Sir, are you saying that you believe sin will be minimized before the return of our Lord?
No, nor is it implied.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sir, are you saying that you believe sin will be minimized before the return of our Lord?
Close. I look for a millennial kingdom that takes place in the created-order (not some Kantian "spiritual" kingdom).
I cannot see how this is possible when your premil scheme binds you in to the expectation that only the personal and visible appearing of Jesus Christ can usher in the millennial kingdom. This effectively reduces all "kingdom" hope to a future period, and thereby nullifies any anticipation of the reigning King renewing the face of the earth prior to His triumphal advent by means of Word and Spirit.
I also think you mistakenly describe the amil position when you call it a Kantian "spiritual" kingdom. I agree the kingdom is spiritual -- righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost; but that does not mean it takes place outside the created order. Amils regard God's kingdom as present in the Christian influence which brings light to the world.
I have question for the postmillennialist on this site such as DanielRitchie that said that amillennialist was pessimistic about their end times belief's.How long will it take for this victory to take place? I see the world around us is not getting better and better,but is getting worse,for instance the slaughter of million's of babies avery year just for starters.
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.
There is not much to get excited about if Christ's kingdom is predestined to defeat in history, while humanists rule the world.
Christ said His Kingdom is not of this world so don't look for it,his kingdom ultimate place is the new heavens and the new earth. Kim Riddlebarger in "A Study of American Postmillenialism" says,"Another critical factor which must be kept in view is that the term postmillenial 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 amilllennial 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 ninteenth century, and the origin of the term is shrouded in mystery. Accordingly, Gaffin asks the poignant questionin this regard, "Who coined the term amillennial?" 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 Berkgof, Berkhof, himself a Princeton graduate, and astudent 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. And yet, virtuallyall historians of doctrine agree that what is now known as amillennialist is generally the eschatology of historic Christianity. Even B.B.Warfield, usually portrayed as postmillennial in his eschatology, remarked to his friend SamuelG. 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."What then are the differences between "amillennialism" and "postmillennialism," and how do these terms develop unique distinctives".
There is not much to get excited about if Christ's kingdom is predestined to defeat in history, while humanists rule the world.
Christ said His Kingdom is not of this world so don't look for it,his kingdom ultimate place is the new heavens and the new earth. Kim Riddlebarger in "A Study of American Postmillenialism" says,"Another critical factor which must be kept in view is that the term postmillenial 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 amilllennial 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 ninteenth century, and the origin of the term is shrouded in mystery. Accordingly, Gaffin asks the poignant questionin this regard, "Who coined the term amillennial?" 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 Berkgof, Berkhof, himself a Princeton graduate, and astudent 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. And yet, virtuallyall historians of doctrine agree that what is now known as amillennialist is generally the eschatology of historic Christianity. Even B.B.Warfield, usually portrayed as postmillennial in his eschatology, remarked to his friend SamuelG. 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."What then are the differences between "amillennialism" and "postmillennialism," and how do these terms develop unique distinctives".
There is a difference between saying Christ's kingdom is not of this world (meaning that it does not derive its authority from an earthly source) and saying that it is victorious in this world.
I have been studying this topic lately, and first let me say that Daniel's book is very good.
I started wondering...
Churches started disconnecting government with the Church.
The Westminster Standards underwent revision to which statements regarding the civil authorities role under Christ was softened.
Now, some newer Bibles soften the call to make disciples "of all nations"
Is this how it normally funnels down? The Church starts thinking differently, so they change their confessions, and eventually the Scripture themselves are changed?
Mat 28:19 from some of those "newer" versions i mentioned...
The Message: (vv18-20)
Jesus, undeterred, went right ahead and gave his charge: "God authorized and commanded me to commission you: Go out and train everyone you meet, far and near, in this way of life, marking them by baptism in the threefold name: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Then instruct them in the practice of all I have commanded you. I'll be with you as you do this, day after day after day, right up to the end of the age."
Contemporary English Version:
Go to the people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,
Worldwide English (instead of "of" they use "in"):
So go and make disciples in all countries. Baptise them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.