What was the key text for your Millennium position?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rolden,

You've presented quite a good case there, was helpful though I'm already an Amil. :)

I'd have to say that Riddlebargers treatment of Daniel 9 ( the Dispensationalists interpret it as the antichrist, but he shows how it is all a prophecy of the messiah) is the icing on the amil cake.

I don't see how an interpretation of Dan 9 as relating to the Messiah would be the 'linchpin' or amil if I might put it so. I have not obtained a copy of Riddlebarger's work yet so can anyone shed some light here?
 
No one single verse, but this was one of many helpful, in the context of all of Scripture:

Luke 17:21
21Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
 
The increase of His government

Southern Twang,
I hope you are right about the coming revival. Some people think it has been going on lately. Maybe "the increase of His government" means something like it is increasing in that every believer added to Christ's true church increases His government. The man of God said 50 years ago "The Church has surrendered her once lofty concept of God and has substituted for it one so low, so ignoble, as to be utterly unworthy of thinking, worshipping men. This she has done not deliberately, but little by little and without her knowledge; and her very unawareness only makes her situation all the more tragic. The low view of God entertained almost universally among Christians is the cause of a hundred lesser evils everywhere among us. A whole new philosophy of the Christian life has resulted from this one basic error in our religious thinking. With our loss of the sense of majesty has come the further loss of religious awe and consciousness of the divine Presence. We have lost our spirit of worship and our ability to withdraw inwardly to meet God in adoring silence. Modern Christianity is simply not producing the kind of Christian who can appreciate or experience the life in the Spirit. The words, “Be still, and know that I am God,” mean next to nothing to the self-confident, bustling worshiper in this middle period of the twentieth century. This loss of the concept of majesty has come just when the forces of religion are making dramatic gains and the churches are more prosperous than at any time within the past several hundred years. But the alarming thing is that our gains are mostly external and our losses wholly internal; and since it is the quality of our religion that is affected by internal conditions, it may be that our supposed gains are but losses spread over a wider field." - Tozer. And we've gone down hill from there. I do so hope you are right!, though I fear you may not be. I drop a tear now and then just at the thought of such a world as you envisage.
 
Last edited:
duet. 29:29 :lol:


YES! :lol:

post_thanks.gif

post_thanks.gif

post_thanks.gif

post_thanks.gif


Take your pick, mang.
 
I don't see how an interpretation of Dan 9 as relating to the Messiah would be the 'linchpin' or amil if I might put it so. I have not obtained a copy of Riddlebarger's work yet so can anyone shed some light here?

Riddlebarger (pages 149-156) says that Daniel 9 speaks of the Lord Jesus and His work. He is the One spoken of as being cut off, and making a covenant. He notes that the "abomination that causes desolation" has to do with the sacrifices in the temple which were offered after the death of Christ until 70 A.D. Christ has already ratified the covenant with His blood. The animal sacrifices were not necessary anymore and therefore an abomination. Riddlebarger adds that the three and a half years are interpreted in Rev. 12:14.

I don't have his book at present (I'm using my notes I wrote after reading the book). But I think Riddlebarger uses John 5:24 as a key text for the amillennial position.

John 5:24 (ESV) Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

cf. Eph. 2:5-6; Col. 2:12. Believers have been raised in Christ. They are reigning with Him. The "already/not yet" tension is seen in these texts.
 
I'm currently working through the various systems in eschatology and would like to know simply what are the key texts or turning points that shaped your eschatological position. For example if you're a Premil simply based on 1 text, Rev20 (think Macarthur).

By the way, I'm using Three views on the millennium and beyond, as kind of the main reading with Robert B. Strimple presenting the Amil, Kenneth L. Gentry Jr. the Postmil and Craig A. Baising the Premil positions. Are they good representations of the various positions or should I be looking else where? I've gone through Strimple's argument for Amil and it seems pretty weak.

