what is the "all" in Col. 1:20

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rembrandt

Puritan Board Sophomore
[quote:78d0034c68]Colossians 1
20and through him to reconcile to himself [i:78d0034c68]all things[/i:78d0034c68], whether [i:78d0034c68]things on earth or things in heaven[/i:78d0034c68], by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.[/quote:78d0034c68]

who/what is the [i:78d0034c68]all[/i:78d0034c68] in this verse?
 
The text speaks of Christ reconciling work as the basis on which the Fathers alienation from men has been removed or dealt with. In other words, Paul's interest is primarily in the salvific work of Christ in removing the Fathers (righteous) hostility towards the men for whom Christ represented.

However, the text also seems to have in mind the cosmic ramifications since his work involves "all things." If Christ did not come to save Angels (Heb 2:16) it seems best to understand this as a reference to the reconciliation of the cosmos (ie the removal of frustration within the creation - Rom 8:19 ff) through the final eschatological manifestation of the Kingdom of God in the new (reconciled) heaven's and earth.
 
while I agree that the full manefestation of Christ redemptive work will be realized in the eternal state. we must not forget that there is an aspect in which this is present "already". the kingdom of Christ has come, He is over all things, His kingdom is growing till the "knowledge of the Lord cover the earth as the waters cover the sea". then finally at His return we will have rule of God is all its fullnes due to the redemptive work of our Lord.

-vantil
 
Colossians 1:20 indicates that the reconciling work of Christ on the cross effects all things (ta panta). All things (ta panta), in this context, clearly refers to all things created, without exception-c.f. 1:16, 17. This would mean that reconciliation, IN THIS CONTEXT, is cosmic and universal not soteric and individual alone. This is not universal salvation but universal reconciliation-the universal reconciliation (to bring under subjection and into harmony with) of the cosmos (formerly chaotic due to the entrance of sin through the first Adam and the curse) to God's purposes through the work of Christ the last Adam-c.f. also Eph. 1:10, 22. I agree with Darren.
 
Paul said:
[quote:f55e60acff]
yeah baby...sounds postmill to me!
[/quote:f55e60acff]

I don't know if you meant van til or me. I think van til. Either way, my comments fit within an Ammillennial frame as well.
 
[quote:fb2876a1cf][i:fb2876a1cf]Originally posted by Rich Barcellos[/i:fb2876a1cf]
Colossians 1:20 indicates that the reconciling work of Christ on the cross effects all things (ta panta). All things (ta panta), in this context, clearly refers to all things created, without exception-c.f. 1:16, 17. This would mean that reconciliation, IN THIS CONTEXT, is cosmic and universal not soteric and individual alone. This is not universal salvation but universal reconciliation-the universal reconciliation (to bring under subjection and into harmony with) of the cosmos (formerly chaotic due to the entrance of sin through the first Adam and the curse) to God's purposes through the work of Christ the last Adam-c.f. also Eph. 1:10, 22. I agree with Darren. [/quote:fb2876a1cf]

In what way did God reconcile the reprobate, angels, and all cosmic forces to himself through Christ? If they are reconciled in the way that I understand the term they would be eternally saved.

Rembrandt
 
[quote:61a018642a]
In what way did God reconcile the reprobate, angels, and all cosmic forces to himself through Christ? If they are reconciled in the way that I understand the term they would be eternally saved.
[/quote:61a018642a]

The way I understand reconciliation in Col. 1:20 is subjugation to Christ as the last Adam. I qualified the meaning of reconciliation in my previous post. "All things" (ta tanta) in Col 1 refers to all created things, without exception. Through Christ's work, God has put everything uder His (Christ's) feet (Eph. 1:20-22). In this context (Col 1) all means all created things.
 
The way I understand Romans 5 (and Cor. 15) is that Christ is the second and last Adam of the [i:245403f0ec]new race[/i:245403f0ec]. I say this on the basis of it saying in verse 18 that his one act of righteousness was for [i:245403f0ec]all[/i:245403f0ec] men.
[quote:245403f0ec]Just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.[/quote:245403f0ec]
This verse would teach universalism, except that the "all" that he is referring to is the [i:245403f0ec]particular[/i:245403f0ec] people he died for and are therefore in [i:245403f0ec]union[/i:245403f0ec] to him.

So is he not the last Adam of the elect or is it all people? If it is only of the elect, then how could he have possibly have reconciled something he didn't even intend to reconcile (those things reconciled are not truly reconciled like the elect)?

thanks,
Rembrandt
 
Paul said:
[quote:0cc0573dc3]
yeah baby...sounds postmill to me!
[/quote:0cc0573dc3]

I don't know if you meant van til or me. I think van til. Either way, my comments fit within an Ammillennial frame as well. [/quote]

I was just joking around...basically (as I rub my hands together like a made scientist planning to take over the world with a 45 in one hand and a bible in the other...oh wait, I'm starting to sound like scary Gary North.)

-Paul [/quote]

well as a matter of fact i am very much postmill :cool:

have my 45 with "dominion" engraved on it :gunfire:

ok so maybe we theonomist are a little crazy :cool:
 
Rembrant said:
[quote:ef5cbcf735]
This verse would teach universalism, except that the "all" that he is referring to is the particular people he died for and are therefore in union to him.
[/quote:ef5cbcf735]

I agree. The antithetical parallels of Rom. 5 are clear.

