must be mentioned however, that both of these points have been understood to be open to interpretation, and not all postmillennialists are in agreement about this. Kik, for one, is of the opinion that...



To me this comment is where the rub is; not so much in the bit about the duration of the millennium (few postmillennialists that I know off ever held that the millennium was a literal 1000 years), but the extent to which the world will be transformed by the gospel.


----------



## puritan lad (Jun 4, 2008)

Great. I would also recommend David Chilton's "Paradise Restored". He has some interesting lyrics from some Christmas Carols, about Christ's First Advent, not His Second. Among them, this verse from Joy To The World.

No more will sin and sorrow grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He's come and make the blessings flow
Far as the curse was found,
Far as the curse was found,
Far as, far as the curse was found.


----------



## Stephen (Jun 4, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> After reading a couple books recommended by Daniel Ritchie I may be abandoning my A-mill for Post-Mil...
> 
> Must say Iain Murray's "The Puritan Hope" and Greg Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" have been the most help. Also in a negative way Robert Strimple's essay in "Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond" on Amillenialism was sadly weak and convoluted.
> 
> Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?




Brother, say that quietly. I do not think you want to announce it too loudly on the PB  That is great news. Welcome to the family of post-millenialists. You are in great company with many saints in the past and the present.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Stephen (Jun 4, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > 4 good Amil recommendations:
> ...



What are you now? I thought you were pre-millenial?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 4, 2008)

Stephen said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> > Puritan Sailor said:
> ...



In the words of Corrie Ten Boom: that is a-pre-posterous question!


----------



## MOSES (Jun 4, 2008)

Check out some of BB Warfields works too.

Also, rather then just studying the position, exegetically, of Post-mill...read some of the biblical applications of the position.
e.g., Rushdoony's "Salvation and Godly Rule"

It helps put the post-mill position into perspective.

What I mean is this:
Ok...you exegetically know from the scriptures that Jesus Christ is the only Savior.
yea...so what...what difference does that make.

Ask the same thing with your conclusions on post-mill.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 4, 2008)

Stephen said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> > Puritan Sailor said:
> ...



Short answer: I disavor all millennial schemata. It is a fairly new conceptual framework and no position can satisfy all data. I was persuaded of the premil framework after reading Russell Moore's _Kingdom of Chrst_. But I saw a few problems with the post mil readings of texts. Amillennialism is out of the question entirely.

I really don't have a paradigm to bring all this data together.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jun 4, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> Stephen said:
> 
> 
> > Ivanhoe said:
> ...



No- mill = a-mil


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 4, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> > Stephen said:
> ...



You are clever.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jun 4, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> Short answer: I disavor all millennial schemata. It is a fairly new conceptual framework and no position can satisfy all data. I was persuaded of the premil framework after reading Russell Moore's _Kingdom of Chrst_. But I saw a few problems with the post mil readings of texts. Amillennialism is out of the question entirely.
> 
> I really don't have a paradigm to bring all this data together.



I think I can somewhat relate. Although I have no doubt you've studied it the issues more than I have thus far (since I simply haven't a whole lot), millennial schemes (and other nuances of eschatology in general) are one area of systematic theology in particular in which I'm still essentially agnostic, probably more so than in any other area.



Ivanhoe said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > Ivanhoe said:
> ...


----------



## MW (Jun 4, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> No- mill = a-mil



No, a-mil = realised mill. The non-millennial idea opens the door to the incorporation of pessimistic premillennial views of apostasy and tribulation into the amil scheme; whereas if amil is understood correctly as the realisation in Christ of the OT promises to Israel, then the ingathering of the nations is part and parcel of Christ's present reign and allows for charitable optimism concerning the Christianisation of the world.


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 4, 2008)

Anything by my old prof, G.E. Ladd.

Your becoming post-millennial? I heard estrogen pills can reduce those symptoms. 

Honestly, I have never seen a truly satisfying eschatological schema. Count me as historical pre-mill until then.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jun 4, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > No- mill = a-mil
> ...



It was just a play on words  I actually agree with you here.


----------



## MW (Jun 4, 2008)

Puritan Sailor said:


> armourbearer said:
> 
> 
> > Puritan Sailor said:
> ...



 Sorry for not not reading the mood properly. Blessings!


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jun 4, 2008)

Stephen said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> > Puritan Sailor said:
> ...


sorry Jacob but I have to laugh at this.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 4, 2008)

Ok, It is official I am in the Post-Mill camp now. Put me down on their roster...

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## KMK (Jun 4, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> AV1611 said:
> 
> 
> > Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> ...



And I would say that postmills who don't believe in a literal 1000 years preceded by a 'golden age' are not really postmills. 

Honestly, here on PB be prepared to cast away all of the ordinary definitions when it comes to eschatology.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 5, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Ok, It is official I am in the Post-Mill camp now. Put me down on their roster...



In what way are your views different now from what they were?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 5, 2008)

KMK said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > AV1611 said:
> ...



Aye, but who among post-millers ever did believe in a literal 1000 years? The only one I know of is FN Lee. 

