Posted on 09/09/2006 4:04:19 AM PDT by xzins
The second foundation stone supporting the pretribulational rapture of the church is the biblical doctrine known as premillennialism. Premillennialism teaches that the second advent will occur before Christ's thousand-year reign from Jerusalem upon earth. In the early church, premillennialism was called chiliasm, from the Greek term meaning 1,000 used six times in Revelation 20:2-7. Charles Ryrie cites essential features of premillennialism as follows: "Its duration will be 1,000 years; its location will be on this earth; its government will be theocratic with the personal presence of Christ reigning as King; and it will fulfill all the yet-unfulfilled promises about the earthly kingdom."1
Premillennialism is contrasted with the postmillennial teaching that Christ will return after He has reigned spiritually from His throne in heaven for a long period of time during the current age, through the church, and the similar amillennial view that also advocates a present, but pessimistic, spiritual reign of Christ. Biblical premillennialism is a necessary foundation for pretribulationalism since it is impossible for either postmillennialism or amillennialism to support pretribulationism.
Without question, premillennialism was the earliest and most widely held view of the earliest centuries of the church. The dean of church historians, Philip Schaff has said, "The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene Age [A.D. 100-325] is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, . . . a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papia, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius."2 German historian Adolph Harnack has said, "First in point of time came the faith in the nearness of Christ's second advent and the establishing of His reign of glory on the earth. Indeed it appears so early that it might be questioned as an essential part of the Christian religion. . . . it must be admitted that this expectation was a prominent feature in the earliest proclamation of the gospel, and materially contributed to its success. If the primitive churches had been under the necessity of framing a 'Confession of Faith,' it would certainly have embraced those pictures by means of which the near future was distinctly realized."3
Premillennialism began to die out in the established Catholic Church during the life of Augustine (A.D. 354-430). Ryrie summarizes this change: "With the union of church and state under Constantine, the hope of Christ's coming faded some. The Alexandrian school of interpretation attacked the literal hermeneutic on which premillennialism was based, and the influence of the teaching of Augustine reinterpreted the concept and time of the Millennium."4 Premillennialism has always survived, even when it has not been dominant or widely known. Chiliasm, though suppressed by the dominant Catholic Church, nevertheless survived through "underground" and "fringe" groups of Christians during the 1,000 year mediaeval period. During the Reformation, Anabaptists and Hugenots helped to revive premillennialism, until it was adopted on a wide scale by many Puritans during the Post-Reformation era.
The last 200 years have seen the greatest development and spread of premillennialism since the early church. Starting in the British Isles and spreading to America, consistent premillennialism, known as dispensational premillennialism, has come to dominate the Evangelical faith. This form of premillennialism has given rise to the most rigorous application of the literal hermeneutic which has lead to the championing of pretribulational premillennialism in our own day.
Even though the strongest support for premillennialism is found in the clear statement of Revelation 20:1-7, where six times Christ's kingdom is said to last 1,000 years, the Old Testament and the rest of the New Testament also support a premillennial understanding of God's plan for history. Jeffrey Townsend has given an excellent summary of the biblical evidence for premillennialism in the following material:
Developed from the Old Testament
"The OT covenants with Abraham and David established unconditional promises of an Israelite kingdom in the ancient land ruled by the ultimate Son of David. The OT prophets, from the earliest to the latest, looked forward to the establishment of this kingdom. Its principle features will include: regathering of the Jews from the nations to the ancient land, mass spiritual regeneration of the Jewish people, restoration of Jerusalem as the principal city and her Temple as the spiritual center of the world, the reign of David's ultimate Son over the twelve reunited tribes dwelling securely in the land as the pre-eminent nation of the world. Based on OT Scripture, a this-earthly, spiritual-geopolitical fulfillment of these promises is expected.