[quote:ef5cbcf735]
So is he not the last Adam of the elect or is it all people? If it is only of the elect, then how could he have possibly have reconciled something he didn't even intend to reconcile (those things reconciled are not truly reconciled like the elect)?
[/quote:ef5cbcf735]

The passage in Colossians is different. The "all things" [ta panta] of v. 16(2x) = all created things. These are the things in heaven, on the earth, visible and invisible, thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities (probably references to the celestial beings). In v. 17, He is said to hold "all [created] things" [ta panta] together. V. 20 says that the "all things" mentioned previously have been reconciled to God through Christ. Now, if we take reconciliation in its limited and soteriological sense, then either this verse teaches universal soteriological reconciliation or we have to redefine "all things" [ta panta] in v. 20. Some commentators do this.

I think that interpretation is strained and unnecessary. If we understand reconciliation, in this context, as referring to the act of God in Christ's death which subjugates all created things to Christ, then we don't have to limit "all things" but qualify what is meant by reconciliation. As the incarnate Son of God and last Adam, Christ has been given the responsibility to do what the first Adam failed to do - obey perfectly, which included subduing the earth. When sin entered into the world and the curse was inflicted, it effected man and the entire earth, even the cosmos. The entrance of sin into the cosmos (man's sin and the Devil's and his angels) caused a cosmic fracture. At the cross, a slow but sure conquest and subjugation of all things was effected and is now being extended. Colossians itself testifies that Christ's cross "disarmed principalities and powers" (Col. 2:15). Christ is now, as the incarante and ascended God-man, "the head of all principality and power" (Col. 2:10). He "has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him" (1 Pt. 3:22). He came, in part, to "destroy the works of the Devil" (1 Jn. 3:8). He is head over "all things" to the church (Eph. 1:22). This is in persuit of the promise in Gen. 3:15 and in fulfillment of the covenant of works. Christ's headship over all things was necessitated by the fact that all things had been effected by the presence of sin. He is both like an unlike Adam. And, thank God, He is greater and much more powerful than Adam. Indeed, He will, one day, finally subdue His and our enemies and usher us into an Eden that cannot be tarnished with sin, while casting all opposition into the lake of fire. This is the way I understand the cosmic reconciliation of Col. 1:20.
 
. When sin entered into the world and the curse was inflicted, it effected man and the entire earth, even the cosmos. The entrance of sin into the cosmos (man's sin and the Devil's and his angels) caused a cosmic fracture. At the cross, a slow but sure conquest and subjugation of all things was effected and is now being extended. Colossians itself testifies that Christ's cross "disarmed principalities and powers" (Col. 2:15). Christ is now, as the incarante and ascended God-man, "the head of all principality and power" (Col. 2:10). He "has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him" (1 Pt. 3:22). He came, in part, to "destroy the works of the Devil" (1 Jn. 3:8). He is head over "all things" to the church (Eph. 1:22). This is in persuit of the promise in Gen. 3:15 and in fulfillment of the covenant of works. Christ's headship over all things was necessitated by the fact that all things had been effected by the presence of sin. He is both like an unlike Adam. And, thank God, He is greater and much more powerful than Adam. Indeed, He will, one day, finally subdue His and our enemies and usher us into an Eden that cannot be tarnished with sin, while casting all opposition into the lake of fire. This is the way I understand the cosmic reconciliation of Col. 1:20. [/quote]

while i will throughly agree with you that in the eternal state we will have the full realization of Christ's redemptive work. i would love to know how much is that work "extened" now? the Lord described the kingdom in the present form as a small piece of leven that will eventually permeate the whole lump. the writer to the hebrews wrote saying that Christ is presently expecting His enemies to subjected to him. Paul taught in 1 cor. 15 that His return will happen after he has subjected his enemies, in order do away with the last enemy death. would love to hear your thoughts.

-vantil
 
vantil said:
[quote:08a45f6c13]
while i will throughly agree with you that in the eternal state we will have the full realization of Christ's redemptive work. i would love to know how much is that work "extened" now? the Lord described the kingdom in the present form as a small piece of leven that will eventually permeate the whole lump. the writer to the hebrews wrote saying that Christ is presently expecting His enemies to subjected to him. Paul taught in 1 cor. 15 that His return will happen after he has subjected his enemies, in order do away with the last enemy death. would love to hear your thoughts.
[/quote:08a45f6c13]

Christ has been, is, and will conquer through the gospel going out to the nations and being blessed by the Holy Spirit to the salvation of souls. Just how many souls? Heaven knows. As far as the extent of His soteriological reign goes; Heaven knows. There will always be wheat and tares living and growing together (Mt. 13:30). This age will always be an evil age (Gal. 1:4). The NT is normative for Christians during the entirety of the inter-advenatal age. "Through much tribulation we must enter the kingdom of God." Gospel victories and unbelief will coexist until the end.
 