Thanks bunch

Luke 19:15 "And so it was that when he returned, having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
 
I don't see how an interpretation of Dan 9 as relating to the Messiah would be the 'linchpin' or amil if I might put it so. I have not obtained a copy of Riddlebarger's work yet so can anyone shed some light here?

Riddlebarger (pages 149-156) says that Daniel 9 speaks of the Lord Jesus and His work. He is the One spoken of as being cut off, and making a covenant. He notes that the "abomination that causes desolation" has to do with the sacrifices in the temple which were offered after the death of Christ until 70 A.D. Christ has already ratified the covenant with His blood. The animal sacrifices were not necessary anymore and therefore an abomination. Riddlebarger adds that the three and a half years are interpreted in Rev. 12:14.

I don't have his book at present (I'm using my notes I wrote after reading the book). But I think Riddlebarger uses John 5:24 as a key text for the amillennial position.

John 5:24 (ESV) Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

cf. Eph. 2:5-6; Col. 2:12. Believers have been raised in Christ. They are reigning with Him. The "already/not yet" tension is seen in these texts.

Hmm thanks for this, gonna go get a copy of the book.

Southern Twang,
I hope you are right about the coming revival. Some people think it has been going on lately. Maybe "the increase of His government" means something like it is increasing in that every believer added to Christ's true church increases His government. The man of God said 50 years ago "The Church has surrendered her once lofty concept of God and has substituted for it one so low, so ignoble, as to be utterly unworthy of thinking, worshipping men. This she has done not deliberately, but little by little and without her knowledge; and her very unawareness only makes her situation all the more tragic. The low view of God entertained almost universally among Christians is the cause of a hundred lesser evils everywhere among us. A whole new philosophy of the Christian life has resulted from this one basic error in our religious thinking. With our loss of the sense of majesty has come the further loss of religious awe and consciousness of the divine Presence. We have lost our spirit of worship and our ability to withdraw inwardly to meet God in adoring silence. Modern Christianity is simply not producing the kind of Christian who can appreciate or experience the life in the Spirit. The words, “Be still, and know that I am God,” mean next to nothing to the self-confident, bustling worshiper in this middle period of the twentieth century. This loss of the concept of majesty has come just when the forces of religion are making dramatic gains and the churches are more prosperous than at any time within the past several hundred years. But the alarming thing is that our gains are mostly external and our losses wholly internal; and since it is the quality of our religion that is affected by internal conditions, it may be that our supposed gains are but losses spread over a wider field." - Tozer. And we've gone down hill from there. I do so hope you are right!, though I fear you may not be. I drop a tear now and then just at the thought of such a world as you envisage.

Hi there, it's pretty hard to read your post if you don't paragraph. :) How much of what you wrote is quoted from Tozer?
 
The "problem of evil" for the premillennialist convinced me against premillennialism (read it in A Case for Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger). Postmillennialism sounds nice but I don't know if I can believe it.
 
Am sorry to say there no one key verse for me, there are several passages I look at for mine. I am not saying what position I am in, your going have to look at the passages and guess from there. (Hint: I am not dispensational)

Matthew 24:29-30
1 Thessalonians 1:7-10
Revelation 20:2-5
Zechariah 14:6-17
Isaiah 11:6-9
Isaiah 65:20
Revelation chapters 20-21:think::gpl::)
 
Am sorry to say there no one key verse for me, there are several passages I look at for mine. I am not saying what position I am in, your going have to look at the passages and guess from there. (Hint: I am not dispensational)

Matthew 24:29-30
1 Thessalonians 1:7-10
Revelation 20:2-5
Zechariah 14:6-17
Isaiah 11:6-9
Isaiah 65:20
Revelation chapters 20-21:think::gpl::)

Premil for sure unless I fell into your hint trap hahaha....but I must say we all use these same passages for our positions....lol
 
Am sorry to say there no one key verse for me, there are several passages I look at for mine. I am not saying what position I am in, your going have to look at the passages and guess from there. (Hint: I am not dispensational)

Matthew 24:29-30
1 Thessalonians 1:7-10
Revelation 20:2-5
Zechariah 14:6-17
Isaiah 11:6-9
Isaiah 65:20
Revelation chapters 20-21:think::gpl::)

Premil for sure unless I fell into your hint trap hahaha....but I must say we all use these same passages for our positions....lol

I was gonna say postmil based on Isa65. Lol
 
Amil



Matthew 13:24-30
He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?' He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' So the servants said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?' But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"


Matthew13:36-43 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field."
He answered, "The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the close of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.