Developed from the New Testament
The NT writers do not reinterpret the OT kingdom promises and apply them to the church. Instead the church participates now in the universal, spiritual blessings of the Abrahamic, Davidic, and New Covenants without negating the ultimate fulfillment of the covenant promises to Israel. The NT authors affirm rather than deny the ancient kingdom hope of Israel. Matthew, Luke, and Paul all teach a future for national Israel. Specifically, Acts 1 with Acts 3 establishes that the restoration of the kingdom to Israel takes place at the second coming of Jesus Christ. Romans 11 confirms that at the time of the second advent, Israel will have all her unconditional covenants fulfilled to her. First Corinthians 15 speaks of an interim kingdom following Christ's return but prior to the eternal kingdom of God during which Christ will rule and vanquish all His enemies. Finally, Revelation 20 gives the chronology of events and length of Christ's kingdom on this earth prior to the eternal state.
In sum, the case for premillennialism rests on the fact that the OT promises of an earthly kingdom are not denied or redefined but confirmed by the NT. The basis of premillennialism is not the reference to the thousand years in Revelation 20. That is merely a detail, albeit an important one, in the broad pattern of Scripture. The basis of premillennialism is the covenant-keeping nature of our God, affirmed over and over again in the pages of Scripture. God will do what He has said He will do, for His own glory among the nations. And what He has said He will do is fulfill the Abrahamic, Davidic, and New Covenants to a regathered, regenerated, restored nation of Israel at the second coming of Jesus Christ, and for a thousand years thereafter, prior to the eternal kingdom of God."5
Premillennialism is merely the result of interpreting the whole Bible, Genesis to Revelation, in the most natural way -- literally. Many of the critics admit that if the literal approach is applied consistently to the whole of Scripture, then premillennialism is the natural result. If the Old Testament promises are ever going to be fulfilled literally for Israel as a nation, then they are yet in the future. This is also supportive of premillennialism. Premillennialism also provides a satisfactory and victorious end to history in time as man through Christ satisfactorily fulfills his creation mandate to rule over the world.
Premillennialism is a necessary biblical prerequisite needed to build the later biblical doctrine of the rapture of the church before the seven-year tribulation.
1 Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide To Understanding Biblical Truth (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1986), p. 450.
2 Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (New York: Scribner, 1884),, Vol. 2, p. 614.
3 Adolph Harnack, "Millennium," The Encyclopedia Britannica, Ninth Edition (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1883), XVI, pp. 314-15. Cited in Renald E. Showers, There Really Is A Difference! A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology (Bellmawr, N.J.: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, Inc., 1990), p. 117.
4 Ryrie, Basic Theology, p. 452.
5 Jeffrey L. Townsend, "Premillennialism Summarized: Conclusion" in Edited by Donald K. Campbell & Jeffrey L. Townsend, A Case For Premillennialism: A New Consensus (Chicago: Moody Press, 1992), pp. 270-71.
[He] has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity 2 Timothy 1:9
This particular verse is so critical: it shows that the mind of God is not chaotic, but that He is knowing, purposed, and gracious.
So often we want to divorce his knowledge from His power or vice versa; we want to divorce his power & knowledge from His gracious nature....all of these efforts create some sort of odd being who "can't talk and chew gum at the same time."
Actually God can know, purpose, and love simultaneously. Along this same line, the Creator has given a small glimpse in these human creatures He has designed: We can be decisive, informed, purposed, and compassionate all at the same time.
If all men are sinners without exception (and they are), so is the gift of grace for all men.
Hallelujah, amen! For the Grace of God is Greater than man's sin - "where sin abounded, grace abounded much more," says Romans 5:20
We say with Paul (1 Cor. 15:10)
His grace toward me was not in vain!
AMEN, so well worded! Thank you so much for this reply to me! How I rejoice in this fellowship!
If God "knows" something, that thing will happen. If God wants something else to happen, something else will happen and God will "know" it.
There's been so much written about a correct understanding of "foreknowledge" that I think it comes down to the fact that Arminians would simply "prefer" to believe that God is limited by His foreknowledge of some event, when in truth, God is in control of ALL events.
What God purposed at the moment of creation, will occur. Period.
It seems Arminians keep coming back to their own autonomy; that somehow God has released His grip on reality to permit independent behavior. It is the same instinct of Adam and Eve. The very same, although it's dressed up in words like "free will" and self-determination."
At its heart, election according to God's awareness of our choosing to have faith puts man in the driver's seat and in control of whether or not he receives salvation. It pats man on the back for having the good sense and righteousness to believe when his neighbor is not so clever or pious.
But throughout Scripture we are told all men are fallen and no man seeks God, and that salvation is a gift by God's grace alone through faith in Christ. Faith is the instrument with which God dispenses His grace.
It is all of Him and none of us.
"And when the gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -- Acts 13:48
Ordained to believe; ordained to eternal life by God's holy decree, issued by Him and sent out into the universe at the moment of creation. He does not rule by the sense of direction of His creation; He rules His creation by His hand and will and design.
You miss so much if you do not understand that.
Now if future events are foreknown to God, they cannot by any possibility take a turn contrary to His knowledge. If the course of future events is foreknown, history will follow that course as definitely as a locomotive follows the rails from New York to Chicago. The Arminian doctrine, in rejecting foreordination, rejects the theistic basis for foreknowledge. Common sense tells us that no event can be foreknown unless by some means, either physical or mental, it has been predetermined. Our choice as to what determines the certainty of future events narrows down to two alternatives — the foreordination of the wise and merciful heavenly Father, or the working of blind, physical fate. The Socinians and Unitarians, while not so evangelical as the Arminians, are at this point more consistent; for after rejecting the foreordination of God, they also deny that He can foreknow the acts of free agents. They hold that in the very nature of the case it cannot be known how the person will act until the time comes and the choice is made. This view of course reduces the prophecies of Scripture to shrewd guesses at best, and destroys the historic Christian view of the Inspiration of the Scriptures. It is a view which has never been held by any recognized Christian church. Some of the Socinians and Unitarians have been bold enough and honest enough to acknowledge that the reason which led them to deny God's certain foreknowledge of the future acts of men, was, that if this be admitted it would be impossible to disprove the Calvinistic doctrine of Predestination. Many Arminians have felt the force of this argument, and while they have not followed the Unitarians in denying God's foreknowledge, they have made it plain that they would very willingly deny it if they could, or dared. Some have spoken disparagingly of the doctrine of foreknowledge and have intimated that, in their opinion, it was not of much importance whether one believed it or not. Some have gone so far as to tell us plainly that men had better reject foreknowledge than admit Predestination. Others have suggested that God may voluntarily neglect to know some of the acts of men in order to leave them free; but this of course destroys the omniscience of God. Still others have suggested that God's omniscience may imply only that He can know all things, if He chooses,—just as His omnipotence implies that He can do all things, if He chooses. But the comparison will not hold, for these certain acts are not merely possibilities but realities, although yet future; and to ascribe ignorance to God concerning these is to deny Him the attribute of omniscience. This explanation would give us the absurdity of an omniscience that is not omniscient. When the Arminian is confronted with the argument from the foreknowledge of God, he has to admit the certainty or fixity of future events. Yet when dealing with the problem of free agency he wishes to maintain that the acts of free agents are uncertain and ultimately dependent on the choice of the person,—which is plainly an inconsistent position. A view which holds that the free acts of men are uncertain, sacrifices the sovereignty of God in order to preserve the freedom of men. Furthermore, if the acts of free agents are in themselves uncertain, God must then wait until the event has had its issue before making His plans. In trying to convert a soul, then He would be conceived of as working in the same manner that Napoleon is said to have gone into battle-with three or four plans in mind, so that if the first failed, he could fall back upon the second, and if that failed, then the third, and so on, —a view which is altogether inconsistent with a true view of His nature. He would then be ignorant of much of the future and would daily be gaining vast stores of knowledge. His government of the world also, in that case, would be very uncertain and changeable, dependent as it would be on the unforeseen conduct of men. To deny God the perfections of foreknowledge and immutability is to represent Him as a disappointed and unhappy being who is often checkmated and defeated by His creatures. But who can really believe that in the presence of man the Great Jehovah must sit waiting, inquiring, "What will he do?" Yet unless Arminianism denies the foreknowledge of God, it stands defenseless before the logical consistency of Calvinism; for foreknowledge implies certainty and certainty implies foreordination. Speaking through the prophet Isaiah the Lord said: "I am God, and there is none like me; declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure," Isaiah 46:10. "Thou understandest my thoughts afar off," said the psalmist, 139:2. He "knoweth the heart," Acts 15:8. "There is no creature that is not manifest in His sight; but all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of Him with whom we have to do," Hebrews 4:13...""The Arminian objection against foreordination bears with equal force against the foreknowledge of God. What God foreknows must, in the very nature of the case, be as fixed and certain as what is foreordained; and if one is inconsistent with the free agency of man, the other is also. Foreordination renders the events certain, while foreknowledge presupposes that they are certain.
