Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Spurgeon's View of the MILLENNIUM
Pilgrim Pub. ^ | MARK A. MCNEIL

Posted on 09/12/2002 7:19:20 AM PDT by xzins


CONFUSED ABOUT SPURGEON'S PROPHETIC VIEWS?

WELL, NO LONGER!  HERE IS...

.

Charles

Haddon

Spurgeon's

VIEW OF THE

MILLENNIUM

 Annotated Summary by  

MARK A. MCNEIL

"I am not now going into millennial theories, or into any speculation as to dates. I do not know anything at all about such things, and I am not sure that I am called to spend my time in such researches. I am rather called to minister the gospel than to open prophecy. Those who are wise in such things doubtless prize their wisdom, but I have not the time to acquire it, nor any inclination to leave soul-winning pursuits for less arousing themes. I believe it is a great deal better to leave many of these promises, and many of these gracious out-looks of believers, to exercise their full force upon our minds, without depriving them of their simple glory by aiming to discover dates and figures. Let this be settled, however, that if there be meaning in words, Israel is yet to be restored. Israel is to have a SPIRITUAL RESTORATION or a CONVERSION."

[from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 429, Ezekiel 37:1-10 (age 30)]

INTRODUCTION

There has been some considerable difference of opinion regarding the position that C. H. Spurgeon, the great Baptist preacher from the 19th century, held in the area of Eschatology regarding the doctrine of the Millennium. Each of the three major divisions within this area of doctrine have proponents who claim Spurgeon as one of their own. Many times authors claim a different millennial view than what Spurgeon actually believed.

It is not our task to sort out the arguments for each view. Such an assignment would take a very large volume (many are available) and the issue would still not be solved for all. We would simply like to define the basic positions and then demonstrate from Spurgeon's own words which one view he held.

PREMILLENNIALISM

The first view regarding the Millennium is that of PREMILLENNIALISM. The prefix, "Pre," denotes "before." The prefix is telling us at what point in relationship to the millennium that Christ will come. This view holds that our Lord will Literally return before a 1,000-year reign of Christ begins. The millennium of Revelation 20 is taken to be literal. If not literal, it at least is speaking of an indefinite period of time following the coming of Christ during which there will be perfect peace on the earth.

Within the premillennialist camp, there have come to be two identifiable views: the "dispensationalist" position, and the "historic" position. For further information defending each of these views, one should consult Reese's The Approaching Advent of Christ [historic] and Dwight Pentecost's Things to Come [dispensational]. Though the differences between the two are important, it is not within the scope of our purpose here to delve into such matters.

AMILLENNIALISM

The second view is called AMILLENNIALISM, or sometimes called "realized eschatology". The prefix, "A-," means "no". This would suggest that those who hold this view do not believe in a millennium. This is somewhat misleading, however. This view is the the product of a consistent Spiritual interpretation of prophetic literature. To those, the millennium is not some future physical reign, but the present reign of Christ in the hearts of believers. The "millennium" is an indefinite period of time (the present age) after which Christ will physically return. Prophecy in the Church, by Oswald Allis, is a standard work for the amillennial position.

This is the position of the Roman Catholic Church, also many other Protestant denominations. It grew out of St. Augustine's spiritualizing of these issues in his writings, and the tendency of many early Christian writers to see the Church as the "new Israel" and therefore the recipient of the promises of the Old Testament for the Jewish nation. Those who hold this view do not speak of the millennium as a future happening.  It is, to them, a Present Reality.

POSTMILLENNIALISM

The third, and last, major view is that of POSTMILLENNIALISM. The prefix "Post" speaks of "after." This teaching promotes the view that the physical return of Christ will Follow an actual millennium. The influence of Christianity will over-take the world for an extended period of time, then Christ will return.

This view appears to be a mixture of the principles that work to produce the first two views. It is not consistently spiritual or literal in its interpretation of the prophetic material relevant to this issue. Perhaps the foremost writing for this position today is The Millennium, by Loraine Boettner.