In the Gospels only speak of two ages. This age is temporal, the age to come eternal. Matthew 13 is explained as the kingdom age, then the judgment, followed by eternity with the Father.
 
Amil



Matthew 13:24-30
He put another parable before them, saying, "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?' He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' So the servants said to him, 'Then do you want us to go and gather them?' But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.'"


Matthew13:36-43 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field."
He answered, "The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the close of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.


In the Gospels only speak of two ages. This age is temporal, the age to come eternal. Matthew 13 is explained as the kingdom age, then the judgment, followed by eternity with the Father.

:applause:
 
What pushed me to the postmil from the amil camp was if the millennium began at the redemption purchased by Christ on the cross, hence binding Satan, then how can Satan be loosed again, being that the power of Christ's redemptive work will never end?

So, from amil to postmil key text would be: Rev 20:3[/QUOTE]

Uh Oh..........let the games begin!!!! :book2:

your dilema stems from a misunderstanding of what the binding of Satan entails. What is your understanding if I may ask? Is it JUST about the application of Christ's redemptive work to the elect or is there more?
[/QUOTE]

Roldan, thanks for your question- as I have understood it, (although I admit I need to study the issue more) the general amil interpretation of the millennium represents the period of time beginning at Christ's redemption which also marks the binding of Satan, until the end when Christ returns. However, I cannot see how this fits because Satan will be released according to Rev 20:3- furthermore, in Rev 20:4 the saints are said to live and reign with Christ for a thousand years- again, the general amil interpretation I believe is that this scripture represents the saints now reigning with Christ in heaven- but again, this cannot be because it only lasts a thousand years! Certainly once a saint dies and reigns with Christ, his spiritual reign with Him will not end? So, I concluded that the millennium is a period of actual time that is coming, where God will cause His gospel to tremendously progress in the earth, wherein Satan will truly be bound. Hence the postmil position. Sorry it took me a while to respond, I have a lot going on and generally stay away from the big debates... haha... just couldn't help myself I suppose- sticking in my own thoughts! Thanks! :D

Also, here is the sermon that convinced me of this:
SermonAudio.com - Postmillenialism and Revelation 20
 
Last edited:
Am sorry to say there no one key verse for me, there are several passages I look at for mine. I am not saying what position I am in, your going have to look at the passages and guess from there. (Hint: I am not dispensational)

Matthew 24:29-30
1 Thessalonians 1:7-10
Revelation 20:2-5
Zechariah 14:6-17
Isaiah 11:6-9
Isaiah 65:20
Revelation chapters 20-21:think::gpl::)

Premil for sure unless I fell into your hint trap hahaha....but I must say we all use these same passages for our positions....lol

I was gonna say postmil based on Isa65. Lol

Roldan, I know, that sort of my point. And you were right, am technically a historical premil. However, I have been leaning towards an amill position, there are just a few questions that I have not had good answers too. I have read the books, just not satisfied with answers.

Ewenlin, maybe you get it right next time. :lol:
 
“For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea.” (Habakkuk 2:14)
 
“For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea.” (Habakkuk 2:14)

AMen.....in the consummation of the new heavens and new earth :)

-----Added 7/31/2009 at 11:44:31 EST-----

Premil for sure unless I fell into your hint trap hahaha....but I must say we all use these same passages for our positions....lol

I was gonna say postmil based on Isa65. Lol

Roldan, I know, that sort of my point. And you were right, am technically a historical premil. However, I have been leaning towards an amill position, there are just a few questions that I have not had good answers too. I have read the books, just not satisfied with answers.