[quote:56355c10af]
Christ has been, is, and will conquer through the gospel going out to the nations and being blessed by the Holy Spirit to the salvation of souls. Just how many souls? Heaven knows. As far as the extent of His soteriological reign goes; Heaven knows. There will always be wheat and tares living and growing together (Mt. 13:30). This age will always be an evil age (Gal. 1:4). The NT is normative for Christians during the entirety of the inter-advenatal age. "Through much tribulation we must enter the kingdom of God." Gospel victories and unbelief will coexist until the end.
[/quote:56355c10af]

And the congregation says Amill ! oops, im mean Amen.:p

you cant touch the A-team, baby!:attack:

[Edited on 4-7-2004 by Optimus]
 
[/quote]
There will always be wheat and tares living and growing together (Mt. 13:30). This age will always be an evil age (Gal. 1:4). The NT is normative for Christians during the entirety of the inter-advenatal age. "Through much tribulation we must enter the kingdom of God." Gospel victories and unbelief will coexist until the end. [/quote]

it is true that christians will suffer (cf. rom.8) , but will it be a suffering that leads to historical victory or historical defeat. we as all would agree that in the end Christ will win. yet the issue is do we see this victory in history. the scriptures present "this present evil age" being conquered by the gospel. daniel see a boulder that grows into a mountain that cover the earth. our Lord commanded us to disciple (not just bear witness) the nations b/c all authority in hevean and on earth is His, promised to with us while we do it. zachariah says that the result of the first coming not the second, Christ reign will be "from the river to the ends of the earth" david in psalm 22 says as the result of the work of Christ "all the earth will worship him" so just to say that believers and non-belvers will coexsist till He returns is not completely accurate.
as John said,"the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ and He shall reign for ever and ever"........now thats an AMEN dennis :spin:
 
[quote:1169c74cbc][i:1169c74cbc]Originally posted by cornelius vantil[/i:1169c74cbc]

it is true that christians will suffer (cf. rom.8) , but will it be a suffering that leads to historical victory or historical defeat. we as all would agree that in the end Christ will win. yet the issue is do we see this victory in history. the scriptures present "this present evil age" being conquered by the gospel. daniel see a boulder that grows into a mountain that cover the earth. our Lord commanded us to disciple (not just bear witness) the nations b/c all authority in hevean and on earth is His, promised to with us while we do it. zachariah says that the result of the first coming not the second, Christ reign will be "from the river to the ends of the earth" david in psalm 22 says as the result of the work of Christ "all the earth will worship him" so just to say that believers and non-belvers will coexsist till He returns is not completely accurate.
as John said,"the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ and He shall reign for ever and ever"........now thats an AMEN dennis :spin: [/quote:1169c74cbc]

This was a well articulated post in defense of the post mil hope both biblically balanced and Christ glorifying- it is no wonder that the Amil camp has been unable to return this ace serve. The question that we must all ask ourselves is- what effect did the first coming of Christ have on history? Did Christ first coming cause the earth to grow worse or did it cause the earth to get better? How powerful is the Gospel... Did the father really give the Son the world or was God just exaggerating in psalm 2?

But the main question to ask ourselves is should we build our eschatology off of the newspaper or the promises of God? Obviously the promises of God... well what does God promise? I think Vantil has demonstrated this in his arguments above.

In any event does any Amil have an answer to Vantils postmil defense?

Tyler
 
what is the

vantil said:
[quote:16f26d49cf]
the scriptures present "this present evil age" being conquered by the gospel.
[/quote:16f26d49cf]

According to Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43 and Lk. 20:27-40, this age includes sons of the kingdom and sons of the evil one, marriage, death, dying, and natural (unglorified) men. This age ends at the resurrection when the age to come is ushered in. If "the scriptures present "this present evil age" being conquered by the gospel," then Rom. 12:2 ('and do not be conformed to this "age"') is not normative throughout the interadvental period. Are you advocating an intermediate state between the the first and second advents where the NT is not normative? It was after Christ ascended that Paul said that Satan is 'the god of this age' (2 Cor.4:4). With the new creation inagurated by Christ, the age to come has eclipsed this age and we live in the tension of the already/not yet. When the not yet comes in its fullness, Satan shall be cast into the lake of fire along with the sons of the evil one, marriage will cease, death will be no more, dying will be a relic of the past, and only glorified men will populate the new earth. When all evil is gone, this present evil age will be no more. Until that time, we live in two ages at once. Is the NT normative for the interadvental period?
 
[i:60a7799873]Originally posted by Tertullian[/i:60a7799873]
[quote:60a7799873][i:60a7799873]Originally posted by cornelius vantil[/i:60a7799873]

it is true that christians will suffer (cf. rom.8) , but will it be a suffering that leads to historical victory or historical defeat. we as all would agree that in the end Christ will win. yet the issue is do we see this victory in history. the scriptures present "this present evil age" being conquered by the gospel. daniel see a boulder that grows into a mountain that cover the earth. our Lord commanded us to disciple (not just bear witness) the nations b/c all authority in hevean and on earth is His, promised to with us while we do it. zachariah says that the result of the first coming not the second, Christ reign will be "from the river to the ends of the earth" david in psalm 22 says as the result of the work of Christ "all the earth will worship him" so just to say that believers and non-belvers will coexsist till He returns is not completely accurate.
as John said,"the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ and He shall reign for ever and ever"........now thats an AMEN dennis :spin: [/quote:60a7799873]

G'day Tyler,

You suggest that the differences properly understood can be found in the answer to your question "what effect did the first coming of Christ have on history?"
Then immediately, you clarify your question further when you narrow "history" to the temporal effects, and specifically the"effects"as they are manifest on earth as measured by the gradual amelioration of sin and evil from our culture and one imagines the cause, man's sinful (unregenerate) heart. This is evident in your question "Did Christ first coming cause the earth to grow worse or did it cause the earth to get better?" Moreover, implicit in your thinking is the belief that if evil is not ameliorated in this way then "How powerful is the Gospel..."
Furthermore, you seem to labour under the impression that brothers who hold to the realised mill position have their eschatology shaped by temporal manifestations of sin as reported in the newspapers, I assumed biblical revelation is the supposed point of comparison!

