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 previous 1-20 ... 2,301-2,3202,321-2,3402,341-2,360 ... 2,721-2,722 next last
To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
If Jesus inherits the curse how can He inherit the throne of David..or is God a liar?
2,321 posted on 10/15/2002 10:44:09 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2320 | View Replies]

To: The Grammarian
Actually, I was rather under the impression that at least part of the reason that you wrote in the style that you did was because you were trying to offend your opponents in debate. I'm actually happy to hear that that isn't the case.

No it isn't. I am not deliberately trying to offend my opponents in Debate. As I said before, my usual personal preference is that I don't offend my opponents in Debate.

I just don't necessarily care if my opponents take personal offense (as long as I know in my own soul that I have not deliberately tried to offend them).

That's a very different thing.

It may be solipsist of me (a charge I've never denied anyway), but it's certainly not any active malice on my part.

Out of curiosity, what exactly made you think I was a Romanist?

I don't remember off the top of my head... probably a long-forgotten mis-reading of some old argument of yours. Whatever it was, I'll stipulate that my impression was mistaken and happily proffer an apology.

2,322 posted on 10/15/2002 10:50:24 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2319 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
When I posted a post with that assertion on it you mocked and discounted it..when others have said it you mocked and discounted it...Now you wish to adopt it? 2318 posted on 10/15/02 10:33 PM Pacific by RnMomof7

Where and when?

Citation, please. I've honestly NO idea what Post you are talking about.

2,323 posted on 10/15/2002 10:51:15 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2318 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Please OP that discussion went on for a long time ..I recently reposted it as doc brought it up

You mocked and said that it was not a blood curse it was a curse on all desendents therefore Jesus would be under the same curse

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/749331/posts?page=677#677
2,324 posted on 10/15/2002 11:03:43 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2323 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; jude24; the_doc; CCWoody
If Jesus inherits the curse how can He inherit the throne of David..or is God a liar? 2321 posted on 10/15/02 10:44 PM Pacific by RnMomof7

Because the Jeconiah Curse DOES NOT "close" the Descent of Solomon, and its everlasting inheritance of the Davidic Throne. It can't. The Solomonic Descent is everlasting. The Solomonic Claim to the Davidic Throne is everlasting. (II Samuel 12:12-17, I Chronicles 17: 11-14, I Chronicles 22:10).

The Jeconiah Curse does not abrogate the everlasting Promise of the Davidic Throne to the Solomonic House. It can't.

The Jeconiah Curse qualifies the Rights of the Solomonic House... specifically in the SAME WAY that God qualified His Promises to Solomon: in regard to the Kingdom in the Land.

(See for example Xzins' #2242, which blew up in his face -- per my #2274).

The Jeconiah Prophecy does NOT deny that the Descent of Solomon will continue. It stipulates that Jeconiah WILL IN FACT father a Descent -- right there in the Prophecy!

But the Jeconiah Prophecy (in keeping with the "Land-Kingdom conditionality" of I Kings 9:4-7) forbids the Royal Sons of the Solomonic House from ever again establishing the Throne of David in old Jerusalem of Judah (Jeremiah 22:30) on This Earth (Jeremiah 22:28).

Which means that the PreMillenial position is Biblically illegal.

Jesus has established the Throne of David now -- in the Courts of New Jerusalem forever.


2,325 posted on 10/15/2002 11:06:27 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2321 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; jude24; the_doc; CCWoody
Please OP that discussion went on for a long time ..I recently reposted it as doc brought it up. You mocked and said that it was not a blood curse it was a curse on all desendents therefore Jesus would be under the same curse

I mock the foolishness of presuming that the Jeconiah Curse is a "blood curse" which is arbitrarily differentiated from the Promises of Solomon to serve the desperate needs of PreMillenial Eschatology.

The SAME Hebrew Word, Zera', descent, establishes the Terms of BOTH the Solomonic Prophecy AND the Jeconiah Prophecy.

Which therefore makes BOTH prophecies Part and Parcel of the same SOLOMONIC DESCENT.

I.E....

Which means that the PreMillenial position is Biblically illegal.

2,326 posted on 10/15/2002 11:11:09 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2324 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
But all in all, if we don't at least give jude24 credit for his willingness to consider and contemplate our arguments (see Jude's #2219 and his #2220 and his #2223 and his #2258 and his #2269 and his #2276), then I think we would be guilty of being insufficiently charitable towards him.

Not a correction, just a request for credit being given where it is due.

I think I will ignore both of you kids (grin).

2,327 posted on 10/15/2002 11:53:15 PM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2306 | View Replies]

To: the_doc
I think you are arrogant and OP talks out of both sides of his mouth
2,328 posted on 10/15/2002 11:58:17 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2327 | View Replies]

To: the_doc
And one more think...you started this so if you guys end up looking like fools it is your fault not ours...
2,329 posted on 10/15/2002 11:59:20 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2327 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; jude24
I just don't have unlimited patience.

This stuff is not that hard. Both of you need to be more thoughtful.

This stuff is not that hard. Both of you should have abandoned premillennialism by now.

This stuff is not that hard.

I don't intend to flag either one of you any more on this thread.

2,330 posted on 10/16/2002 12:22:38 AM PDT by the_doc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2328 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; RnMomof7; drstevej; lockeliberty; JesseShurun
Come on OP, you know that the Church/Israel debate is the heart of the entire discussion. It's been going on for years. You think that Jeconiah's curse supercedes promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?

