postmillennialism, premillennialism, amillennialism - your stance?

[AV1611]

Read Iain Murray's book The Puritan Hope.

Already have done brother.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Read Iain Murray's book The Puritan Hope.

Already have done brother.

Read Ken Gentry's He Shall Have Dominion; the best amil book is Cornelis Venema's The Promise of the Future, though I would say this is not really amillennial as its too optimistic.

 

[AV1611]

Amils can pray for it in the expectation that their prayers will never be answered.

Even if your assessment is correct; we are to pray for the conversion of all yet we know not all will be saved. We pray in the morning that we will live godly lives knowing that by the end of the day that we will have sinned manifold times.

I fail to see how your comments apply to me who as an "optimistic" amillennialist believes that all we pray for in Question & Answer 191 will come to pass.

 

[AV1611]

Read Ken Gentry's He Shall Have Dominion;

I aim to. The problem in my opinion with Gentry is his preterism.

the best amil book is Cornelis Venema's The Promise of the Future, though I would say this is not really amillennial as its too optimistic.

Then maybe I am not really amil

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Amils can pray for it in the expectation that their prayers will never be answered.

Even if your assessment is correct; we are to pray for the conversion of all yet we know not all will be saved. We pray in the morning that we will live godly lives knowing that by the end of the day that we will have sinned manifold times.

I fail to see how your comments apply to me who as an "optimistic" amillennialist believes that all we pray for in Question & Answer 191 will come to pass.

Well I would say that Q 191 reflects promises in Scripture about what will come to pass, therefore, we pray in the expectation that they will be answered; however, as your an optimistic amil then there's not much difference between you and a post-mil

 

[AV1611]

Well I would say that Q 191 reflects promises in Scripture about what will come to pass, therefore, we pray in the expectation that they will be answered;

I agree completely. Have you read American Postmillennialism | The Reformed Reader ?

 

[Bygracealone]

Have any of you read Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" or Mathison's "Postmillenialism"? If so, what were your thoughts?

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Well I would say that Q 191 reflects promises in Scripture about what will come to pass, therefore, we pray in the expectation that they will be answered;

I agree completely. Have you read American Postmillennialism | The Reformed Reader ?

I haven't; its a lot for an internet article, is it in a book anywhere?

As for Ken Gentry's Preterism, as far as I am aware he has never fully been answered. To me its the best position, though I don't think we can be too dogmatic about the question as it involves the interpretation of some of the most difficult texts in Scripture.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Have any of you read Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" or Mathison's "Postmillenialism"? If so, what were your thoughts?

I have read the second one; its very good; an excellent introduction to postmillennialism and partial preterism. Though I think he holds the view that the millennium refers to the whole NT; I hold the position that it started at 70 AD and ends with the satanically inspired revolt against Christendom.

 

[AV1611]

Have any of you read Bahnsen's "Victory in Jesus" or Mathison's "Postmillenialism"? If so, what were your thoughts?

I have read the latter. It was an interesting read but I was not convinced overall. It has been a while since I read it though....

 

[AV1611]

I haven't; its a lot for an internet article, is it in a book anywhere?

Not to my knowledge, but well worth the effort in my opinion.

As for Ken Gentry's Preterism, as far as I am aware he has never fully been answered. To me its the best position, though I don't think we can be too dogmatic about the question as it involves the interpretation of some of the most difficult texts in Scripture.

Without getting into his exegesis I am sceptical because; (1) it rests upon Revelation being of an early date; (2) it has no historical pedigree, to my (limited) knowledge; and, (3) I see no reason to believe that whilst the Olivet discourse was (partially) fulfilled in AD70 it cannot be (fully) fullfilled in the future. But I am open to persuasion.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

I haven't; its a lot for an internet article, is it in a book anywhere?

Not to my knowledge, but well worth the effort in my opinion.

As for Ken Gentry's Preterism, as far as I am aware he has never fully been answered. To me its the best position, though I don't think we can be too dogmatic about the question as it involves the interpretation of some of the most difficult texts in Scripture.

Without getting into his exegesis I am sceptical because; (1) it rests upon Revelation being of an early date; (2) it has no historical pedigree, to my (limited) knowledge; and, (3) I see no reason to believe that whilst the Olivet discourse was (partially) fulfilled in AD70 it cannot be (fully) fullfilled in the future. But I am open to persuasion.

I understand your objections; what would persuade me of it is my conviction that Revelation was written prior to 70 AD. I believe this for theological reasons, basically I think the canon of the NT had to be finished before the public destruction of the Temple and the Old Covenant system, which signified the end of the period of transition between the two dispensations. Point 2 is probably right with regard to the Reformers and Puritans, though Idealism has no real historical identity either. As for point 3, most partial preterists would argue that only Matthew 24:1-34 was fulfilled at 70 AD, verse 35 onwards refers to the end of the world.

 

[bookslover]

I voted amil because that is what the confession teaches.

But is it what the Bible teaches?

A friend of mine likes to say that amillennialism is the eschatology for people who don't like eschatology.

 

[panta dokimazete]

A friend of mine likes to say that amillennialism is the eschatology for people who don't like eschatology.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

A friend of mine likes to say that amillennialism is the eschatology for people who don't like eschatology.

 

[DMcFadden]

A friend of mine likes to say that amillennialism is the eschatology for people who don't like eschatology.

A very insightful observation.

 

[JonathanHunt]

Optimistic Amil but not dogmatic on the subject.

 

[VaughanRSmith]

Tentatively amillennial. I would like to study more about postmillennialism.

 

[Bladestunner316]

Im undecided but Im interested in Historicism.

