Posted on 01/13/2005 8:10:49 AM PST by Rutles4Ever
(AGI) - Vatican City, 12 Jan - The Pope commented today on the Apocalypse before the 7,000 people attending the General Papal Audience today in the Nervi Hall, indicating that the fight between good and evil, personified by Satan, is a very hard one, as shown by the manifold violence and injustice in the world today, however the outcome is certain, evil will be vanquished. Pope John Paul II explained, "God and the Lamb, Christ, surrounded by the 'Council of the Crown', are judging human history in good and evil, but showing us however the ultimate end in salvation and glory. The songs which are found in the Apocalypse and which serve to illustrate the issue of divine glory which regulates the flux, often disconcerting, of the tide of human events". Of great significance is the first part of the hymn intoned by the 24 ancients who seem to incarnate the chosen people in their two historic stages, the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve apostles of the Church. The Pope continued, Satan, the original adversary, who accused our brothers in the heavenly court, has now been cast down from heaven and therefore no longer has great power. He knows he has not much time left because history is about to see a radical turning point in freedom from evil and therefore he is reacting full of great fury. And then the resurrected Christ will rise up, whose blood is the principle of salvation and who received from the Father royal power over the entire universe, in Him are centred salvation, strength and the kingdom of our God. In his victory are associated the Christian martyrs who chose the path of the cross, not yielding to evil and it virulence, but delivering themselves to the Father and uniting themselves to the death of Christ by means of a testimony of donation and courage which brought them to give up life in order to die". He concluded, "the words of the Apocalypse regarding those who have vanquished Satan and evil through the blood of the Lamb, echo also in the splendid prayer attributed to the Christian martyr Simeon, from Seleucia-Ctesifonte in Persia, 'I will receive life without pain, worry, anguish, persecutor, persecuted, oppressor, oppressed, tyrant or victim, there I will see no threat of king, or terror of prefects, no-one will quote me in court or terrorise me and no-one will drag me or scare me". (AGI) . 121425 GEN 05
Old Testament prophets had an amazing responsibility - they were to speak and write the words that had absolute divine authority. They could say, "Thus says the Lord" and the words that followed were the very words of God.
In the New Testament there were also people who spoke and wrote God's very words and had them recorded in Scripture, but Jesus no longer calls them "prophets", but uses the term "apostles". The apostles are the NT counterpart to the OT prophets. It is the apostles, not the prophets, who have authority to write the words of NT Scripture. [1Cor.2:23; 2Cor.13:3; Gal.1:8-9,11-12; 1Thess.2:13, 4:8,15; 2Pet.3:2]
When the apostles want to establish their unique authority they never appeal to the title "prophet", but rather call themselves "apostles". [Rom.1:1; 1Cor.1:1; 9:1-2; 2Cor.1:1; 11:12-13; 12:11-12; Gal.1:1; Eph.1:1; 1Pet.1:1; 2Pet.1:1; 3:2; etc., etc.]
Unlike OT times, in NT times, the Greek word for "prophet" had a very broad range of meanings.
NT "prophets", unlike the "apostles", do not and did not speak with authority equal to Scripture. One, of many examples that could be cited:
"Through the Spirit [the diciples at Tyre] told Paul not to go on to Jerusalem." But Paul disobeyed their "prophecy", which he would never have done if he had considered it to be God's very words - having authority equal to Scripture. [Acts 21:4]
If Paul had thought that "prophecy" equaled God's word in authority, he would not have told the Thessalonians "do not despise prophesying, but test everything [against Scripture]; hold fast what is good". This is something that would never have been said of an Old Testament prophet, or of the authoritative teachings of a NT apostle. [1 Thess.5:19-21]
None of the apostles exhorted the church to "give heed to the prophets in your churches", or to "obey the words of the Lord through your prophets," etc. Instead, they pointed them to the Scriptures.
Paul emphasizes "rightly handling the word of truth" [2Tim.2:15], and the "God-breathed" character of "Scripture" for "teaching", for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." [2Tim.3:16; Jude 3; 2Pet.1:19-20; 3:16].
John tells God's people that TRUTH is already in them: "..the anointing which you have received from God abides in you and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in him." [1John 2:27]
Jesus said the same thing about those that his Father has given him out of the world: John 17:6-10, 17,23.