I think you have highlighted the essential difference between modern postmillennialism and older postmillennialism. The former has been influenced by the exegetical insights of amillennialism, but just not its pessimism.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 5, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Aye, but who among post-millers ever did believe in a literal 1000 years? The only one I know of is FN Lee.



I thought Jonathan Edwards did also.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 5, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > Aye, but who among post-millers ever did believe in a literal 1000 years? The only one I know of is FN Lee.
> ...



While it's a long time since I read _The History of Redemption_, I thought he only believed in a future golden-age, not a literal 1000 years.


----------



## Stephen (Jun 5, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...



No postmillenialist I have read believes in a 1000 year reign. This is only characteristic of the premillennial position.


----------



## Stephen (Jun 5, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> AV1611 said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...




No, he did not believe in a literal 1000 year reign.


----------



## caddy (Jun 5, 2008)

toddpedlar said:


> All that came to mind as I read the thread title was a song... "I think I'm turning post-millenial, I think I'm turning post-millenial, I really think so!..."


 
...and all I am hearing are your words set to Roberta Flack......!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 5, 2008)

joshua said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > Count me as historic ...
> ...



 You cheeky monkey!


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 5, 2008)

Stephen said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > AV1611 said:
> ...



Marsden speaks of him as having a very literalistic approach to the millennium. He says that Edwards estimated that the world would last 6 1,000 years days (employing Ussher's chronology), and then would come the golden millennial age/sabbath in about the year 2,000 a.d.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 5, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> Stephen said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...



Marsden says that, but does Edwards say that?


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 5, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > Stephen said:
> ...



I have no idea. But since I heard Marsden reference it a few days ago, and was tied up at work with a messy termination issue, searching Edwards did not seem possible.


----------



## Stephen (Jun 6, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> > Stephen said:
> ...




I have never come across that idea in Edward's writing. What would you do with Jesus' own words, "No man knows the day or the hour."


----------



## holyfool33 (Jun 7, 2008)

If I mat throw my two cents in there might I recommend 

Things To Come by J. Dwight Pentecost it's a good explanation of Dispensational Eschatology.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 8, 2008)

holyfool33 said:


> If I mat throw my two cents in there might I recommend
> 
> Things To Come by J. Dwight Pentecost it's a good explanation of Dispensational Eschatology.



It is a good explanation of _revised_ dispensationalism


----------



## HaigLaw (Jun 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?



Yeah, when I first started studying millennial views, around 1989, I couldn't spell it either. 

I'd recommend Lorraine Boettner's book, I think it's called _The Millennium_.

He is so fair and balanced, you cannot tell which view he prefers. The only one he denigrates is of course Dispensationalism.


----------



## HaigLaw (Jun 8, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> It is a good explanation of _revised_ dispensationalism



Yeah, or _new & improved_, revised *revision*; or you could use "flavor of the week."


----------



## holyfool33 (Jun 8, 2008)

HaigLaw said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Any good ideas for more reading (either way)?
> ...



I read Boettner's book his criticisms of Dispensationalism are very outdated. 
Also I said Pentecost's book was fair and balanced because he at least addressed criticisms brought against Dispensationalism. When other authors would simply dismiss them out of hand and not give them a seconds thought.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 8, 2008)

holyfool33 said:


> Also I said Pentecost's book was fair and balanced because he at least addressed criticisms brought against Dispensationalism.



I found it neither fair nor balanced but not to worry. Owing to the major problems of classical dispensationalism is was Revised to form a brand of dispensationalism that Pentecost _et al_ articulated, yet owing to the major problems with Revised Dispensationalism meant that it too needed to be revised, hence the development of Progressive Dispensationalism.


----------



## holyfool33 (Jun 8, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> holyfool33 said:
> 
> 
> > Also I said Pentecost's book was fair and balanced because he at least addressed criticisms brought against Dispensationalism.
> ...



the same thing could be said of Covenant Theolgy to be perfictlly honest wher John Murry revised because he saw no basis for a Covenanat of Works.


----------



## AV1611 (Jun 8, 2008)

holyfool33 said:


> the same thing could be said of Covenant Theolgy to be perfictlly honest wher John Murry revised because he saw no basis for a Covenanat of Works.



Not really as Murray saw a CoW in Paradise, he just didn't call it a Covenant. It was really a disagreement over terminology. The differences, however, between Revised and Progressive dispensationalism are huge.


----------



## shackleton (Jun 8, 2008)

I hate to admit it but I think I am leaning PM myself as I become more Reformed. As I understand the notion of Covenant Theology and what was really going on in the OT and how it naturally flows through to the NT it makes one unified whole, it just seems to fit. 

Plus my favorite theologian, Charles Hodge, and his other Princeton brother Warfield are also PM, along with Dabney and most Puritans. This is an impressive list. 

I have heard that PM was popular up until the time of WWI and then eschatology pretty much became pessimistic. I am starting to see Dispensational Premil as being pretty pessimistic since it _hopes_ for bad times to come so they will be raptured out of the world and their problems. So go so far as to help it along, Hagee. 