It continues; it's a chapter well worth your time to read.
Thank you both so much for sharing your wisdom and insights!
Amen.
The Atonment made salvation possible for all men, not necessary.
All men are born dead in sins.
If they were elect from eternity they would be saved from eternity, not born into sin.
That is not dealing with the problem.
If you are in Christ from eternity, then how are you born into Adam?
Did you jump out of Christ?
The basis for eternal security is being in Chirst, so how is one in Christ before one is born and then is born in the 1st Adam?
Once inside of Christ you cannot get out, unless you believe as the Armianian's do, that you can lose your salvation.
And so, by the inward working of the Holy Spirit, we miraculously sin less and less.
Really?
No volition involved? (Rom.6-7)
And if the Spirit limits some sinning why not all?
And if the Spirit limits some sinning little by little, why not all at once?
Certainly it is not God's will that we sin so why does God allow it and how do we resist God's will in doing so?
All as God ordained, determined, willed, decreed, planned, executed, written in the indelible blood of Christ for all time. God's "foreknowledge" is just a cop-out, clinging to some phantom righteousness within us which God responds to. It's just not there. All men sin all the time.
God's foreknowledge is as real as His Predestination.
In fact, God's Predestination is based on it.
The only reason 'all' men are not saved is because they refuse the free gift of salvation That philosophy assaults the Holy Spirit to the heart by saying the work of the Holy Spirit can be refused by men. I just don't recognize that Holy Spirit anywhere in Scripture.
The Holy Spirit can be refused by men, as Stephen himself says in Acts 7.
You and I refuse the Holy Spirit everytime we sin and that is why God gave us 1Jn.1:9.
Now don't tell me you don't sin!
Or, are you sinning because God wants you to do so?
God saves whom He will, solely based on His good pleasure, according to His determinant plan for salvation, ordained before the foundation of the world, for His glory alone. If God wanted all men saved, all men would be saved.
God does want all men to be saved (1Tim.2:4), and all are not saved because God gave man the choice.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
Yes, and the 'things' in context with that chapter are referring to doctrines dealing with spirtual growth, not salvation.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ" -- 1 Corinthians 2:14-16
Yes, and the mind of Christ states that God wants all men to be saved, nor does He take pleasure in the death of the wicked.
Did you obtain "the mind of Christ" on your own? Or even with a "little" help from God? Or was God 100% responsible for putting Christ within you and giving you a new heart with which to know Him?
I received the Indwelling Holy Spirit when I believed in Christ (1Cor.6).
The Holy Spirit explains scripture through the use of Pastors and teachers, with the scriptures (KJB) as the final authority (Gen.40:8, Ps.119:18, 30, Eph.4:11-12)
That means that Scripture cannot contradict other scripture which Calvinism ignores.
Clear scripture interpets more complex scripture and the clearest scriptures in the Bible are Jn.3:16 and 3:36.
All theology must begin with those clear scripture as it's foundation, not with Eph.1:4, or Rom.8:29-30.
Your volition is involved when you reject God's will and sin, and if you deny that then you are you are contradicting what Paul wrote in Rom.6:1-2
As for being born of the Spirit, what does that have do with anything we are discussing?
You still live in the flesh and have to yield to one or the other and that yieldness is based on your will.
All men are the sons of Adam, lost in sin.
Some men were ordained by God to salvation by Christ's atonement through nothing in themselves, through grace alone.