The preservation and correct assembling of the canon of Scripture was an integral part of the history of redemption itself. Just as God was at work in creation, calling his people Isreal, in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, and in the early work and writings of the apostles, so God was at work in the preservation and assembling together of the books of Scripture for the benefit of his people for the entire church age.
God's greatest revelation to mankind was written down by the apostles.
We have everything we need to know about the life, death and resurrection of Christ, and its meaning for the lives of believers for all time.
No more writings can be added to the Bible after the time of the New Testament.[Heb 1:1-2 Rev.22:18-19]
Only those who don't believe that God is sovereign would doubt his faithfulness to his people and think that he would allow something to be missing from Scripture for almost 2,000 years that he thinks we need to know for obeying him and trusting him fully. The canon of Scripture today is exactly what God wanted it to be, and it will stay that way until Christ returns. Amen.
This is true, and I applaud you for doing your homework. However, a non-dispensational (aka historic) premillennial futurist view of the Revelation was undeniably the position of the earliest Church, in particular those who are most connected to the Apostle John himself (e.g. Papias, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and even enemies like Cerinthius).
Dispensationalism is not so much wrong as it is an overcorrection of the Replacement Theology (Supracessanism, if you prefer) that had dominated the RCC and carried over into the Reform churches for so many centuries. Disp. is correct, in my view, in its understanding that God's promises to the land and natural seed of Israel will be fulfilled exactly as they are written in both the Tanakh and NT instead of merely in spiritual allegory to the Church. However, in the zeal to uphold Israel's promises as given, Dispys unfortunately draw too wide a distinction between Israel and the Church, considering the latter a "mystery" in the OT, and (usually) even positing that God will not directly deal with Israel again until after the Church is taken out of the world (Raptured).
What I would suggest is that we regard the Gentile Church as being neither separate from Israel nor replacing her natural members in those promises specific to Israel (which is a separate issue from individual salvation), but being more of a sibling adopted into another's family. As an adopted child, it is not our right to promote ourselves over the natural seed nor to scorn them (whether or not they are currently in fellowship with the Father), nor to use the freedom the Lord gave us not to have the Jewish Torah culture imposed on us as a condition of adoption or fellowship (Acts 15) as a pretext for condemning those who choose to keep it. Nor can we say that we have replaced the natural children in the Father's will--rather, we have simply been added to it, so that we too can share in it's blessings. Paul warns us in Romans 11 not to arrogate ourselves over the natural branches, even those broken off, for God is able to graft them back in again. Further, he states that after the full number of the Gentiles have been brought into God's Community, the partial blindness will be lifted from Israel, "and so all Israel will be saved, as it is written."
I am no proposing that simply being born Jewish makes one saved, or that keeping the Torah does. Clearly, long before the Torah was given at Sinai, it was faith that was what made men righteous before God, as Paul points out repeatedly from Abraham's example in Genesis 15. However, while salvation through faith is God's greatest blessing, and the prerequisite to recieving all others in any but a temporary fashion in this life, it is not God's only blessing. The land grant of Israel was clearly given to Abraham's natural seed through Isaac in Genesis 15--and that was a unilateral covenant made by God that neither Abraham nor his descendants could break. They could put it on hold through disobedience, but the prophetic Scriptures (and today's reality) show that God has promised to always bring them home again in His own time.
What we most need to recognize is the simple fact that God elects and judges corporate bodies (i.e. nations) just as He does individuals . . . and the Bible is clear that He has elected Israel to be the center of the Messiah's kingdom when He Comes again.
. The land grant of Israel was clearly given to Abraham's natural seed through Isaac in Genesis 15--and that was a unilateral covenant made by God that neither Abraham nor his descendants could break.
_________________________________________________________
Jos 23:11 Take good heed therefore unto yourselves, that ye love the LORD your God.
Jos 23:12 Else if ye do in any wise go back, and cleave unto the remnant of these nations, [even] these that remain among you, and shall make marriages with them, and go in unto them, and they to you:
Jos 23:13 Know for a certainty that the LORD your God will
*** no more drive out [any of] these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, *** until ye perish from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.