I have some more reading to do in works like, Postmillinnialism by Mathison, a number of books by Gentry plus I found some lectures by him as well, http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?SpeakerOnly=true&currSection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Rev.^Ken^Gentry. 

I am worried that theonomy is the next thing I start to embrace


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 8, 2008)

Come to the Darkside Eric...


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 8, 2008)

When I dream of eschatology, that image is EXACTLY the one the post-mil view conjures up for me!

When first you practice to decieve . . . you end up on the dark side.

Actually, during my pastoral years, this is one hymn we NEVER sang (or at least I never selected it to be sung), because of the eschatology.

We’ve a story to tell to the nations,
That shall turn their hearts to the right,
A story of truth and mercy,
A story of peace and light,
A story of peace and light.

Refrain

For the darkness shall turn to dawning,
And the dawning to noonday bright;
And Christ’s great kingdom shall come on earth,
The kingdom of love and light.

We’ve a song to be sung to the nations,
That shall lift their hearts to the Lord,
A song that shall conquer evil
And shatter the spear and sword,
And shatter the spear and sword.

Refrain

We’ve a message to give to the nations,
That the Lord who reigns up above
Has sent us His Son to save us,
And show us that God is love,
And show us that God is love.

Refrain

We’ve a Savior to show to the nations,
Who the path of sorrow has trod,
That all of the world’s great peoples
Might come to the truth of God,
Might come to the truth of God.

If you want to see the Disney secular equivalent of postmillennialism, check out the song from the old Disneyland attraction, the G.E. Carousel of Progress. It was written by the Sherman brothers.

There's a great, big, beautiful tomorrow
Shining at the end of every day
There's a great, big, beautiful tomorrow
And tomorrow's just a dream away

Man has a dream and that's the start
He follows his dream with mind and heart
And when it becomes a reality
It's a dream come true for you and me

So there's a great, big, beautiful tomorrow
Shining at the end of every day
There's a great, big, beautiful tomorrow
Just a dream away


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 8, 2008)

How are Post-Millers acting to deceive?


----------



## HaigLaw (Jun 8, 2008)

holyfool33 said:


> HaigLaw said:
> 
> 
> > I'd recommend Lorraine Boettner's book, I think it's called _The Millennium_.
> ...



A little historical perspective is in order. Dispensationalism rose up c. 1830 in England, was popularized in America mainly through Scofield's Reference Bible, first edition 1909, major revision in 1967, lost much academic credibility when the rapture didn't happen in 1988 as many predicted due to it being 40 years after "Israel" was restored in 1948, and was re-popularized with the recent "left-behind" series. 

I've lost track of how many of Dispensational's theological revisions after the fourth I've read about. So, obviously, Lorraine Boettner's book is outdated as to major revisions that came out since his book was published. 

But one has to ask -- how much credibility does a theological theory have when it's gone through at least 4 major revisions in 180 years? 

The Reformed Faith has not gone through any revisions of its core truths since the WCOF was formulated in 1641-48; the only thing you could argue by way of comparison would be minor tweaks.


----------



## HaigLaw (Jun 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> How are Post-Millers acting to deceive?



Aw, come on -- let's give Dennis a little more time to see the truth. He's still young.


----------



## shackleton (Jun 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Come to the Darkside Eric...



SO who am I going to find out is my long lost father who previously moved over to the darkside?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 8, 2008)

Kenneth Gentry? Keith Mathison?


----------



## shackleton (Jun 8, 2008)

HaigLaw said:


> holyfool33 said:
> 
> 
> > HaigLaw said:
> ...



I have seen them talking about this on TBN. They have said that a generation is now 100 years.


----------



## shackleton (Jun 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Kenneth Gentry? Keith Mathison?



Maybe it will be Ken Gentry since we both had Dr. Talbot as a mentor from Whitefield. Or maybe it _is_ Dr. Talbot


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 8, 2008)




----------



## shackleton (Jun 8, 2008)

*This represents my past two years becoming reformed*

Darth Vader represents Dr. Talbot and my studies at WTS. Luke represents me fighting against the truth and my Dispensational, Pentecostal background. The only difference is Luke did not give in to the dark side. 


YouTube - Star Wars - Luke I am your father


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 8, 2008)

HaigLaw said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > How are Post-Millers acting to deceive?
> ...



Yeah, give him (me) a break!

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 8, 2008)

shackleton said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Kenneth Gentry? Keith Mathison?
> ...



Oh, oh. I'm a student at Whitefield!!! Ohhhhhhhhh nooooooo!

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DMcFadden (Jun 8, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> How are Post-Millers acting to deceive?



Relax. Just playing with you. I know my minority status as a pre-mill on the PURITAN Board.


_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 8, 2008)

I know DM


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 8, 2008)

holyfool33 said:


> HaigLaw said:
> 
> 
> > Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> ...



Lorraine Boettner's criticisms in all probability are outdated, but this is hardly surprising since the book is ancient.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 8, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> When I dream of eschatology, that image is EXACTLY the one the post-mil view conjures up for me!
> 
> When first you practice to decieve . . . you end up on the dark side.
> 
> ...



If you only sang the Psalms then you would have no option but to be postmillenial. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.


----------