Spurgeon's VIEW  

With basic definitions before us, then, let's look at some quotes from Spurgeon to see what his position was on the Millennium.

"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]

Spurgeon here specifically identifies the Postmillennial view with a clear DENIAL of any adherence to it! Those who attempt to claim Spurgeon for this viewpoint do not demonstrate their contention by referring to clear comparisons such as this one. They rather go to sermons not specifically dealing with both positions and pull out of them ideas that are "compatible" with Postmillennial thinking. This is a faulty way of proving a point, however* especially when they meet squarely with a Spurgeon statement like the one above, and those below.

*NOTE: Furthur, a few postmillennialists (especially GARY NORTH), are guilty of misrepresenting Spurgeon constantly in articles and books; NORTH has repeatedly alleged that "Spurgeon was Postmillennial"yet neither his supplied quotations "say" so, and/or he deliberately does not present a statement by Spurgeon that North will speculate "implies" a Postmillennial position. Our advice is to ignore anything North states regarding Spurgeon's views and Prophecy!

Again, consider Spurgeon's View here in light of 'Postmillennial' teaching...

"Paul does not paint the future with rose-colour: he is no smooth-tongued prophet of a golden age, into which this dull earth may be imagined to be glowing. There are sanguine brethren who are looking forward to everything growing better and better and better, until, at last, this present age ripens into a millennium. They will not be able to sustain their hopes, for Scripture gives them no solid basis to rest upon. We who believe that there will be no millennial reign without the King, and who expect no rule of righteousness except from the appearing of the righteous Lord, are nearer the mark. Apart from the second Advent of our Lord, the world is more likely to sink into a pandemonium than to rise into a millennium. A divine interposition seems to me the hope set before us in Scripture, and, indeed, to be the only hope adequate to the occasion. We look to the darkening down of things; the state of mankind, however improved politically, may yet grow worse and worse spiritually." [from The Form of Godliness Without the Power MTP Vol 35, Year 1889, pg. 301, 2 Timothy 3:5 (age 54)]

"We are to expect the literal advent of Jesus Christ, for he himself by his angel told us, 'This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven,' which must mean literally and in person. We expect a reigning Christ on earth; that seems to us to be very plain, and to be put so literally that we dare not spiritualise it. We anticipate a first and a second resurrection; a first resurrection of the righteous, and a second resurrection of the ungodly, who shall be judged, condemned, and punished for ever by the sentence of the great King." [from Things to Come MTP Vol 15, Year 1869, pg. 329, 1 Corinthians 3:22 (age 35)]

Here, stress is laid upon the Literal Nature of the second coming.  Also, after this literal return is stressed a reigning upon the earth.

"We have done once for all with the foolish ideas of certain of the early heretics, that Christ's appearance upon earth was but a phantom. We know that he was really, personally, and physically here on earth. But it is not quite so clear to some persons that he is to come really, personally, and literally, the second time. I know there are some who are labouring to get rid of the fact of a personal reign, but as I take it, the coming and the reign are so connected together, that we must have a spiritual coming if we are to have a spiritual reign. Now we believe and hold that Christ shall come a second time suddenly, to raise his saints at the first judgment, and they shall reign with him afterwards. The rest of the dead live not till after the thousand years are finished. Then shall they rise from their tombs at the sounding of the trumpet, and their judgment shall come and they shall receive the deeds which they have done in their bodies." [from The Two Advents of Christ MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pg. 39, Hebrews 9:27-28 (age 28)]

[from The Sinner's End MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pgs. 712-713, Psalms 73:17-18 (age 28)], Spurgeon is discussing the final condition of the sinner "Let us go on to consider their end. The day of days, that dreadful day has come. The millennial rest is over, the righteous have had their thousand years of glory upon earth."