The serve is not an ace if it is returned!
First, there is nothing in Psalm 2, 22, Dan 2, Zech 9 or for that matter Isaiah that cannot be understood to be referring to the consummation.
Dan 2 teaches us about the invincibility and ultimate victory of the Kingdom and even its inauguration, ie it will appear "at the time of those kings" (Mk 1:15). However, it does not speak to the issues relating to what constitutes victory. Indeed, the promise of Psalm 2 revolves around the content of the Messiah's inheritance not the timing of it, Psalm 2 does not even speak to the issue that separates Realised Mill and Post Mill. Similarly, Zech 9 only confirms what both camps readily agree on - that the King's dominion will extend over all the earth (His reign began at his ascension). That Psalm 22 affirms that the Messiah will fulfill - inherit both the Abrahamic and Davidic promises is undisputed amongst reformed men. Psalm 22 speaks about the content of His inheritance (the families/nations). That you interpret "all the families of the earth will remember and turn..." as a promise of a golden age is *a* possible interpretation, but hardly the only one.

Second, Rich Barcellos' point is a pressing one for those who contend for a earthly kingdom (contrast with Jn 18:36). He implied your eschatological framework (in which you interpret the O.T texts) is inadequate in that it does not seem to be sensitive enough to the two eschatological ages of the N.T. Clearly, N.T does not teach the Post Mill view of a gradual removal of the temporal effects of sin and evil. Nor does it see the victory of the gospel in terms of social, economic and political transformation. Rather, the N.T maintains the eschatological tension between the two ages so that "this age" (Rom 12:2) and its evil implications is antithetical to the age still to come when our Lord returns to consummate all things.
Instead of a gradual transformation, the N.T teaches a cataclysmic end to Satan's Kingdom (it will be crushed - not slowly squeezed see Dan 2:44; Matt 13:39-40; Rom 16:20; Rev 19:11ff) then, and only then we will hear the voices from heaven declare "the Kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and His Christ." Rev 13:15

Having said that, I am a positive A Millenialist, and I want to argue that the Kingdom will advance during this age, however, I do not see the issue turning on the amelioration of evil in this present age, but rather in the gathering of the elect (plundering of the strong man's home see Mk 3:27) through the proclamation of the Gospel until all the elect are gathered into the Kingdom (Goldsworthy - K.o.G, God's people, God's place under God's rule) and then the Lord will return and will crush Satan and his Kingdom forever (consummation).

In my opinion, the Bible teaches this tension between the Kingdom now and the kingdom come. We are taught throughout the N.T about this tension, that's why we need to patiently wait (Rom 8:25). Moreover, Christ's eschatological victory is what encourages us to press on even though we are hard pressed, because though we share in the suffering of Christ we know we shall also share in his vindication and victory at the consummation (2 Cor 4:7-11; Phil 3:10). Consequently, the premise of Post Millennialism that Kingdom of God speak of a fleshly kingdom that will witness the gradual amelioration of evil in this age is in my view the real issue at hand. I believe Riddlebarger is correct on this point, the debate is not over the 'success' but what we believe constitutes the 'success.' The Realised Mill position believes the success is seen now in the plundering of the strong man's house (gathering of the elect) and the Post Mill expects it to manifest through a golden age where evil is eradicated (almost) and culture, politics etc are transformed.
Click to expand...
 
Darren that was an outstanding explanation of the optimistic A-mil position. Woke up my wife when I yelled AMEN! Now THAT was well articulated and biblical.

But to add to this discussion, I would also agree with Darren that to promote the expansion of the kingdom through the conquering of the gospel(the fullfilment of the great commission) in NO WAY implies some earthly golden age that at best is actually gold plated.

I think here at this point our Covenantal paedo Postmil brothers have abandoned the already/not yet aspect of prophecy, where in other areas of covenant theology strongly affirms it (example: Jer. 31).

Yes, it is true that God has promised a time of universal worship, peace, and prosperity, but that will occur only, as the consistent witness of the NT declares, when the Lord Jesus Christ returns. Postmillennialism repeatedly emphasizes that the struggle between Christ and satan is a historical struggle that ends in historical victory. TRUE. But this it will end in TOTAL and PERFECT victory at the END of history (greek: to telos which means "completion", "perfect":1 Cor. 15:24; 1 Peter 4:7).

In other words, God's elect and God's created cosmos enter into COMPLETE(to telos) and Perfect(to telos) deliverance from sin and its consequences (see Rom. 8:18-23). The present earth and heavens will replaced with a "new heaven and a new earth, the HOME of righteousness"(2 Peter 3:13).

God's creational purpose(creative covenant) will be fulfilled in the NEW creation.

