Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Postmillinium


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I saw the following posted online today. While I understand what he's trying to say in part of his posting, I don't understand it all, especially the farther he goes.

 

Anyone know how to explain this?

 

-------------

Is it coincidence, or something else? I am friends with several exegetes who are thoroughly grounded in scripture; typology, the OT, hermeneutics, the writings of Josephus, and biblical genre as well. They are all Partial Preterists when it comes to eschatology; HANDS DOWN!

The Futurist view is not even based on the Bible at all, yet many blindly follow a view made popular in much the same way "The Origin of Species" was made popular, and both coming forth in the same year.

Not that the "same year idea" makes one inaccurate, but both trend setters (Darby and Darwin) attest to the power of ideas (which have consequences), and the power of a trend setter, and what he espouses.

If people could realize, Christ came to give salvation, and to nullify the Old Covenant. In doing so, He destroyed the Sacrificial system, its city, and its ceremony, as He was the antitype of all the types and shadows that came before Him. He promised that He would "come on clouds" before one generation passed, and if He would not have came on clouds, He would be a false prophet. I add, He is accused of being a false prophet to those who do not know how to read scripture. He fulfilled this prophesy and can be seen in heaven, in The book of Daniel, as He was vindicated, and coronated 37 years after His crucifixion; within a generation as prophesied.

 

Seems reasonable and Scriptural all the way up until the last sentence. That is the big fill in the blank to make it all "come together" which is far more than just a stretch of Scripture, it is mostly made up. I don't care which learned dok-ter made it up, but it is made up nonetheless.

 

The early portion that seems reasonable "is" but there is, IMO, more basis inline with overall truth in the Bible using the same info above in a dispensational premillinial view of the Bible.

 

I know preterist and partials are dead set on this outlook and won't be dissuaded, not even attempting that.   I just can't buy it that we are right now in the millennial kingdom? I know I am saved and want to live for the Lord but am still wretched and can hardly control my own mind. This is the millennial reign?? HARDLY and far from it.

 

What an outrageous stretch of the imagination to think so and what an incredible insult to the Majesty and Power of God to imagine this cesspool of a world is being reigned right now by the Lord. How marginalizing and demeaning to God's real plan for the future as described pretty clearly in Prophesy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Moderators

All I can think is that He didn't come to nullify the Old Covenant, He came to complete it.

 

"Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets. I come not to destroy but to fulfill."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As an amil, partial preterist, I'll put my modifications in red:

If people could realize, Christ came to give salvation, and to nullify the Old Covenant accomplish salvation, to fulfil the old covenant, and to inaugurate the  new & everlasting covenant in his own blood. Thus the OC is totally superceeded.       In doing so, He destroyed ended the Sacrificial system, its city, and its ceremony, as He was the antitype  antetype of all the types and shadows that came before Him. He promised that He would "come on clouds" before one generation passed, and if He would not have came on clouds, as prophesied on Olivet, He would be a false prophet.   I add, He is accused of being a false prophet to those who do not know how to read scripture. He fulfilled this prophesy and can be seen in heaven, in The book of Daniel, as He was vindicated, and coronated  crowned King of kings and Lord of lords 37 years after His crucifixion; within a generation as prophesied.

 

 

Seems reasonable and Scriptural all the way up until the last sentence. That is the big fill in the blank to make it all "come together" which is far more than just a stretch of Scripture, it is mostly made up. I don't care which learned dok-ter made it up, but it is made up nonetheless.

 

The "learned dok-ters" are the inspired Scripture writers. Jesus was condemned for claiming to be the one Daniel prophesied: 

7:13 13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

 

Mat. 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

 

26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

 

There is clear prophecy by the Lord about his coming within a generation. Further prophecy is in Mat. 21, Mark 12 & Luke 20, e.g. Mark 12:9 What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others. 

 

Such clear prophecy requires us to understand the Olivet prophecy including they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory in terms of the destruction, NOT some future "end times" fulfilment.

 

The early portion that seems reasonable "is" but there is, IMO, more basis inline with overall truth in the Bible using the same info above in a dispensational premillinial view of the Bible.

 

There is no hint of the "dispensational premillinial view of the Bible"  in the passages in question. What is in question is HOW to understand/interpret the details of the Olivet & related prophecy in terms of the obvious fulfilmen t in AD 70. What is in view is that the rejected Messiah will come to destroy those who rejected him, and give vineyard authority to others. Not a distant body of Israeli leaders, but those who rejected him. That's not to say they would all be still living, but the generation would not have all died - i.e. within about 40 years, as Hebrews makes very clear.