What were the borders of the country promised?

Why is the Church clearly held distinct from Israel in the New Testament?

Why does Paul say, "I wish myself accursed for my BRETHREN...Israel?"

Why does Paul enter into purification rites before entering the Temple and insist that no gentiles had accompanied him into the Temple?

Why? Because there was still a separate requirement for Jews that did not include Genitiles. Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians are "one in Christ" Jesus, they are united in the Church, but Israel still has a separate identity and a special role and will still have its promises fulfilled.

2,331 posted on 10/16/2002 3:46:33 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2305 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody; xzins
I guess that fortheDeclaration, acting just like a God hating Tare, is calling the Lord a liar. Do any of the other PreMillennialists want to call the Lord a liar today?

No, I am saying that the Lord is not ruling now. The Father is in the process of putting all his enemies under his feet.

Are things being done on earth as they are in heaven according to God's will (Matt.6:10)

BTW, don't think that I am speaking to you again ftd. I just find it interesting that you are boasting that the scripture xzins cited and I referenced a lie. I thought I'd point it out to the rest of the PreMills.

I have no idea what that last statement even means! LOL!

2,332 posted on 10/16/2002 4:54:29 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2301 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; xzins
O-Popy has flipped his lid!

Jesus Christ is not an heir to the Solomon line He is not a son of that house!

Maybe O-POPY can show from the geneology of Matthew how Jesus Christ could be an heir in the line of Solomon.

This is one of the infamous ergo's which only he understands!

The Jeconiah curse is prove that Joseph was not the real father of Christ.

2,333 posted on 10/16/2002 5:08:17 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2308 | View Replies]

To: the_doc; RnMomof7; OrthodoxPresbyterian
I'm not going to ditch premillenialism just to win your approval.

I'll listen to any scriptural arguments put forward (and OP has put forward a good one), but I will not be pushed into anything.

You may consider this stubborness, but its not. It's caution.

I remember 5 years ago, someone told me an anassailable proof that Calvinism was heretical. I believed him, too, until a little over a year ago. Wish I had been a little more careful then....

Bear in mind: this is something that could have far-reaching implications, too. You're basically asking me to abandon the Plymouth Brethren. If I must, I must. But that is not something I will do lightly.

2,334 posted on 10/16/2002 5:09:30 AM PDT by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2330 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
The promise made was to David and that his house would be established forever, not Solomon. (2Sam.7:16)

The condition given to Solomon in 1Kings 9:5-8 have to do with his personal line (which ended with Jeconiah) and the conditional promises regarding blessing and cursing in Deut 28.

However, the promise to David was unconditional as was the land that was promised to the Jews.

Thus, Isaiah predicts two returns to the Land,(Isa.11:11) one after the Babylon captivity and the a second one after the Roman dispersion (which is why Israel is now in the land).

She was cast out of the land twice and is back for the final time (Amos 9:15)

2,335 posted on 10/16/2002 5:25:11 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2274 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
That elimates Jesus being a legal heir to the Throne of David..It would make 1)God a liar ..(he lied to David) 2)Make Jesus an illegitmate King To the others have I mis stated OP's position?

That is also how I understand his argument.

2,336 posted on 10/16/2002 5:26:00 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2308 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
**As a Legal and Rightful adoptive Descendant, Jesus rightfully inherits ALL of the Promises made to the Solomonic Descent.**

I'm new here, so I'm sorry if you've discussed this before, but may I ask a question?

How can Jesus inherit anything that is only His to give?

Also, if he inherited the promises as an adopted son, would he not also have inherited the sin nature (or is that blood thing?)?

Thanks.
2,337 posted on 10/16/2002 5:26:54 AM PDT by Josephs Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2315 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; RnMomof7; lockeliberty; jude24; ksen; Woodkirk; Josephs Dad; kjam22; ...
However, the promise to David was unconditional as was the land that was promised to the Jews. Thus, Isaiah predicts two returns to the Land,(Isa.11:11) one after the Babylon captivity and the a second one after the Roman dispersion (which is why Israel is now in the land). She was cast out of the land twice and is back for the final time (Amos 9:15)

Precisely. Which is why OP's error deprives Jesus of rightful kingship and Israel of rightful promises. IN trying to assume his victory in the debate on the millennium he has cast aside KING Jesus, son of David, and he has cast aside the promises to the patriarch about the promised land.

How can any amillennialist follow OP's line of reasoning? As RnMom and Lockeliberty have pointed out it's so seriously flawed that it calls Jesus' rightful claim into question. If that is so, then Jesus is not the one who fulfilled the prophecies. OP's argument delegitimizes Jesus' claim to be Messiah.

2,338 posted on 10/16/2002 5:34:45 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2335 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Sorry, mentioned you so should have pinged you to 2338
2,339 posted on 10/16/2002 5:44:11 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2338 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
You continue to demonstrate that you are a spiritual Tare with your behavior and the things that you post. I will therefore, follow the advice of my Lord and not respond to you. Why? Well, at the end of this age of sowing, He will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend and burn them.

This is basic gospel stuff, which you deny.
2,340 posted on 10/16/2002 6:12:59 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2332 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,301-2,3202,321-2,3402,341-2,360 ... 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