Jos 23:14 And, behold, this day I [am] going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that *** not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the LORD your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, [and] *** not one thing hath failed thereof.
Jos 23:15 Therefore it shall come to pass, [that] as all good things are come upon you, which the LORD your God promised you; **** so shall the LORD bring upon you all evil things, until he have destroyed you from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.
Jos 23:16 When ye have transgressed the covenant of the LORD your God, which he commanded you, and have gone and served other gods, and bowed yourselves to them; then shall the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and *** ye shall perish quickly from off the good land which he hath given unto you. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Jos/Jos023.html#14
Jer 11:10 They are turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers, which refused to hear my words; and they went after other gods to serve them: *** the house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken my covenant which I made with their fathers.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Jer/Jer011.html#10 http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Jer/11/10.html
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 NOT according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; *** which my covenant
THEY brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But THIS [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Jer 31:35 Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, [and] the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts [is] his name:
Jer 31:36 If THOSE ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, [then] the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.
Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For *** they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Rom/9/6.html
Rom 9:7 *** Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Rom 9:9 For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son......
Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Rom 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Rom 9:25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
Rom 9:26 And it shall come to pass, [that] in the place where it was said unto them, Ye [are] not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
Rom 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, **** a REMNANT shall be saved:
Rom 9:28 For he will finish the work, and cut [it] short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
Rom 9:29 And as Esaias said before, **** Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.
Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
Rom 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
Rom 9:32 Wherefore? Because [they sought it] not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. **** For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
Rom 9:33 **** As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of ONE, And TO THEY SEED, WHICH IS CHRIST.
Gal 3:17 And this I say, [that] the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance [be] of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one.
Gal 3:21 [Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
Gal 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Gal 3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 ******* And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Gal/Gal003.html#29 http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Gal/3/29.html
' Paul warns us in Romans 11 not to arrogate ourselves over the natural branches, even those broken off, for God is able to graft them back in again'
Rom 11:23 And they also, **** IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.....
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rom/Rom011.html#23
Rom 11:30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
Rom 11:31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
Mar 11:26 But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mar/Mar011.html#26
Rom 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
Rom 11:35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
Rom 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, [are] all things: to whom [be] glory for ever. Amen.
Perhaps this is why:
Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev003.html#9
Rom 11:31 ......that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
Isa 58:1 Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins....... http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Isa/Isa058.html#1
1Ch 22:7 And David said to Solomon, My son, as for me, it was in my mind to build an house unto the name of the LORD my God:
1Ch 22:8 But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, Thou hast shed blood abundantly, and hast made great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight.
1Ch 22:9 Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon [Solomon Means PEACE - see note below], and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days.
1Ch 22:10 He shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I [will be] his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1Ch/1Ch022.html#9
Note: Solomon means PEACE:
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a SON is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called WONDERFUL [*** SEE NOTE BELOW], Counsellor, The mighty GOD, The everlasting FATHER, The PRINCE OF PEACE. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Isa/9/6.html
Isa 9:7 Of the increase of [his] government and peace [there shall be] no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Isa/Isa009.html#top
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Luk/Luk001.html#33 http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Luk/1/33.html
*** NOTE FROM ISAIAH 9:6 ABOVE:
Jdg 13:18 And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it [is] SECRET? http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Jdg/Jdg013.html#18
Leave it to the Danites. The correct word is WONDERFUL!
Hsa 13:9 — O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me [is] thine help. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Hsa/13/9.html
As you probably know:
Jerusalem = "teaching of peace"
1) the chief city of Palestine and capital of the united kingdom and the nation of Judah after the split
Strong's Hebrew for 03389
'I asked Jesus how much He loved me, and He spread His arms wide to the side, revealing the wounds in His hands, and He replied, This much.'
Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jhn 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Jhn/Jhn003.html#16
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Jhn/3/16.html
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of ONE, And TO THY SEED, WHICH IS CHRIST.
Really? That's funny. We find Origen (DIED aprox 275)himself saying that it [Chiliasm/Millenarianism] was "confined to those of the simpler sort."