Ewenlin, maybe you get it right next time. :lol:


WHat questions? I'm willing to help

-----Added 7/31/2009 at 11:50:28 EST-----

What pushed me to the postmil from the amil camp was if the millennium began at the redemption purchased by Christ on the cross, hence binding Satan, then how can Satan be loosed again, being that the power of Christ's redemptive work will never end?

So, from amil to postmil key text would be: Rev 20:3



Roldan, thanks for your question- as I have understood it, (although I admit I need to study the issue more) the general amil interpretation of the millennium represents the period of time beginning at Christ's redemption which also marks the binding of Satan, until the end when Christ returns. However, I cannot see how this fits because Satan will be released according to Rev 20:3- furthermore, in Rev 20:4 the saints are said to live and reign with Christ for a thousand years- again, the general amil interpretation I believe is that this scripture represents the saints now reigning with Christ in heaven- but again, this cannot be because it only lasts a thousand years! Certainly once a saint dies and reigns with Christ, his spiritual reign with Him will not end? So, I concluded that the millennium is a period of actual time that is coming, where God will cause His gospel to tremendously progress in the earth, wherein Satan will truly be bound. Hence the postmil position. Sorry it took me a while to respond, I have a lot going on and generally stay away from the big debates... haha... just couldn't help myself I suppose- sticking in my own thoughts! Thanks! :D

Also, here is the sermon that convinced me of this:
SermonAudio.com - Postmillenialism and Revelation 20

You have the binding of Satan misunderstood...Satan will be released BEFORE Christ return not at His return. So no delimma there....Its the postmil that has a problem with that not us.....AND are the saints reigning in heaven with Christ in their physical bodies? nope.....and its not just the dead saints we alive now are also reigning with Christ but not yet until our glorified bodies are given then fully. I'm in a rush so sorry if my response was not as thorough as you wanted but I can tell you that from reading your posts your understanding of the AMil position is misunderstood and I don't mean that in a jerky way or anything just an observation.....ask away I will get you straight lol :detective:
 
If Christ doesn't triumph in history through the Gospel over all of His enemies, the Papacy, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Secular Humanism,etc, etc, and doesn't Christianise all nations, we'd always be left asking for eternity, "Could He have done it? "

Besides, we've already seen Christ defeat a number of enemies and stratagems of the Devil already in history. Is He not going to do that with them all, finish the job and completely clean up?

The binding of Satan is progressive. Clearly he's still deceiving the nations somewhat.
 
Off the top of my head, I would say Isaiah 65 points to a golden age before Christ returns. Particularly, Isaiah 65:20 makes me think it is before Christ returns because it speaks of sinners being present.

I don't know about this three ages thing you are talking about. I've never heard this from the postmills.

I cannot agree that Isaiah 65 is before the return of Christ. While the middle section of 17 - 25 does have things in it that sound like people are still dying, I look at the bookends of the passage which start with
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing And her people for gladness.

This new heavens and new earth certainly seem like Rev 21. It also ends with
“The wolf and the lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the serpent’s food. They will do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain,” says the Lord. Isa 65:25

which is not something this age sees, but the new age.

While I tend to agree that there is not perfect clarity in looking into the prophetic sections of scripture (if there were, the Jews would have seen Jesus coming the first time around) and that there is some disagreement on the subject (even Jean gets it wrong and thinks in post-mil terms :) ) I also know that it is something that I tend to give a Duet 29:29 view.
 
Ironically, the Daniel 9 passage that is so often touted as a Dispensational prootext helped secure me as an amillennial. Once I started reading the Old Testament in light of the New (instead of vice versa), everything fell into place.
 
Quote from Brian
Quote:
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing And her people for gladness.

This new heavens and new earth certainly seem like Rev 21. It also ends with
Quote:
“The wolf and the lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the serpent’s food. They will do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain,” says the Lord. Isa 65:25

which is not something this age sees, but the new age.