In the quotes above, the order of events fits perfectly the PREmillennial point of view. The final end of the sinner is faced after the righteous have enjoyed a thousand years with Christ.

.

 

"Our Hope is the Personal

PRE-MILLENNIAL

RETURN of the

  Lord Jesus Christ in Glory."

August 1891, age 58  

Of the various articles and writings by those who deny the conclusion that we feel is obvious, none that I have found bases itself on the same type of quotes we have produced (many others could have been given see those that follow). To the contrary, their's are based on "interpreting" Spurgeon's statements apart from such quotes that we have given.

.

We feel safe in concluding, then,

that of the three views we began with,

Spurgeon expressly states that he believes in a

Literal Return of Jesus Christ

BEFORE

a Literal Millennium on the Earth.

———————————————————————————

.

Written by Mark A. McNeil (Houston TX USA), B.A., M.A., & PhD. Student

Author of An Evaluation of the 'Oneness Pentecostal' Movement

$3 + $1 shipping Published by Pilgrim Publications

also Read C. H. SPURGEON on "PRETERISM" <<< Click Link

  Join our company... Psalm 68:11 "The Lord gave the WORD:

Great was the COMPANY of those that PUBLISHED it."

Please, Copy this article, pass it on, and mail to others.

Permission granted by Bob L. Ross  No Copyright

NOTES OF INTEREST

Watching and Waiting Magazine

                                          by C. W. H. Griffiths

Published by Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony

1 Donald Way, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 9JB United Kingdom

Stephen A. Toms, secretary

Write and Request the Complete Article            

From the Summer 1990 issue of this magazine, C. W. H. Griffiths states Spurgeon "was a valued standard bearer for historic Pre-millennialism," and then presents an excellent article defending his Pre-millennial position.

Documenting additional quotations which we have added and expanded below

Spurgeon (age 43) There is moreover to be a reign of Christ. I cannot read the Scriptures without perceiving that there is to be a pre-millennial reign, as I believe, upon the earth and that there shall be new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness...

Spurgeon (age 49) Then all His people who are alive at the time of His coming shall be suddenly transformed, so as to be delivered from all the frailties and imperfections of their mortal bodies: The dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed. Then we shall be presented spirit, soul, and body without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; in the clear and absolute perfection of our sanctified manhood, presented unto Christ Himself.

Spurgeon (age 50) When the Lord comes there will be no more death; we who are alive and remain (as some of us may be we cannot tell) will undergo a sudden transformation for flesh and blood, as they are, cannot inherit the kingdom of God and by that transformation our bodies shall be made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.

Spurgeon (age 52) His coming will cause great sorrow. What does the text say about his coming? All kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Then this sorrow will be very general.

Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pgs. 427-430, Ezekiel  37:1-10] Under the preaching of the Word the vilest sinners can be reclaimed, the most stubborn wills can be subdued, the most unholy lives can be sanctified. When the holy "breath" comes from the four winds, when the divine Spirit descends to own the Word, then multitudes of sinners, as on Pentecost's hallowed day, stand up upon their feet, an exceeding great army, to praise the Lord their God. But, mark you, this is not the first and proper interpretation of the text; it is indeed nothing more than a very striking parallel case to the one before us. It is not the case itself; it is only a similar one, for the way in which God restores a nation is, practically, the way in which he restores an individual. The way in which Israel shall be saved is the same by which any one individual sinner shall be saved. It is not, however, the one case which the prophet is aiming at; he is looking at the vast mass of cases, the multitudes of instances to be found among the Jewish people, of gracious quickening, and holy resurrection. His first and primary intention was to speak of them, and though it is right and lawful to take a passage in its widest possible meaning, since "no Scripture is of private interpretation," yet I hold it to be treason to God's Word to neglect its primary meaning, and constantly to say "Such-and-such is the primary meaning, but it is of no consequence, and I shall use the words for another object." The preacher of God's truth should not give up the Holy Ghost's meaning; he should take care that he does not even put it in the back ground. The first meaning of a text, the Spirit's meaning, is that which would be brought out first, and though the rest may fairly spring out of it, yet the first sense should have the chief place. Let it have the uppermost place in the synagogue, let it be looked upon as at least not inferior, either in interest or importance, to any other meaning which may come out of the text.