"This [Chiliasm/Millenarianism] obscure doctrine was probably known to but very few except the fathers of the church, and is very sparingly mentioned by them during the first centuries; and there is reason to believe that it scarcely attained much notoriety, even among the learned Christians, until it was made a matter of controversy by Origen, and then rejected by the greater majority. In fact, we find Origen himself saying that it was confined to those of the simpler sort." (Waddington's History, pg. 56)
"One of the antichrists who afflicted the early church was Cerinthus, the leader of a first-century Judaistic cult. Regarded by the Church Fathers as "the Arch-heretic," and identified as one of the "false apostles" who opposed Paul.
Cerinthus was a Jew who joined the Church and began drawing Christians away from the orthodox faith. He taught that a lesser deity, and not the true God, had created the world (holding, with the Gnostics, that God was much too "spiritual" to be concerned with material reality). Logically, this meant also a denial of the Incarnation, since God would not take to Himself a physical body and truly human personality.
And Cerinthus was consistent: he declared that Jesus had merely been an ordinary man, not born of a virgin; that "the Christ" (a heavenly spirit) had descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism (enabling Him to perform miracles), but then left Him again at the crucifixion. Cerinthus also advocated a doctrine of justification by works in particular, the absolute necessity of observing the ceremonial ordinances of the Old Covenant in order to be saved.
Furthermore, Cerinthus was apparently the first to teach that the Second Coming would usher in a literal reign of Christ in Jerusalem for a thousand years. Although this was contrary to the apostolic teaching of the Kingdom, Cerinthus claimed that an angel had revealed this doctrine to him." (Chapter 12,Paradise Restored)
"At the Council of Ephesus in 431, belief in the millennium was condemned as superstitious." (Clouse, The Meaning of the Millennium, p. 9.)
Epiphanes (315-403): "There is indeed a millennium mentioned by St.John; but the most, and those pious men, look upon those words as true indeed, but to be taken in a spiritual sense." (Heresies, 77:26.)
Eusebius (A.D.325): "This same historian (Papias) also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise certain strange parables of our Lord, and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too fabulous.
In these he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the antiquity of man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as, for instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments." (Book III, Ch. 39)
C.H. Spurgeon (1865) "Those who wish to see the arguments upon the unpopular side of the great question at issue, will find them here; this is probably one of the ablest of the accessible treatises from that point of view. We cannot agree with Mr. Young, neither can we refute him. It might tax the ingenuity of the ablest prophetical writers to solve all the difficulties here started, and perhaps it would be unprofitable to attempt the task. . . (review of Short Arguments about the Millennium; or plain proofs for plain Christians that the coming of Christ will not be pre-millennial; that his reign will not be personal." B. C. Young. In The Sword and Trowel 1:470 (October 1867).
Christ speaks of a 'final day'. He speaks of a singular general judgment and resurrection. He speaks of a single 2nd coming. Acts tells us that the heavens must receive him until the restitution of ALL things. That's the New Heavens and the New Earth!
2 Peter 3 destroys any and all forms of premillennialism - especially when read along side of 1 Corinthians 3.
2 Peter 3 never tells us about any "1000" years.
There is neither Jew nor Greek..." [Gal.3:28, Col 3:11]
Origen was wrong about a lot of things. I invite you to read Irenaeus, Papias, Justin Martyr, Victoranius, and Hippolytus for yourself--they hardly come across as simpletons, despite Origen and Eusebius' slander against them. I could post the quotes for you, but I'm working late tonight, so you'd have to wait for a couple of days for me to pull them if you don't want to do the reading yourself.
Cerinthus was a Jew who joined the Church and began drawing Christians away from the orthodox faith.
Yes, yes, yes, and if you carefully read my post, you'll see that I acknowledge that he was an enemy of the Apostle John. I was hardly holding him up as a model of Christianity. My point was simply that everyone connected to the author of the Apocalypse (and many besides in those early days, like Martyr) was premillennial, which demonstrates that that was the teaching of the Apostle too. Amillennialism came later, as your own quotes demonstrate.
You'll notice that except for Origen, who was mid-third century, all of your quotes come from the fourth and fifth centuries. That hardly demonstrates that amillennialism preceded premillennialism. Indeed, since it was during that period that the Church started merging with the state, I would argue that it demonstrates the later contamination of the original theology as the Church compromised with paganism and Greek philosophy.