 

I know preterist and partials are dead set on this outlook and won't be dissuaded, not even attempting that.   I just can't buy it that we are right now in the millennial kingdom? I know I am saved and want to live for the Lord but am still wretched and can hardly control my own mind. This is the millennial reign?? HARDLY and far from it.

 

The "millennial reign" according to Rev. 20 does not take place on earth. The SOULS of the martyrs lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. And your supposed wonderful future millennium with the Lord ruling in person is a total failure, with the whole population of the world rising at Satan's call in rebellion. No. the millennium is the present age where Jesus shows his power by saving sinners. Read Rev. 1 for YOUR status:

And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

Note v. 7, where Jesus' Olivet prophecy Mat. 24:30 is quoted. The tribes of the earth DID mourn, as prophesied. The LORD's presence in the wilderness and in the dedication of the tabernacle & temple was evident in the clouds. Why should we look for whatever YOU expect?   

    

 

What an outrageous stretch of the imagination to think so and what an incredible insult to the Majesty and Power of God to imagine this cesspool of a world is being reigned right now by the Lord. How marginalizing and demeaning to God's real plan for the future as described pretty clearly in Prophesy. 

 

Who is being outrageous? Who is denying the oft-repeated assertion of Scripture that The Lord reigneth? You are slow to learn what Nebuchadnezzar learned:

Dan. 4:25 .... the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.     


You are rejecting the clear words of Jesus when he claims: All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth?   

Peter answers your mocking by referring both to the longsuffering of God, and the certainty of his coming. And he looks beyond that promised coming to the NH&NE. (2 Peter 3)  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Oh yes, and if the Millennium is a spiritual one that's currently taking place, how does that work since it's been more than a millennium since the fall of Jerusalem and all that?  Also, how could Satan be currently shut up in prison and is not deceiving people? Seems to me they're pretty well deceived right now.

 

Hope that didn't come out snarky at all.  I don't agree with your view, but I am sincerely curious to see how you explain these apparent inconsistencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The main fact that almost noone born again can identify in their wildest imagination that this is the kingdom nor does Prophesy even hint that the 1000 years would be an invisible spiritual kingdom. Plus we are at 2000 years and the clock is still ticking. Plus the entire world apart from a fraction of a percent know the Lord. Plus on and on and on. Come on, the Lord was far more visible to the known world in the OT than He is now.

 

I have tried to get it, my esteemed British colleague. Maybe I am not smart enough?  I will shut up about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh yes, and if the Millennium is a spiritual one that's currently taking place, how does that work since it's been more than a millennium since the fall of Jerusalem and all that?  Also, how could Satan be currently shut up in prison and is not deceiving people? Seems to me they're pretty well deceived right now.

 

Hope that didn't come out snarky at all.  I don't agree with your view, but I am sincerely curious to see how you explain these apparent inconsistencies.

Covenanter can correct this if necessary, but as I was reading on this the other day an author on the subject said that Satan is bound from preventing the spread of the Gospel to all nations, peoples and tongues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The main fact that almost noone born again can identify in their wildest imagination that this is the kingdom nor does Prophesy even hint that the 1000 years would be an invisible spiritual kingdom. Plus we are at 2000 years and the clock is still ticking. Plus the entire world apart from a fraction of a percent know the Lord. Plus on and on and on. Come on, the Lord was far more visible to the known world in the OT than He is now.

 

I have tried to get it, my esteemed British colleague. Maybe I am not smart enough?  I will shut up about it.

I raised this in another thread, but it fits here as well. This is something I don't grasp because dispensationalists say the thousand years has to be literal, yet when it comes to the 70 weeks prophecy they say that's not literal and it seems they say so because otherwise it doesn't fit their view. Scripture says there will be 70 weeks (of years) yet dispensationalists say the 70 weeks doesn't mean a literal 70 weeks but rather 69 literal weeks followed by a yet to be determined myriad of weeks until finally a certain week arrives (after vast multiple scores of weeks) that will be called the 70th week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As an amil, partial preterist, I'll put my modifications in red:

Your modifications helps. I don't know if that guy was in a hurry when he typed that or just unable to articulate his point well. He's too touchy for me to bother asking him to clarify. I tried that one time and rather than answer my seemingly simple question, he launched into an attack accusing me of not believing the Bible, of questioning God, and on and on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Covenanter can correct this if necessary, but as I was reading on this the other day an author on the subject said that Satan is bound from preventing the spread of the Gospel to all nations, peoples and tongues.