The meaning of our text, as opened up by the context, is most evidently, if words mean anything, first, that there shall be a political restoration of the Jews to their own land and to their own nationality; and then, secondly, there is in the text, and in the context, a most plain declaration, that there shall be a spiritual restoration, a conversion in fact, of the tribes of Israel.

The promise is that they shall renounce their idols, and, behold, they have already done so. "Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols." Whatever faults the Jew may have besides, he certainly has no idolatry. "The Lord thy God is one God," is a truth far better conceived by the Jew than by any other man on earth except the Christian. Weaned for ever from the worship of all images, of whatever sort, the Jewish nation has now become infatuated with traditions or duped by philosophy. She is to have, however, instead of these delusions, a spiritual religion: she is to love her God. "They shall be my people, and I will be their God." The unseen but omnipotent Jehovah is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth by his ancient people; they are to come before him in his own appointed way, accepting the Mediator whom their sires rejected; coming into covenant relation with God, for so our text tells us "I will make a covenant of peace with them," and Jesus is our peace, therefore we gather that Jehovah shall enter into the covenant of grace with them, that covenant of which Christ is the federal head, the substance, and the surety. They are to walk in God's ordinances and statutes, and so exhibit the practical effects of being united to Christ who hath given them peace. All these promises certainly imply that the people of Israel are to be converted to God, and that this conversion is to be permanent, for the tabernacle of God is to be with them, the Most High is, in an especial manner, to have his sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore; so that whatever nations may apostatize and turn from the Lord in these latter days, the nation of Israel never can, for she shall be effectually and permanently converted, the hearts of the fathers shall be turned with the hearts of the children unto the Lord their God, and they shall be the people of God, world without end.

We look forward, then, for these two things. I am not going to theorize upon which of them will come first, whether they shall be restored first, and converted afterwards, or converted first, and then restored. They are to be restored, and they are to be converted too. Let the Lord send these blessings in his own order, and we shall be well content whichever way they shall come. We take this for our joy and our comfort, that this thing shall be, and that both in the spiritual and in the temporal throne, the King Messiah shall sit, and reign among his people gloriously.

Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Lamb the Light MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 439, Revelation 21:23] (Spurgeon says of the millennial earth), They shall not say one to another, "Know the Lord: for all shall know him, from the least to the greatest." There may be even in that period certain solemn assemblies and Sabbath-days, but they will not be of the same kind as we have now; for the whole earth will be a temple, every day will be a Sabbath, the avocations of men will all be priestly, they shall be a nation of priests distinctly so, and they shall day without night serve God in his temple, so that everything to which they set their hand shall be a part of the song which shall go up to the Most High. Oh! blessed day. Would God it had dawned, when these temples should be left, because the whole world should be a temple for God. But whatever may be the splendours of that day and truly here is a temptation to let our imagination revel however bright may be the walls set with chalcedony and amethyst, however splendid the gates which are of one pearl, whatever may be the magnificence set forth by the "streets of gold," this we know, that the sum and substance, the light and glory of the whole will be the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, "for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." Now, I want the Christian to meditate over this. In the highest, holiest, and happiest era that shall ever dawn upon this poor earth, Christ is to be her light. When she puts on her wedding garments, and adorns herself as a bride is adorned with jewels, Christ is to be her glory and her beauty. There shall be no ear-rings in her ears made with other gold than that which cometh from his mine of love; there shall be no crown set upon her brow fashioned by any other hand than his hands of wisdom and of grace. She sits to reign, but it shall be upon his throne; she feeds, but it shall be upon his bread; she triumphs, but it shall be because of the might which ever belongs to him who is the Rock of Ages. Come then, Christian, contemplate for a moment thy beloved Lord. Jesus, in a millennial age, shall be the light and the glory of the city of the new Jerusalem. Observe then, that Jesus makes the light of the millennium, because his presence will be that which distinguishes that age from the present. That age is to be akin to paradise. Paradise God first made upon earth, and paradise God will last make. Satan destroyed it; and God will never have defeated his enemy until he has re-established paradise, until once again a new Eden shall bless the eyes of God's creatures. Now, the very glory and privilege of Eden I take to be not the river which flowed through it with its four branches, nor that it came from the land of Havilah which hath dust of gold I do not think the glory of Eden lay in its grassy walks, or in the boughs bending with luscious fruit but its glory lay in this, that the "Lord God walked in the garden in the cool of the day." Here was Adam's highest privilege, that he had companionship with the Most High. In those days angels sweetly sang that the tabernacle of God was with man, and that he did dwell amongst them. Brethren, the paradise which is to be regained for us will have this for its essential and distinguishing mark, that the Lord shall dwell amongst us. This is the name by which the city is to be called Jehovah Shammah, the Lord is there. It is true we have the presence of Christ in the Church now "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." We have the promise of his constant indwelling: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." But still that is vicariously by his Spirit, but soon he is to be personally with us. That very man who once died upon Calvary is to live here. He that same Jesus who was taken up from us, shall come in like manner as he was taken up from the gazers of Galilee. Rejoice, rejoice, beloved, that he comes, actually and really comes; and this shall be the joy of that age, that he is among his saints, and dwelleth in them, with them, and talketh and walketh in their midst.

"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]



TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: amillennialism; burnservetus; calburnbibles; calvinism; falsedoctrine; heritics; millenium; postmillennialism; premillennialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 2,721-2,722 next last

1 posted on 09/12/2002 7:19:20 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; winstonchurchill; ShadowAce; P-Marlowe; Revelation 911; The Grammarian; ...
It's obvious that Charles Haddon Spurgeon was a premillennialist.

Not that he's the final word on things, but thought you'd be interested.
2 posted on 09/12/2002 7:21:06 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
You just proved my last point, over on the other thread. You really don't have anything better to do, do you?
3 posted on 09/12/2002 7:23:38 AM PDT by Jerry_M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Matchett-PI; CCWoody; RnMomof7; Jerry_M; Jean Chauvin; BibChr; ...
Spurgeon also admitted that eschatology was not his strong suit. And he actually avoided preaching his premillennial views.

In other words, the Lord was not pleased to bless Spurgeon with much detailed insight in millennial eschatology but was pleased to block any vigorous assertion by Spurgeon of the views which he did happen to hold.

4 posted on 09/12/2002 7:32:35 AM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jerry_M
My response from the other thread is also appropriate here:

I have started most of the eschatology threads in recent days at least. They've received fairly solid discussion.

A lot of times I do it to learn. I always do it to sharpen my understanding.

Isn't bible study the point of these threads?

5 posted on 09/12/2002 7:34:44 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: the_doc; Jerry_M; fortheDeclaration; drstevej
I am certainly no Spurgeon scholar, but many hold him as a very significant Christian in the history of the church.

I do think his bible knowledge was so broad that his opinions must be taken seriously. There's no requirement to bow to Spurgeon's opinions on any subject, but it would be wrong to say his opinions were ill considered. (Even on election.)

Jerry asked an earlier question about the impact of millennial views. I have an article on that subject that I'll shortly post. (I'm a military retiree on an outstanding pension....today's my day off -- and so is tomorrow -- ...I have nothing better to do. ROTFLOL!!)

6 posted on 09/12/2002 7:41:34 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xzins; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Matchett-PI; CCWoody; RnMomof7; Jerry_M; Jean Chauvin; BibChr; ...
As a follow-up, I would offer an amplification.