For Eusebius, all I can say is that if he was so willing to lie about Papias' connection to John, despite Irenaeus' clear testimony to the contrary, in order to discredit Papias' clear premill POV, then how exactly is that a point in favor of those who attempted to discredit the view by slander in the days of the Constantinian compromises?
The people I cite, on the other hand, are all late-first and early-to-mid seconed century fathers who are very well respected by later scholars. Indeed, Eusebius quotes Irenaeus as authoritative in other matters of history.
And for Spurgeon . . . so what? What has his single opinion, one among many who were far distanced from the man who wrote the Revelation in the first place, have to do with anything?
Most importantly, of course, is what the Bible itself says . . . and the Bible says that those killed by the Beast that is empowered by the Dragon are raised before the Millennium, which in turn occurs after the Lord Jesus Christ defeats the Beast and the False Prophet in the Last Battle, and has the Dragon that empowered them cast into the Abyss for that same period.
Furthermore, the Bible, particularly the Tanakh, speak of a number of events that haven't happened yet and clearly happen after the Lord's Coming, but which also could not happen in a perfect, eternal age in which there was no more death and suffering: All the nations having to go up to Jerusalem to celebrate Sukkot, with rain being withheld if they refuse in Zech. 14, for example. Or the survivors of the Day of the Lord bringing the Jews to Jerusalem by any means that they can in Isa. 66. The rebuilding of the Temple, in which the Prince will oversee the sacrifices in Ezekiel 40-48, and so on.
Amillennialism has no answer to these many passages that speak of Israel's destinty as the seat of the King or of a time when the Son of Man will rule with a rod of iron over the nations from Jerusalem, so it has to either simply ignore them, or else explain them away in absurd fashion as somehow applying to the present age. However, if God cannot keep even His direct promises of earthly blessings to His people Israel, how then can we expect Him to keep His promises of eternal life and adoption to the Church?
"Amillennialism has no answer to these many passages that speak of Israel's destinty as the seat of the King or of a time when the Son of Man will rule with a rod of iron over the nations from Jerusalem, so it has to either simply ignore them, or else explain them away in absurd fashion as somehow applying to the present age. However, if God cannot keep even His direct promises of earthly blessings to His people Israel, how then can we expect Him to keep His promises of eternal life and adoption to the Church?" ~ Buggman
Your questions are easily answered.
Amillennialism is not a "no millennium" viewpoint. The basic idea here is that the "thousand years" described in Revelation 20 is figurative of Christ's spiritual reign in this Gospel Age -- i.e., now.
All the OT promises were fulfilled in Christ; Satan was "bound" at the cross and resurrection of Christ; there is now only one "Israel" -- the Church made up of both Jews and Gentiles; Satan will be "loosed" just before the Second Coming; the gathering of the saints, the resurrection, and Christ's Second Coming are all a simultaneous event, followed immediately by the one general Judgment and then the eternal state (the "new heavens and new earth").
We don't disagree that Scripture speaks of the "millennium", we just disagree as to its meaning.
Below, I have set forth the basis for where what I believe comes from --- BUT NOT UNTIL AFTER I set forth [reiterate] --- FROM WHOM you get the basis for your beliefs.
THIS IS THE GUY WHOSE IDEAS YOU EMBRACE:
"One of the antichrists who afflicted the early church was Cerinthus, the leader of a first-century Judaistic cult. Regarded by the Church Fathers as "the Arch-heretic," and identified as one of the "false apostles" who opposed Paul.
Cerinthus was a Jew who joined the Church and began drawing Christians away from the orthodox faith. He taught that a lesser deity, and not the true God, had created the world (holding, with the Gnostics, that God was much too "spiritual" to be concerned with material reality). Logically, this meant also a denial of the Incarnation, since God would not take to Himself a physical body and truly human personality.
And Cerinthus was consistent: he declared that Jesus had merely been an ordinary man, not born of a virgin; that "the Christ" (a heavenly spirit) had descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism (enabling Him to perform miracles), but then left Him again at the crucifixion. Cerinthus also advocated a doctrine of justification by works in particular, the absolute necessity of observing the ceremonial ordinances of the Old Covenant in order to be saved.