But you as an amillennialist with "realised eschatology" should know that the new heavens and the new earth (the new creation) started in principle with Christ's resurrection. Every Lord's Day we are celebrating the beginning of the new creation in principle. Also the powers of the new creation have invaded this age. Each believer is a new creation in his soul.

Whether there will be wolves and lambs in the new heavens and earth I don't know. Does this not refer to world peace? The reference to the serpent taking a lowly place to the devil's defeat?

Compare this passage with Isaiah 2:1-4 and Isaiah 11:1-10.

Quote from Brian
While I tend to agree that there is not perfect clarity in looking into the prophetic sections of scripture (if there were, the Jews would have seen Jesus coming the first time around)

Some of that was because of sin, otherwise Simeon, Anna, maybe Nathanael, and others wouldn't have been ready. I don't claim to see perfectly or without sin, myself, of course.
 
If Christ doesn't triumph in history through the Gospel over all of His enemies, the Papacy, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Secular Humanism,etc, etc, and doesn't Christianise all nations, we'd always be left asking for eternity, "Could He have done it? "

Why would we be asking that question? I know he could do it, He's God Almighty but the question is what it part of His plan. Thats like asking if God creates such a enormous rock can he lift it......in other words thats like asking if God doesn't create this enormous rock and shows us He can still move it then will we be still wondering if He could or not for eternity? of course not because we know He can He is God.

Besides, we've already seen Christ defeat a number of enemies and stratagems of the Devil already in history. Is He not going to do that with them all, finish the job and completely clean up?

He sure is......at His coming

The binding of Satan is progressive. Clearly he's still deceiving the nations somewhat.

No sir...may you please provide context of scripture that would suggest that the binding of Satan is a progressive one....again it seems to me that you haven't grasped what the devils binding means....no disrespect

-----Added 7/31/2009 at 09:23:25 EST-----

Quote from Brian
Quote:
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing And her people for gladness.

This new heavens and new earth certainly seem like Rev 21. It also ends with
Quote:
“The wolf and the lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the serpent’s food. They will do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain,” says the Lord. Isa 65:25

which is not something this age sees, but the new age.

But you as an amillennialist with "realised eschatology" should know that the new heavens and the new earth (the new creation) started in principle with Christ's resurrection. Every Lord's Day we are celebrating the beginning of the new creation in principle. Also the powers of the new creation have invaded this age. Each believer is a new creation in his soul.

Whether there will be wolves and lambs in the new heavens and earth I don't know. Does this not refer to world peace? The reference to the serpent taking a lowly place to the devil's defeat?

Compare this passage with Isaiah 2:1-4 and Isaiah 11:1-10.

Quote from Brian
While I tend to agree that there is not perfect clarity in looking into the prophetic sections of scripture (if there were, the Jews would have seen Jesus coming the first time around)

Some of that was because of sin, otherwise Simeon, Anna, maybe Nathanael, and others wouldn't have been ready. I don't claim to see perfectly or without sin, myself, of course.


Isaiah 65 is merely anthropomorphic language.

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 and 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.

This is why I am Amil......
 
Dear Roldan,

We find evidence for Satan's binding being progressive from the first century on in Rev 20. The chain is the progress of the Gospel.

(a)...and He (that is the angel, Christ) laid hold on the Dragon...

(b)....and bound him 1,000 years...

(c)....and cast him into the bottomless pit...

(d)....and shut him up.........

(e)....and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more.....

This ties in better with the kind of deception of nations that still went on in the twentieth century and still goes on today.

I'll later try and show in simple and short outline how this has worked out in history.

Your brother,

Richard.
 
Matthew 24:34 pushed the "tribulation" to the past. Out went the premill view.

In my humble opinion, too many verses in the Bible that make it appear that the gospel is going to have an overwhelming, all conquering, victorious impact on this earth. (Is 9:6, Is. 65, Matt 28:19). So amillennialism is out of the question, label me a postmillennailist.