 

[Anton Bruckner]

Amill or Postmill is the way to go. The only problem is that I found Amills rather boring and unmotivated. Excitement for eschatology is only found with the Premills and the Postmills. From the rapture right prognosticators to the erudite work of the Postmills, these two groups have passion. But the amills.

 

[Herald]

I have no idea what I believe and haven't worried one iota about it. Having come out of dispensationalism and the pre-trib rapture view I haven't the slightest inkling what to do with my eschatology other than to confess that Jesus Christ is coming again. That's the only sword I'm willing to fall on at this point.

Check back with me in five years if I'm still breathing.

 

[RamistThomist]

I used to be die hard postmill. Dr Russell Moore convinced me of premillennialism. Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology showed me how I could use the same verses postmills used as a premillennialist. The switch was quite easy, actually.

 

[Coram Deo]

I am curious on what you would call John Gill's Position which is the way I lean more toward...

Here is the Summary...

1. An unspecified term of Great Tribulation period.
2. Second Coming of Christ, Battle of Mediggo ending with the Great Day of Fire purging the World and Renewing the Heavens and the Earth.
3. A 1000 year period of festal Marriage Feasting with Resurrected Believers and Satan Bound.
4. End of 1000 years, Satan released with his minions ending with the Battle of Jehoshaphat with Satan and Minions thrown into Lake of Fire.
5. Unbelievers Resurrected.
6. Judgment Day


The Difference between this scene and Modern Historic Premill. is that Historic Premill puts the Great Day of Fire at the end of the 1000 years and a brand new Heaven and Earth compared to a renewed Heaven and Earth. I am unsure if Modern Historic Premill. hold to the Battle of Jehoshaphat or what terms of the tribulation period they hold to..

So what would you call this system?

 

[RamistThomist]

I am curious on what you would call John Gill's Position which is the way I lean more toward...

Here is the Summary...

1. An unspecified term of Great Tribulation period.
2. Second Coming of Christ, Battle of Mediggo ending with the Great Day of Fire purging the World and Renewing the Heavens and the Earth.
3. A 1000 year period of festal Marriage Feasting with Resurrected Believers and Satan Bound.
4. End of 1000 years, Satan released with his minions ending with the Battle of Jehoshaphat with Satan and Minions thrown into Lake of Fire.
5. Unbelievers Resurrected.
6. Judgment Day


The Difference between this scene and Modern Historic Premill. is that Historic Premill puts the Great Day of Fire at the end of the 1000 years and a brand new Heaven and Earth compared to a renewed Heaven and Earth. I am unsure if Modern Historic Premill. hold to the Battle of Jehoshaphat or what terms of the tribulation period they hold to..

So what would you call this system?

Whatever it is, sounds good. Very helpful post.

 

[KMK]

I voted amil because that is what the confession teaches.

Not the Westminster Standards, read WLC Q&A 191.

Question 191: What do we pray for in the second petition?

Answer: In the second petition (which is, Thy kingdom come), acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate: that the ordinances of Christ may be purely dispensed, and made effectual to the converting of those that are yet in their sins, and the confirming, comforting, and building up of those that are already converted: that Christ would rule in our hearts here, and hasten the time of his second coming, and our reigning with him forever: and that he would be pleased so to exercise the kingdom of his power in all the world, as may best conduce to these ends.

How do you pray that Christ would 'hasten the time of his second coming' if you know for a fact that can't happen for at least 1000 years?

 

[Ivan]

historic premil.

Me too.

 

[bookslover]

I have no idea what I believe and haven't worried one iota about it. Having come out of dispensationalism and the pre-trib rapture view I haven't the slightest inkling what to do with my eschatology other than to confess that Jesus Christ is coming again. That's the only sword I'm willing to fall on at this point.

Check back with me in five years if I'm still breathing.

Bill, you're a pan-millennialist: everything will pan out all right in the end!

 

[Puritan Sailor]

Uh-oh!

There is no need to say "Uh-oh". Q&A 191 is the second petition of the Lord's Prayer. Amils can agree with and pray this petition as well as posties. Therefore, when the confession is taken as a whole (as it should since it relates a system of doctrine) the Standards do teach amil as it is the historic position of the church.

But there is nowhere in the Standards that teach that there will be a "Golden Age" or a Christianizing of all the nations. These concepts were mostly popularized in the US with Jonathan Edwards (he was a Golden Ager) who also believed that the Jews would be converted (Rom 11) to usher in the Golden Age. It became even more popular when Princeton caught on to it. Prior to Edwards, the idea of modern day postmillinialism was foriegn to the church.

Amils can pray for it in the expectation that their prayers will never be answered. How anyone can think that the Westminster Standards are amillennial is beyond me; read WLC 191, read the Puritans, read the Covenanters - postmilleniallism is the historic Reformed view. While I agree that the Westminster Standards do not necessarily require one to adhere to Edwards' golden-age postmillennialism - most modern postmills wouldn't fully go along with Edwards - the view that Christ's kingdom would have the victory in history, and that the majority of men and nations would be Christian, is the overwhelming Reformed position prior to the 20th century.

Amils do believe Christ gets the victory in history. The second coming, judgment, and resurrection are historical events along with the new heavens and earth, the revealing of the sons of God, the deliverance of creation from futility at the resurrection etc. All historical.

 

[danmpem]

Here is a "quick look at amillennialism". Scroll down for a list of amillennialists, although there may be a couple who are on the list and should not be.

 

[RamistThomist]

Here is a "quick look at amillennialism". Scroll down for a list of amillennialists, although there may be a couple who are on the list and should not be.

I really thought BH Carroll was postmillennial. John Frame is postmillennial (he said so in his Salvation Belongs to the Lord). Iain Murray is very postmillennial. John Murray is postmillennial. Warfield also. The list isn't entirely accurate.