 

Well, Revelation 20 says that Satan is bound "that he should deceive the nations no more". That's not the same thing as that author is saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, Revelation 20 says that Satan is bound "that he should deceive the nations no more". That's not the same thing as that author is saying.

Those more knowledgeable than I on this particular point would have to hash that out. All I know is what I read says the preterist position is that Satan is bound from "deceiving the nations" in that he is bound from preventing the spread of the Gospel in every nation.

 

As far as I know, all the differing pre-mil views hold this verse to mean that during a literal thousand years Satan will be bound completely from involvement on earth until near the end of that thousand years when he's loosed and the nations seem to almost instantly fall in line with him and rebel against Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The dispensationalist teaching was confined to the Brethren and Irvingites (The Catholic Apostolic Church) in England during most of the 19th c.  Then Darby went to America and it went viral.

You overlooked the apostles in the Bible, the first century fathers etc.  It was the calvinist who attempted to change this because in the view of biblical interpretation the calvinst's interpretation falls apart.  This was discovered during the reformation and a Biblical view came back into the main stream.  Now the accepted teaching dispensationalism is being attacked by those who belief system crumbles in the face of God's Word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You overlooked the apostles in the Bible, the first century fathers etc.  It was the calvinist who attempted to change this because in the view of biblical interpretation the calvinst's interpretation falls apart.  This was discovered during the reformation and a Biblical view came back into the main stream.  Now the accepted teaching dispensationalism is being attacked by those who belief system crumbles in the face of God's Word.

I've not had the time to check into this, but a long-time brother in Christ, who is around 60 and been saved most of those years and held to the pre-mil view until a couple years ago (he decided to study the end times purely from Scripture and his view was changed). In any event, he posted the following, perhaps someone here knows more about this:

 

--------------

As I said earlier, it was by way of Emmanuel Lacunza, a Chilean Jesuit priest, who wrote, "The Coming of Messiah in Majesty and Glory" in 1812, which was the first historical mention of a two-part coming of Christ. Before that time, "rapture" was not heard of, in either written or spoken modes.

----------

 

Elsewhere he pointed out that prior to Darby popularizing this, no one held to such a view. He points out what a pastor showed him on cemetery headstones prior to this, whenever Christians had writings placed on their stones they referred to the coming resurrection, not a rapture.

 

As I said, I've not had a chance to try and look into any of this, but would be interested in what any here may know about these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I have not studied this, but a quick Wikipedia search (I know, I know...) mentions that Morgan Edwards wrote on a pre-tribulational rapture in 1788.

 

Found this interesting document documenting possible early rapture references.

http://www.bbc.edu/barndollar/Barndollar_Pre-Darby_Rapture.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Covenanter, where does the Tribulation fit in your view? Dimming of the sun, and all that? I don't see how that could have taken place already.

 

The tribulation was to take place during the 3 1/2 year siege of Jerusalem. Jesus said so. We know God darkened the sun at Calvary, and various astronomical phenomena occurred as recorded in the OT. We also read in Isaiah 13 that the same effects were prophesied when the Medes conquered Babylon. 

1 The burden of Babylon,...

 

Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

 

17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, ....

 

Oh yes, and if the Millennium is a spiritual one that's currently taking place, how does that work since it's been more than a millennium since the fall of Jerusalem and all that?  Also, how could Satan be currently shut up in prison and is not deceiving people? Seems to me they're pretty well deceived right now.

 

Look up thousand years - it's normally indicative of a long time, not an accurate period. Satan was totally defeated at Calvary - Hebrews 2 says "through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." What we do know is the radical contrast by the cross - the Gospel was open to the nations - commanded. People are deceived, until they are set free by the Gospel. The gates of hell are open. 

 

Hope that didn't come out snarky at all.  I don't agree with your view, but I am sincerely curious to see how you explain these apparent inconsistencies.

 

No - they are fair questions, and must be answered from Scripture. If my understanding were contradicted by Scripture, I would have to change - as I did when I came to the partial preterist understanding. BUT - I cannot completely understand all Scripture - can anyone? We tend to use an interpretative system that best answers our questions.

 

For me, the BIG unanswered disp premil failure is the fact that Christ's millennial rule fails completely with all the nations (except for the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city) uniting under Satan for the Gog-Magog war. There is a reliance on claimed "literal interpretation" of OT prophecy concerning Israel of a glorious age, but nowhere in the OT do we read of that glorious age ending.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...