Of course its gonna have an impact on earth but not before His coming. We Amils believe the same thing the problem is that the Postmil want to place this truth before His coming and we Amils place this same exact truth After His coming and do so on the basis of the clear testimony of scripture. Can any Postmil PLEASE by all means present any citation of scripture or context that places an golden age PRIOR to Christ return, we believe in a golden age but this age is everlasting and one that is truly Gold not gold plated in the New heavens and New Earth....following question to think about because the passages you are about to present are nothing new to us.....

Do the passages that you are presenting (Isaiah, Psalms, kindom parables) CLEARLY present an age between this present age and the age to come making three ages?

Surely the Gospel has already had a very beneficial impact in this age?

The kingdom parables of the leaven and mustard seed don't speak of a third age in between the last days and the New Heavens and Earth, but they do speak of the ongoing growth and expansion of Christ's kingdom on earth, until the whole Earth is leavened with the Gospel.

-----Added 8/1/2009 at 12:51:39 EST-----

Satan being bound: Bound in every way? No, the text tells us how and in what ways he is bound. "And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended."

In my humble opinion, too many verses in the Bible that make it appear that the gospel is going to have an overwhelming, all conquering, victorious impact on this earth. (Is 9:6, Is. 65, Matt 28:19). So amillennialism is out of the question, label me a postmillennailist.

How would you define 'Overwhelming', 'all conquering', and 'victorious impact' and where you do you get the idea of those words/phrases from the Scriptures you have cited?

Satan is still deceiving the nations, although less of a proportion of the nations than he was before the first century, because all believers are undeceived.

-----Added 8/1/2009 at 01:02:10 EST-----

2 Peter 3:10 - "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.

Could very well be apocalyptic language, but it seems to me that, even in a general sense, there is little room here for an earthly millennium.

Christ will always appear as a thief in the night for His enemies, whether He comes in death or at the end of the world. For His people He doesn't come as a thief. See I Thessalonians 5:4. We are told in various biblical passages that Christ's visible advent at the end of the world will be preceeded by certain events. We are not told when Christ will come for us in death.

See my posts on this thread for some more info on this:-

http://www.puritanboard.com/f46/whats-your-stand-great-tribulation-51105/
 
If Christ doesn't triumph in history through the Gospel over all of His enemies, the Papacy, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Secular Humanism,etc, etc, and doesn't Christianise all nations, we'd always be left asking for eternity, "Could He have done it? "

Besides, we've already seen Christ defeat a number of enemies and stratagems of the Devil already in history. Is He not going to do that with them all, finish the job and completely clean up?

The binding of Satan is progressive. Clearly he's still deceiving the nations somewhat.

Except that even an amil position holds that the gospel is triumphing in history by having each and every one of the elect coming to saving faith in Christ. If on the last day, there is just one Christian left, and he testifies to the hope that is within him to the last of the unregenerate elect, and God through the Holy Spirit then regenerates the last of the elect, that would mean all the church was in fact saved. The triumph of the gospel is in the saving of all the elect, not in the kingdoms and powers of this world.

For all eternity, we will be praising God for having defeated Satan, his demons, all worldly powers and authorities to the salvation of every last one of the elect. We also will see the great and terrible wrath of God upon those that are the reprobate and love and honor our God all the more. The martyrs who fell will no longer be saying "how long" but rejoice that justice will be served against those who spilled their blood.

And as long as there are reprobate to be not only to be given over to impurity, but deceived by their own sinful desires and the lies of Satan then Satan will still be present in this age. Bound for hell and damnation within all eternity, but of limited freedom to attempt to work against God, yet all the time aiding in God's glory through those very things he desires to thwart.

Satan is already defeated, but it has not yet been revealed the nature of his defeat. He stands like a deer that has been shot through and does not yet know it is dead.

Our worship in heaven will not be tainted by thoughts of the limited vision we have now ... we cannot see the end from the beginning, we do not see the whole of the creation ... and when it is revealed, we will gasp in awe of the glory it shows of the Trinity.
 
Quote from Brian
Quote:
“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. “But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing And her people for gladness.

This new heavens and new earth certainly seem like Rev 21. It also ends with
Quote:
“The wolf and the lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the serpent’s food. They will do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain,” says the Lord. Isa 65:25

which is not something this age sees, but the new age.

But you as an amillennialist with "realised eschatology" should know that the new heavens and the new earth (the new creation) started in principle with Christ's resurrection. Every Lord's Day we are celebrating the beginning of the new creation in principle. Also the powers of the new creation have invaded this age. Each believer is a new creation in his soul.

Whether there will be wolves and lambs in the new heavens and earth I don't know. Does this not refer to world peace? The reference to the serpent taking a lowly place to the devil's defeat?

Compare this passage with Isaiah 2:1-4 and Isaiah 11:1-10.

Quote from Brian
While I tend to agree that there is not perfect clarity in looking into the prophetic sections of scripture (if there were, the Jews would have seen Jesus coming the first time around)

Some of that was because of sin, otherwise Simeon, Anna, maybe Nathanael, and others wouldn't have been ready. I don't claim to see perfectly or without sin, myself, of course.


Isaiah 65 is merely anthropomorphic language.

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 and 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.

This is why I am Amil......

My goodness, I hope that wasn't directed at me ... when I first started reading the message, I thought, you are making my case for me. Then when I got to the end, I though ... huh? He is making my case for me, and doing a wonderful job of it. Oh! He is amil, and that is my point. Did the quote get messed up? I noticed that the last "quote" is incomplete, and it ends with something I did not write, but is after my name....
 
There are many Scriptural reasons for being an Amillienialist:
1) Christ is already in full jurisdiction at the Father's right hand. (Acts 7.55-56, Matthew 28.18)
2) Christ promised to be with the Church as Ruler until the end of the world. (Matthew 28.20, Acts 18.10)
3) Pentecost is identified as the beginning of the millennium. (Acts 2.16-21)

The early church was split, mainly, between pre-millenialism and amillenialism. For example, St. Justin Martyr's theology was very chiliastic and pre-millenialistic, but he described other church memebers of a more amillenialistic mind-set to be of a "pure and pious faith". St. Augustine was originally a premillenialist, but later left that view for an amillenialist view. John Calvin and Martin Luther, as well, seemed to distance themselves from our modern day pre-millenialism for a more amillenialistic approach.

But, in the end, what really matters? Christ crucified and resurrected is all that matters to us, let's not let this issue ever divide the Church.
 
Quote from Brian


But you as an amillennialist with "realised eschatology" should know that the new heavens and the new earth (the new creation) started in principle with Christ's resurrection. Every Lord's Day we are celebrating the beginning of the new creation in principle. Also the powers of the new creation have invaded this age. Each believer is a new creation in his soul.

Whether there will be wolves and lambs in the new heavens and earth I don't know. Does this not refer to world peace? The reference to the serpent taking a lowly place to the devil's defeat?

Compare this passage with Isaiah 2:1-4 and Isaiah 11:1-10.

Quote from Brian
While I tend to agree that there is not perfect clarity in looking into the prophetic sections of scripture (if there were, the Jews would have seen Jesus coming the first time around)

Some of that was because of sin, otherwise Simeon, Anna, maybe Nathanael, and others wouldn't have been ready. I don't claim to see perfectly or without sin, myself, of course.


Isaiah 65 is merely anthropomorphic language.

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 and 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.

This is why I am Amil......

My goodness, I hope that wasn't directed at me ... when I first started reading the message, I thought, you are making my case for me. Then when I got to the end, I though ... huh? He is making my case for me, and doing a wonderful job of it. Oh! He is amil, and that is my point. Did the quote get messed up? I noticed that the last "quote" is incomplete, and it ends with something I did not write, but is after my name....

LOL...yeah sorry about that....it was directed to Richard or any postmil for that matter hehe.....so what you think of it anyways?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top