Postmil assert that Christ will be with His people to oversee the task of successfully completing its commission and that this is the postmil hope, and also claim that ONLY the postmil view can account for this, is not true at all. The realized mil certainly believe that this age will not end until Christ's purposes are fulfilled.

The postmil view has failed to establish the making disciples of all nations, baptizing and teaching them requires that fulfillment be in Postmil terms.

The Lord only knows of TWO ages, the present age and the age to come. Postmil view teach THREE ages, the present evil age, a future golden age, and the age to come. Jesus NOWHERE predicts some glorious future on earth before the end of the world, as the postmil would have us believe. On the contra, the things He Himself experienced are the things that His Church will experience. A disciple is not above his teacher or a slave above his master, "In fact, EVERYONE who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus WILL be persecuted,while evil men and imposters will go from BAD TO WORSE, deceiving and being deceived" (2 Tim. 3:12,13).

As the reign of the truth of the gospel is extended, also the forces of evil will gather strength, especially towards the end.

I want to make some other observations but this post is long already and conclude when a postmil brother will obviously object.:p

In Unity of the Faith, Roldan

ps. Vantil was Amil.

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Roldan]
 
[quote:ce4b094fc7] G'day Tyler, [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

Good day from the States... on a side note "Middleton" is my mothers last name...:)

[quote:ce4b094fc7] You suggest that the differences properly understood can be found in the answer to your question "what effect did the first coming of Christ have on history?"
Then immediately, you clarify your question further when you narrow "history" to the temporal effects, and specifically the"effects"as they are manifest on earth as measured by the gradual amelioration of sin and evil from our culture and one imagines the cause, man's sinful (unregenerate) heart. This is evident in your question "Did Christ first coming cause the earth to grow worse or did it cause the earth to get better?" Moreover, implicit in your thinking is the belief that if evil is not ameliorated in this way then "How powerful is the Gospel..."
Furthermore, you seem to labour under the impression that brothers who hold to the realised mill position have their eschatology shaped by temporal manifestations of sin as reported in the newspapers, I assumed biblical revelation is the supposed point of comparison! [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

Well my point was not to narrow the Gospels power to "historical effects" but to [b:ce4b094fc7] emphasis [/b:ce4b094fc7] that the Gospel also has "historical effects." I truly believe that Christianity is more then just a set of abstract doctrines or that Christianity is only relevant to individuals or the heaven... I think Christianity is a complete worldview and has answers for all of lives problems and histories problems... as such since Chrisantiy is relevant to all areas of life I believe it will have a positive affect on all areas of life.

[quote:ce4b094fc7] The serve is not an ace if it is returned! [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

As are in complete agreement here... so long as it is understood that I made the comment before anyone returned it.

[quote:ce4b094fc7] First, there is nothing in Psalm 2, 22, Dan 2, Zech 9 or for that matter Isaiah that cannot be understood to be referring to the consummation. [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

So Christ crushes the evil kingdoms of the world in Heaven (Dan 2)? Christ dashes the kings of the earth who will not bow to Him in heaven (Psalm 2)?

[quote:ce4b094fc7] Dan 2 teaches us about the invincibility and ultimate victory of the Kingdom and even its inauguration, ie it will appear "at the time of those kings" (Mk 1:15). However, it does not speak to the issues relating to what constitutes victory. [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

But it does... it says that the crushing of the nations and the setting itself up in there place would be Christ's Kingdom's victory.

[quote:ce4b094fc7] Indeed, the promise of Psalm 2 revolves around the content of the Messiah's inheritance not the timing of it, Psalm 2 does not even speak to the issue that separates Realised Mill and Post Mill. [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

So would you agree with me and say that Christ has been given dominion over the nations and that all nations are obligated to follow Christ and submit to his law or else they will perish? If you agree with that then we are left with the question... now that we know that the nations belong to Christ how should that effect our view of the Gospels success? What power, what person, what worldview is able to defend against the Christ conquest of liberation... if nothing then why would Christ stop short of anything less then a world empire?

[quote:ce4b094fc7] Similarly, Zech 9 only confirms what both camps readily agree on - that the King's dominion will extend over all the earth (His reign began at his ascension). That Psalm 22 affirms that the Messiah will fulfill - inherit both the Abrahamic and Davidic promises is undisputed amongst reformed men. Psalm 22 speaks about the content of His inheritance (the families/nations). That you interpret "all the families of the earth will remember and turn..." as a promise of a golden age is *a* possible interpretation, but hardly the only one. [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

I think it is the only one... that Covenant theologians can argue.

[quote:ce4b094fc7] Second, Rich Barcellos' point is a pressing one for those who contend for a earthly kingdom (contrast with Jn 18:36). He implied your eschatological framework (in which you interpret the O.T texts) is inadequate in that it does not seem to be sensitive enough to the two eschatological ages of the N.T. [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

But the postmill camp especially as articulated by Bahnsen, Gentry and DeMar does indeed hold to an already not yet... we just all so think hold to the ICC that is Inauguration, Continuation, and Consummation of the Kingdom... it is the Continuation aspect that the Amil camp seems to forget or not have room for... the Church is not an irrelevant piece of the puzzle but is an important aspect and the stuff we do in between the start and finish have serious implications... that is why I think Christ will continue to bless his Church and not leave her orphaned in unprotected... Christ will bless his Church because and the churches labors will not be in vain.