If you look at the texts which Spurgeon preached from the Book of Revelations, you will discover that he ordinarily just looked for evangelistic applications. He ordinarily did not do what today's prophecy preachers do--which is to elucidate zillions of doctrinal details concerning the supposed future millennium.

He specifically loathed the prevailing practice of trying to "peep between the folded leaves of destiny." He called his own era's speculations concerning Europe's position in the Lord's timetable as "the veriest drivel, mere bones for dogs." He said that the people who thought they had any of the details worked out for the timing of the Lord's return were destined for the inglorious revelation that they didn't know what they were talking about.

This is not to say that Spurgeon never presented his own position. He did. The article demonstrates that. But the article does not bring out the fact that Spurgeon admitted that eschatology was his weak suit.

(Having read Spurgeon's devotional Bible, I don't recall that he said very much at all about his millennial position in that devotional Bible.)

Another thing which the article does not bring out is that Spurgeon really was weak in eschatology. He seriously irked conservative preachers by endorsing one of the most monstrous books ever written on the topic of eschatology.

I am referring here to James Stuart Russell's infamous book The Parousia. This is the most famous defense of full preterism. It really is an incredibly nasty book of exhaustively stupid interpretations.

Spurgeon did not agree with the full preterist position, but he said that the book was interesting and harmless. But it's actually nauseating and dangerous.

7 posted on 09/12/2002 7:56:16 AM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: xzins; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Matchett-PI; CCWoody; RnMomof7; Jerry_M; Jean Chauvin; BibChr; ...
My bottom-line point is that we'd better follow Sola Scriptura. Spurgeon's premillennialism is actually a trap for carnal Christians--i.e., for those who don't really follow Sola Scriptura.


8 posted on 09/12/2002 8:00:31 AM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: the_doc; fortheDeclaration; Woodkirk; drstevej; jude24
The meaning of our text, as opened up by the context, is most evidently, if words mean anything, first, that there shall be a political restoration of the Jews to their own land and to their own nationality; and then, secondly, there is in the text, and in the context, a most plain declaration, that there shall be a spiritual restoration, a conversion in fact, of the tribes of Israel.

This is the part that struck me.

This is dispensational....at least aligned with the fact that promises were made to Israel that must be honored.

9 posted on 09/12/2002 8:13:34 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: xzins
"Isn't bible study the point of these threads?"

It should be plain for all to see that there are those among us who esteem themselves sufficiently that they feel no need for further study.

To the A-mil, and similar Israel replacers, I wish to remind you of Isaiah ch. 11

" 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
11:9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea."

Does anyone seriously believe that these conditions exist? - These are still future events, before the great war over Jerusalem.
10 posted on 09/12/2002 8:28:21 AM PDT by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It's obvious that Charles Haddon Spurgeon was a premillennialist.

LOL. I can think of a few around here who will not appreciate you saying that about their hero!

I do appreciate you starting eschatology threads now and then. They are always interesting reads.... and gives us the opportunity to clarify differences and agreements we have with others.

11 posted on 09/12/2002 8:42:17 AM PDT by kjam22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; fortheDeclaration; Woodkirk; nobdysfool; jude24; the_doc; RnMomof7; ...
Editor, something just dawned on me after I posted to doc a few posts up. I'd copy/pasted this:

The meaning of our text, as opened up by the context, is most evidently, if words mean anything, first, that there shall be a political restoration of the Jews to their own land and to their own nationality; and then, secondly, there is in the text, and in the context, a most plain declaration, that there shall be a spiritual restoration, a conversion in fact, of the tribes of Israel.

And then it hit me.

Spurgeon wrote that in 1865 or so.

Israel was NOT at that point restored to their identity and their land. In fact, that didn't happen until about 80 years AFTERWARDS, and AFTER Spurgeon's death!

Spurgeon was looking to the FUTURE for that event.