That's exactly what Scripture tells us.
"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -- Acts 13:48
I didn't write it. I just read it and believe it.
God does want all men to be saved
If God wanted all men saved, all men would be saved.
Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace" -- Ephesians 1:4-7"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
It's all about grace, ftd. And you're missing the connection. You're plugging into men's own righteousness when it is the righteousness of Christ which saves us, according to God's will for His glory, and not our own.
"That which is born of Spirit is Spirit," the teaching continues. Therefore that which has been born in flesh, being born again in Spirit, evidences election.
But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.We are not born with the Spirit of Christ, but with the flesh of Adam. In order to obtain the Spirit of Christ we must be born again.
~Romans 8:9
No man evidences election without being born again. This is an "in time" event. Just as Christ was "crucified from the foundation of the world" and yet appeared in time approximately two thousand years ago, so we who "today" are born again, are demonstrating that we were actually crucified with Christ from the foundation of the world.
Jesus makes demand on all mankind: "You must be born again."
(I'm currently reading John Piper's new book on What Jesus Demands from the World, and he explains these demands very well.)
Some are born again - they lay down their lives and partake of the life of Christ Jesus! Some are not born again - they refuse to die to their first life, the life of Adam.
That certain men are not born again does not relieve them of the duty to obey the command!
That any men at all are born again brings glory to God through Jesus Christ!
The Atonment made salvation possible for all men, not necessary.
Atonement is indeed necessasary!
"Apart from the shedding of blood there is not remission of sin (Heb. 9:22)."
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved (Acts 16:31)."
"By faith in the Name of Jesus was this man made well (Acts 3:16)."
"You must be born again (John 3:6)."
If one is saved in eternity, how does one get out of Christ and into Adam? Second, the Atonement made salvation possible for all men, but it did not make it 'necessary' for any man, in other words, every man has to accept the Atonement to be saved.
The Atonement makes salvation necessary for no man, it is a potential for every man.
Thus, the 'elect' were not saved in eternity by the Atonement, but rather God foresaw who would accept it and get into Christ.
The Calvinists believe that God decided who was going to be saved and it was those whose sins were paid for at the Cross, not the sins of the world (1Jn.2:2)
Thus, for them, the Atonement makes salvation 'necessary' for the already chosen elect (they must be saved since Christ died for their sins)
Not according to Calvinism, which says that they are saved (elect) from eternity
Some men were ordained by God to salvation by Christ's atonement through nothing in themselves, through grace alone.
And when did this ordaining happen according to Calvinism-in eternity.
Thus, the Calvinist would have the elect saved in eternity by the Decree of God, and yet lost in time, only to be saved again
Now, if you want to use ordaining as it should be used-appointed, then you can say that God foresaw who would believe in time and appointed them to eternal life based on that pre-foreseen faith.
They could not have been saved in eternity by any Decree that God made.
I notice also, that you have yet to deal with Romans 5.
So, if 'all' have been into Adam, as Romans 5 says, what about this 'greater grace' that Christ gave, came upon all men unto justification of life?
That's exactly what Scripture tells us. "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." -- Acts 13:48 I didn't write it. I just read it and believe it. God does want all men to be saved If God wanted all men saved, all men would be saved.
No, God doesn't want you to sin, but you do, now don't you?
"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace" -- Ephesians 1:4-7 It's all about grace, ftd. And you're missing the connection. You're plugging into men's own righteousness when it is the righteousness of Christ which saves us, according to God's will for His glory, and not our own.
Oh, stop with the Calvinist nonsense.
Faith is without works as stated in Rom.4.
Grace is never about not having a will to make a choice, but in God providing the choices.
What you want to ignore is clear scriptures that state that God wants all men to be saved (1Tim.2:4), died for all men (1Jn.2:2, Heb.2:9) and draws all men to Him (Jn.12:32)
Calvinism is cultic in its refusal to compare scripture with scripture and in its rejection of Sola Scriptura based on a philosophical premise that opposes what Scripture clearly teaches-God is love (1Jn.4:8)
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.