[quote:ce4b094fc7] Clearly, N.T does not teach the Post Mill view of a gradual removal of the temporal effects of sin and evil. Nor does it see the victory of the gospel in terms of social, economic and political transformation. Rather, the N.T maintains the eschatological tension between the two ages so that "this age" (Rom 12:2) and its evil implications is antithetical to the age still to come when our Lord returns to consummate all things. Instead of a gradual transformation, the N.T teaches a cataclysmic end to Satan's Kingdom (it will be crushed - not slowly squeezed see Dan 2:44; Matt 13:39-40; Rom 16:20; Rev 19:11ff) then, and only then we will hear the voices from heaven declare "the Kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and His Christ." Rev 13:15 [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

But why not view Christ victory as complete... Christ defeated Satan at the cross, Christ defeats Satan in his return why not also think that Christ defeats Satan in history as well? If Christ does defeat Satan in history then there are going to be historically victories for Christ's Church to speak about- is there not?

[quote:ce4b094fc7] Having said that, I am a positive A Millenialist, and I want to argue that the Kingdom will advance during this age, however, I do not see the issue turning on the amelioration of evil in this present age, but rather in the gathering of the elect (plundering of the strong man's home see Mk 3:27) through the proclamation of the Gospel until all the elect are gathered into the Kingdom (Goldsworthy - K.o.G, God's people, God's place under God's rule) and then the Lord will return and will crush Satan and his Kingdom forever (consummation).

In my opinion, the Bible teaches this tension between the Kingdom now and the kingdom come. We are taught throughout the N.T about this tension, that's why we need to patiently wait (Rom 8:25). Moreover, Christ's eschatological victory is what encourages us to press on even though we are hard pressed, because though we share in the suffering of Christ we know we shall also share in his vindication and victory at the consummation (2 Cor 4:7-11; Phil 3:10). Consequently, the premise of Post Millennialism that Kingdom of God speak of a fleshly kingdom that will witness the gradual amelioration of evil in this age is in my view the real issue at hand. I believe Riddlebarger is correct on this point, the debate is not over the 'success' but what we believe constitutes the 'success.' The Realised Mill position believes the success is seen now in the plundering of the strong man's house (gathering of the elect) and the Post Mill expects it to manifest through a golden age where evil is eradicated (almost) and culture, politics etc are transformed. [/quote:ce4b094fc7]

We are also taught that in our struggle with sin we have received been regenerated and "all things have become new" and we are also told that we will never be rid of sin until Christ returns... but should we conclude that in between of our regeneration and glorified bodies that sin in our personal lives will become worse and worse... or should we conclude that we will be sanctified and though are sanctification will be a battle we are on the winning side? Well in the very same way Christ has started his kingdom... and all though this present evil age will not be destroyed until his consummation- Christians are on the winning side in history even though casualties may build in battles.... I suggest that every argument you use based upon the now and then distinction to show that Gospel simply cannot have political social and economic relevance... could with equal force be used to say that believes will not be sanctified because the believer sanctification also has the same eschatological tension... but if we think that Christians will be sanctified in this life more and more... then we must also make room for God doing the same thing in history as He extends His empire over the world... Satan cannot stop it... Christ need only ask and the world is His... and I believe in the great commission Christ sent His church to claim what is rightfully his.

Christ is no mere tribal deity He is Lord of the world and He will reign from sea to sea... what he started he will continue until he finishes it.

Tyler
:)

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian]
 
[quote:e3b1fdbfb9][i:e3b1fdbfb9]Originally posted by Tertullian[/i:e3b1fdbfb9]

But why not view Christ victory as complete... Christ defeated Satan at the cross, Christ defeats Satan in his return why not also think that Christ defeats Satan in history as well? If Christ does defeat Satan in history then there are going to be historically victories for Christ's Church to speak about- is there not?

Christ is no mere tribal deity He is Lord of the world and He will reign from sea to sea... what he started he will continue until he finishes it.

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian] [/quote:e3b1fdbfb9]

AMEN! But at the Second coming.

Postmillennialism repeatedly emphasizes that the struggle between Christ and satan is a historical struggle that ends in historical victory. TRUE. But this will end in TOTAL and PERFECT victory at the END of history (greek: to telos which means "completion", "perfect":1 Cor. 15:24; 1 Peter 4:7).
 
[quote:87f9eee946][i:87f9eee946]Originally posted by Roldan[/i:87f9eee946]
[quote:87f9eee946][i:87f9eee946]Originally posted by Tertullian[/i:87f9eee946]

But why not view Christ victory as complete... Christ defeated Satan at the cross, Christ defeats Satan in his return why not also think that Christ defeats Satan in history as well? If Christ does defeat Satan in history then there are going to be historically victories for Christ's Church to speak about- is there not?

Christ is no mere tribal deity He is Lord of the world and He will reign from sea to sea... what he started he will continue until he finishes it.

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian] [/quote:87f9eee946]

AMEN! But at the Second coming.

Postmillennialism repeatedly emphasizes that the struggle between Christ and satan is a historical struggle that ends in historical victory. TRUE. But this will end in TOTAL and PERFECT victory at the END of history (greek: to telos which means "completion", "perfect":1 Cor. 15:24; 1 Peter 4:7). [/quote:87f9eee946]

Rholdan, remember the ICC, inauguration, Continuation and Consummation... the Amil camp simply does not due justice to the continuation of the Kingdom... it simply jumps from the start to the finish... making in between essentially useless... Why is the Church still here if not to fulfill the great commission? And will the Church fail in her task when Christ guides and has promised to ensure His peoples success? Our labor is not in vain Christ has resurrected... if not even death could stop Christ what will stop the Gospel the Church is commissioned to share? ... it is a Gospel not ordained by angels but by the very Son of God. I think the Gospel is an unstoppable force and has relevance for politics, economics and culture... therefore let us stop handing them all over to Satan and let us start handing these areas of life over to Christ and Christ's law and see what a powerful Savior Christ is, the savior of not mere individuals but of the human race. Yes it is a war and causality will happen but we are on the winning side!!!

Tyler

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian]
 
[quote:aa839cfb74][i:aa839cfb74]Originally posted by Tertullian[/i:aa839cfb74]

Rholdan, remember the ICC, inauguration, Continuation and Consummation... the Amil camp simply does not due justice to the continuation of the Kingdom... it simply jumps from the start to the finish... making in between essentially useless... Why is the Church still here if not to fulfill the great commission? And will the Church fail in her task when Christ guides and has promised to ensure His peoples success? Our labor is not in vain Christ has resurrected... if not even death could stop Christ what will stop the Gospel the Church is commissioned to share? ... it is a Gospel not ordained by angels but by the very Son of God.

therefore let us stop handing them all over to Satan and let us start handing these areas of life over to Christ and Christ's law and see what a powerful Savior Christ is, the savior of not mere individuals but of the human race. Yes it is a war and causality will happen but we are on the winning side!!!

Tyler

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian] [/quote:aa839cfb74]

Once again I say :amen:!

Let me reiterate what I said previously concerning this.

"Postmil assert that Christ will be with His people to oversee the task of successfully completing its commission and that this is the postmil hope, and also claim that ONLY the postmil view can account for this, is not true at all. [b:aa839cfb74]The realized mil certainly believe that this age will not end until Christ's purposes are fulfilled.[/b:aa839cfb74]

The postmil view has [i:aa839cfb74]failed[/i:aa839cfb74] to establish the making disciples of all nations, baptizing and teaching them requires that fulfillment be in Postmil terms. "

:handshake:
 
[quote:bd3f1eb5c9][i:bd3f1eb5c9]Originally posted by Paul manata[/i:bd3f1eb5c9]

[b:bd3f1eb5c9]And I have heard much talk here by the Amillennialists that the gospel will go forth. That many will be saved. If so, how can a large group of Christians not make an impact on society?[/b:bd3f1eb5c9]


[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Paul manata] [/quote:bd3f1eb5c9]

OH NO! I disagree with Paul on something, not even Paul is perfect!:eek: LOL!

Many will be saved but many will also become worse(wheat,tares) The gospel WILL accomplish the great commission bringing the ELECT out of all nations but at the same time reprobates continue to be born and grow worse.

Got to go to church but will be back tonight to respond to the "gnostic" remark.

But you still my nizze fo shizzle!:cool:
 
[quote:c896eb6212][i:c896eb6212]Originally posted by Roldan[/i:c896eb6212]
[quote:c896eb6212][i:c896eb6212]Originally posted by Tertullian[/i:c896eb6212]

Rholdan, remember the ICC, inauguration, Continuation and Consummation... the Amil camp simply does not due justice to the continuation of the Kingdom... it simply jumps from the start to the finish... making in between essentially useless... Why is the Church still here if not to fulfill the great commission? And will the Church fail in her task when Christ guides and has promised to ensure His peoples success? Our labor is not in vain Christ has resurrected... if not even death could stop Christ what will stop the Gospel the Church is commissioned to share? ... it is a Gospel not ordained by angels but by the very Son of God.

therefore let us stop handing them all over to Satan and let us start handing these areas of life over to Christ and Christ's law and see what a powerful Savior Christ is, the savior of not mere individuals but of the human race. Yes it is a war and causality will happen but we are on the winning side!!!

Tyler

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian] [/quote:c896eb6212]

Once again I say :amen:!

Let me reiterate what I said previously concerning this.

"Postmil assert that Christ will be with His people to oversee the task of successfully completing its commission and that this is the postmil hope, and also claim that ONLY the postmil view can account for this, is not true at all. [b:c896eb6212]The realized mil certainly believe that this age will not end until Christ's purposes are fulfilled.[/b:c896eb6212]

The postmil view has [i:c896eb6212]failed[/i:c896eb6212] to establish the making disciples of all nations, baptizing and teaching them requires that fulfillment be in Postmil terms. "

:handshake: [/quote:c896eb6212]

This Amil version of victory reminds me of the foot ball team who lost according to the score board but whose coach tells you guys are winners in my books because you tried your best... the Amil presents Christ's people as the ones trying their best but losing in the score board the post mill presents the church as the ones doing the stumping... now I ask you which one portrays the Christ as truly victorious in the battle for history, only if you qualify victory to mean "try your best" can we consider the Amil as presenting a victorious Christ of history...