And, HALELUJAH!!...It occurred according to the power of God EXACTLY as Spurgeon's PREMILLENIAL view of his beloved BIBLE said it would.

12 posted on 09/12/2002 8:42:45 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kjam22
I do appreciate you starting eschatology threads now and then. They are always interesting reads.... and gives us the opportunity to clarify differences and agreements we have with others

Thanks. I, too, like to discuss the whole bible. Eschatology is part of our bible (a huge part, actually.)

There are all kinds of other topics we haven't touched on these threads.

We've been so hung up on predestination/free will that we haven't even begun to do justice to the vast reservoir of revelation given us in God's Book! Thanks for the kind words.

13 posted on 09/12/2002 8:49:43 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins; drstevej; jude24; Jerry_M; Matchett-PI; OrthodoxPresbyterian
This is dispensational....

Relax. It is also the position of many amills and many postmills.

***

You are starting in the wrong place. You are making the same mistake which Spurgeon made. (Remember: Spurgeon did not know what to make of the position of the heretical full preterists. He really was confused.)

Before you start tackling the details of millennial prophecy, you need to figure out what the millennium IS.

And the passage which defines the millennium is in ONE place in the Bible. And when we let clear Scriptures interpret more obscure Scriptures--which principle, of course, is one of the most important principles of hermeneutics--we discover that John 5 is the clear text which interprets Revelation 20.

Furthermore, John 5 does not merely offer amillennialism as an interpretive option for Revelation 20. Heck, John 5 demands it. John 5 flatly contradicts the premillennial position.

The reason why Spurgeon was so confused--even to the point of endorsing Russell's book as interesting and harmless--is because he never noticed all of the implications of John 5.

14 posted on 09/12/2002 8:50:54 AM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; RnMomof7; BibChr; CCWoody; Wrigley; Jean Chauvin; Dr. Eckleburg
Please see my #14.
15 posted on 09/12/2002 8:55:06 AM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: the_doc; Woodkirk; jude24
There's a whole discussion on the 2 resurrections over on the church/israel thread.

The basic point is that Rev 20 clearly states 2 resurrections that are separated by a thousand years. These control John 5; not the other way around.

And those who hold the Rev 20 view don't have to run around trying to argue that satan is imprisoned (an absurd notion) during the here and now.
16 posted on 09/12/2002 8:55:49 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xzins
"Spurgeon wrote that in 1865 or so."

And it needs to be noted that the commentaries by Darby, and Scofield were written long before the fulfillments occurred, and essentially as they interpreted them.

These were true men of God, who were guided by the Holy Spirit to show the people of their day the correct reading of God's word. - It is the words of their detractors that are a demonic trap.

17 posted on 09/12/2002 8:59:02 AM PDT by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
The heart-rending thing is, if these good brothers read soteriological or Christological passages the same way they read prophetic passages, they'd all be universalistic pantheists -- or worse.

I know from experience. I was in a New Age cult when the Lord saved me in 1973. It was approaching the Scripture along the lines of plain-sense ("literal") hermeneutics that led to my salvation.

When I later learned that there were Christians who approached Biblical prophecy exactly as I had done in my cultic days ("'Israel' doesn't really mean 'Israel' -- no no, it has a deeper meaning...."), I was shocked.

Guess I still am.

Dan
Biblical Christianity web site

18 posted on 09/12/2002 9:02:26 AM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I find it interesting that a few Calvinists on this thread question Spurgeon on his view of the Millennium, yet rush to use his quotes to support their extremist Calvinism views.

Personally, I think Spurgeon was wise to note that time spent pondering the millennium would be better used to spread the Gospel.
19 posted on 09/12/2002 9:04:12 AM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: the_doc
I don't see what you seem to in John 5, but it is a fact that the Gospel was written many years before the Apocalypse, and it is Rev. 20 that interprets the ideas of John 5, not the reverse.
20 posted on 09/12/2002 9:04:51 AM PDT by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 2,721-2,722 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson