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.
The claim is easy to make. The hard part is backing it up with actual quotes from these folks that can reasonably be read "dispensationally". No one has successfully done that yet to my knowledge.
= = = =
To the best of my memory, Alamo-Girl has done that 2-3 times on FR.
I think Holland is well aware of that but for some reason seems to live in denial of that fact.
The greek is oikonomia and it means "administration." It speaks of God's policy regarding dealing with humans.
OH, DEAR!??
YOU MEAN . . . uhhhh . . . whispering . . .
DISPENSATIONALISM
is NOT a 4 letter word?
OH, MY!
Don't tell Holland. Not sure they could handle it well.
LOL.
I'm thankful for your thread and have been following all the comments. Just wanted to say thanks!
You're welcome, .30. Pray for us.
With thanksgiving!
From your earlier post:
"If one does a word search for wrath in the bible it is alway associated with the great and dreadful day of the Lord, which is the return of Christ to earth.Tribulation is not associated with God it is always associated with man with this present world system."
I was only going off that fairly plain statement. Now you wish to limit the criteria, that is fine, but no doubt you will object when someone points out that "tribulation" doesn't always come from man and "wrath" doesn't always come from God. And thus your parameters for what happens in the future "seven year tribuation period" are limited by your arbitrary definitions.
E.g., • Tertullian 210 AD • Marcion 4.12 - Jesus annulled the Sabbath.
The Christian church, for 2000 years, has believed that Jesus annulled the seventh day sabbath of the Jewish economy. There have been pockets of adventists and others that have taught otherwise, but they were a distinct minority.
Or are you merely confusing the use of the word "dispensation" with "dispensationalism". It's a common problem. That why I have chosen to use the term "economy" rather than "dispensation". They convey the same biblical thought.
I also find it amusing that Origen gets included in your list. Isn't he the notorious allegorizer that "literalist" dispensationalists are often railing against? If Origen came to his "dispensational" conclusions by applying an allegorizing method of viewing Scripture, do you really want to count him in your group?
"B-D, would YOU agree that Christ is reigning as King over the universe or, do you believe as our Pre-dispensationlist friends do that Christ is waiting for some "future" event in time to reign?"
Rather than take up a lot of space in explaining my position concerning the Session of Christ and His reign, look at this site where Gill does an exceptional job. Especially look at Book V chapters 8, 13, 14.
http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/gills_archive.htm
Excellent post, great scripture. Thanks JM.
lol. That's just like a lawyer -- when you ask for a clear answer, they send you to the stacks.
It seems all this millennium questioning comes down to those who say Christ is waiting to reign on earth, and those who say Christ is reigning today on earth as well as in heaven.
And when that's the choice, I don't understand those in the former category. What's to be lost by believing Christ reigns today? By believing the Gospel is doing its work by the light of the Holy Spirit exactly as God has determined and that the Gospel will triumph over the world's lies?
I think Christians are often unaware just how much the world conspires to tie their hands. And yet they still say they believe Christ broke their bonds. They still remember their own conversion. They still preach to others so that they might believe.
Well, that's called progress. We acknowledge God's refining hand when it has actually changed our own lives. We need to recognize this pattern and glory in it. Two steps forward; one step back. Not the other way around.
I think the fascination with all the futurist millennium stuff is men's carnal minds seeking pleasure in puzzles and word games and things unknown. If we realized just how much of this is gnostic and Kabbalistic, we'd flee the interview and run back to Scripture's promise that Jesus Christ has "spoiled principalities and powers; he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it" (Col. 2:15).
Come on now. The last time I posted an involved answer you protested it was too long and should have its own thread. Now I post one of your own sites to give an answer and you complain. Sheesh, can't satisfy you even when I agree with one of your own. By the way, Gill's commentary on the Session is a classic. I was discussing this with my father Sunday afternoon and at his age he still gets tears when discussing the mediatorial work of Christ.
A curious thing happened at church this past weekend in which the leader ask our group if they felt Christ was reigning on earth. I was surprise to hear the concensus of the group was that Christ was not reigning on earth.
This raised in my mind a question that I've seen posted by Gill (per your reference), Piper and others about Christ reigning spiritually but not physically. What's that suppose to mean? As we know from scripture, the demons are subjected to Christ. If so, what is left in this world physically that God does not have control over?
WRITE THE BOOK!
A father/son Christian story is under-represented. Instead we get the goofy "Field of Dreams." I think men are longing for stories about father/sons.
Write one.
My own?
I think Gill covers that in his sermon on the Session of Christ. We tend to overlook the fact that in His position as glorified humanity He is "seated at the right hand" of God, localized in that position in His mediatorial function, while being God He rules over all, including creation. He is the eternal King over all.
How do you arive at a 7 year tribulation period?
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.