I guess it all goes back to our definition of victory... is Christ the savior of every realm or only the spritual realm. Post mil say every realm including the spiritual and physical the Amil say the spritual realm only.

Tyler

[Edited on 4-13-2004 by Tertullian]
 
Jesus did not say, "I have made all new things", He said, "I have made all things new."
 
There is NO evidence for referring the OT passages to the millennium of the New, there is an overwhelming army of evidence for indentifying it with the Perfect eternal state. Isaiah 65:17 sets the stage and time for the entire prophecy: "Behold I create a new heavens and a new earth." This prophecy, recapitulated in verse 22 of the next chapter, is chronologically applied by Peter, in 2 Peter 3, and John, Revelation 21, to a time FOLLOWING the coming of Christ. They interpret Isaiah as refering to the eternal state. In both these NT passages, the Isaiah prophecy is clearly linked with a time subsequent to the millennium. Peter interprets Isaiah's "promise" as one which will be PRECEEDED by the destruction of the wicked and the melting away of the present heavens and earth. Revelation 21 locates the fulfillment of the prophecy at exactly the same time, John perfectly places it AFTER the thousand years, the resurrection and the white throne judgment. Other passages of a parallel nature also must refer to the new earth, not the millennial earth.

The contents of Isaiah's POETIC prophecy are no more literal than the description of the eternal state in Rev. 21 and 22. Who can interpret all the details of those two chapters literally? In both, Isaiah and Rev., language is used,in terms of what was considered most pleasant and astonishing in that day, to get across what words with their present limitations are incapable of correctly expressing. How else can perfection be described in words which have imperfect objects and concepts as recipients? It is difficult to understand why this passage should be misinterpreted when it clearly is indentified with the eternal state by the New Testament. The millennial references is totally without evidence, but its identification with the eternal state is affirmed by an abundance of biblical evidence.

This one passage has been singled out to demonstrate the way in which OT passages which actually refer to restoration from captivity, the New Testament age, and the eternal state are erroniously applied to the assumed golen-age.

Amillennialist or Realized Millennialist are in agreement with the Postmillenialist that we expect the millennium to be an age of imperefection. In oposisition to them, we do not view it as the fulfillment of the golden-age prophecies. We believe the prophesies to be truly GOLDEN perfect not GOLD PLATED! This is not to say that no OT prophecies refer to the present age, quite the contrary. But in accord with both Old and New Testament teaching, they find fulfillment of the "golden-age" prophecies in the eternal state, only then can it be said that all that glitters is Gold.

It is also interesting that postmil have to resort to OT prophesies that speak nothing of a golden age but refer unanimously to the golden age of new heaven and new earth which is Heaven.

The New Testament knows absolutlely nothing of IMPERFECT golden-age preaching. While there is a consistent appeal to look for the PERFECT golden-age of heaven, nothing can be found about an imperfect interim. Everywhere the eternal state is held out as the future hope of the church militant. The millennium is never preached as such. The only satisfactory explanation is that the millennium is a present reality not a future hope.

Old Testament passages frequently cited to substantiate the reality of an unrealized millennium(either in its Pre- or Post- form) do not hold any weight.

Isaiah 65:17-25 in one clear example. We both would agree that the passage speaks of a golden-age. The Postmil(as well as the Premil)will argue that the passage mentions children dying at one hundred years old, and sinners accursed at the end of the same period time. Taking this TOO literally, they insist that it must refer to an imperfect golden-age. And since the one thousand years obviously pertain to a time in which sin and death remain, they feel it is perfectly natural to superimpose the one passage on another.

Careful examination, however,shows two faults with this presupposition. First, there must be unquestionable evidence for indentifying the Isaiah prophecy with Revelation 20. This evidence is totally lacking. The two are brought together in an unatural union. Who can prove, scripturally, that when Isaiah wrote "the wolf and the lamb shall feed together," he was speaking of the SAME period that John calls the "thousand years"? There are indications in the passage itself that it is not to be treated literally like "dust" becoming the serpent's food can hardly be literal.

Ezekiel's new temple is not a physical building that will yet be erected on a mound of dirt in the earthly city of Jerusalem, but the spiritual body of Jesus Christ (cp. Ezek. 40-48 with John 2:18-22 and I Pet. 2:1-10).

Would this advocate gnosticism?

The irenic Bavinck was not too severe when he said that to interpret the prophecy of the Old Testament literally means that one "breaks with Christianity and lapses back into Judaism.



To the praise of our Glorious King who now reigns forever, AMEN.

[Edited on 4-14-2004 by Roldan]

[Edited on 4-14-2004 by Roldan]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Eoghan
  • Locked
Colossians 1:20 "heaven"
Replies
2
Views
2K
Eoghan
Eoghan
Puritan Sailor
  • Locked
Col 1:19 Greek help please
Replies
6
Views
2K
Rich Barcellos
R
A
  • Locked
Man is Head of Woman in all Spheres? 1 Cor 11
2 3
Replies
88
Views
16K
a mere housewife
a mere housewife
dildaysc
  • Locked
Poole's Synopsis on 1 Peter 3:19, 20 (the "spirits in prison")
Replies
1
Views
2K
One Little Nail
One Little Nail
Bern
  • Locked
What is the reformed view of 1 Cor 3:13-15?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Bern
Bern
Back
Top