Replies

Without question, premillennialism was the earliest and most widely held view of the earliest centuries of the church.

I wouldn't necessarily make this assumption but, if so, so what? The early church fathers held erroneous views about many things (E-u-c-h-a-r-i-s-t?). Would Charles Rylie go on record as saying he believes in transubstantiation because Iraeneous did? It's a very weak argument. (I won't bring up my other argument.)

For the first 300 years of the early church the fathers never recorded the basic systematic theology of the church because they were too busy evangelizing. I know. I've looked. The author would like us to think the late date of other views is a bad thing (and I don't believe they were non-existent) but actually some of our greatest theology of the church was finally pulled together and articulated around 300-400AD.

Paul chastised the Thessalonians for their "ignorant" views of the "last days" and this certainly predates the church fathers. I wouldn't base my entire argument on what the majority of the early church fathers believe. Otherwise we're worshiping in the wrong church.

The point remains that premillennialism was the earliest view of the church. Peter and Paul were among the earliest leaders of the church. As you said, evangelism was the earliest mission of the church.

Because there were later theological ideas does not negate the earliest ideas.

And it certainly is not true that premillennialism is only a recently developed view.

The author would like us to think the late date of other views is a bad thing (and I don't believe they were non-existent) but actually some of our greatest theology of the church was finally pulled together and articulated around 300-400AD.

Right. It's like the debate over the Textus Receptus vs. the minority text. Just because something may predate something else does not make it more truthful.

And as pointed out, there was plenty of error in those first 300-400 years floating around.

Both premil and postmil POVs existed in the early church. Just like now.

The truth, however, has not changed. The victory was won on the cross. Christ reigns today over heaven and earth. And one day at the end of time He will return in glory. We have no idea when that will be, but we are told to keep our houses in order for His return.

Life is for the living. God instructs us to be fruitful and preach His word, warning us not to foolishly look to the skies to ponder mysteries known only to God.

"The author would like us to think the late date of other views is a bad thing (and I don't believe they were non-existent) but actually some of our greatest theology of the church was finally pulled together and articulated around 300-400AD."

Right, and don't forget that "johnny-come-lately" Reformed Theology that was pulled together and articulated in the mid 16th century and who could ever forget that God given Dispensationalism that was articulated in the beginning of the 17th century although there were whispers of it in some of the persecuted sects in the 12th and 13th centuries. So, late does not mean fake (I looked for something that rhymed with late and that was the closest I got)!

Paul chastised the Thessalonians for thinking they had missed the Rapture.

He did not deny the Rapture (which he discussed in 1st Thessalonians) but explained certain events needed to occur first, like the apostasy of the Church.