Furthermore, Cerinthus was apparently the first to teach that the Second Coming would usher in a literal reign of Christ in Jerusalem for a thousand years. Although this was contrary to the apostolic teaching of the Kingdom, Cerinthus claimed that an angel had revealed this doctrine to him." (Chapter 12,Paradise Restored)
NOW MY BELIEFS, AND THE BASIS FOR THEM:
The Premillennial view appeals to the traditions of men. It is basically an offshoot of the old Judaic traditions in the law-bound belief in nationalism, earthly Kingdoms, and genealogical glory. When studied carefully, it is both inconsistent, contradictory, and like national Israel before, it continually denies God's fulfillment of Old Testament prophesies (which scripture clearly declare have already been fulfilled).
When God's Word says something is fulfilled (completed), then it's fulfilled. The emphasis of God's Word is on the spiritual nature of Messiah's Kingdom and of those who reign in it. It confirms that we are citizens of that kingdom (now) as prophesied, and we presently reign in Peace, as Kings and Priests unto our God. Not an earthly or political government of Christ in worldly Jerusalem, but a spiritual government in a spiritual city from above (Gal. 4:26). A Government wherein we obey the laws thereof 'in Christ,' who rules over us.
The prevailing view that the historic early church was premillennial is quite misleading. They are applying the name Premillennialism to the historically traditional Old Testament Jewish belief that an earthly Messiah would come to reign in Israel. After the cross, this Old Testament tradition found it's way into some parts of the early Church, as did many other fables.
Blending Old testament Judaic traditions and beliefs of a coming earthly Messiah establishing a political government, with New Testament Christianity - that Messiah reigns 1000 years is an accommodation to old Judaic worldly ideas.
They (as the nation of Israel before them), refused to accept that Messiah had already established His Kingdom in everlasting Peace, and delivered the people from bondage.
In the late 1850's John Nelson Darby put forth a new form of premillennialism, called Dispensationalism. In this was taught that God interacts with man in epochs (periods of time) or dispensations. This view was brought into the mainstream by Cyrus Scofield with the publication of his "Scofield Reference Bible." Many others, getting ideas from his bible, wrote their own conclusions about it, one building on the writings of another, until we have the dispensational doctrine in it's present flavors today. Premillennialism finally gained general recognition among Protestants after the rise of these errors in the first half of the nineteenth century.
In our day, Christians have been told over and over again by these Premillennial writers (and their advocates) that God has a special love for the Jewish race, no matter what evil they might do or how they may continue to deny God's Anointed Christ.
This (besides being in direct contradiction to God's own written Word), makes no biblical sense.
Scripture makes no such claim, as it is written, "they are not all Israel, which are of Israel -Romans 9:6".
There is individual Salvation, not national salvation. The bottom line of this doctrine is that it teaches that a person's racial descent (being Israel) makes them God's Chosen People. i.e., merely by being born, and regardless of lifestyle, faithfulness or obedience. They are chosen people by blood line, or genealogy. Israel (to these theologians) is a matter of race or ethnicity, and not faith in God.
Again, in direct contradiction to all God stands for. The truth is that all Israel is not Israel and all jews are not Jews.
God has declared that Israel will be defined by Him, not the pride of men.
Truly if the captivity of Israel is made free by Christ, then the Kingdom of God has come, and those who wait for another kingdom of Christ, wait in vain.
"The lack of understanding of the scriptures, and the promises concerning the nation of Israel, is what drives doctrines such as Premillennialism to condemn what is obviously Biblical. To these Theologians, the house of Israel, and the house of Judah refers exclusively to the nation of Israel, and the promises of redemption to Israel is yet future. But they are unable to explain how Christ did all His redeeming at the cross, and yet their doctrine declares scripture speaks of Him coming again for a future redemption for Israel to fulfil the prophesy that, "all Israel shall be saved." Is Christ going to the cross a second time to take away sin of Israel? No, all those scriptures were fulfilled, and that lack of acceptance of Christ's word of fulfillment is the root of their error. The answer is in receiving the New Testament explanation of the old. Receiving what is Revealed! All Israel shall Be saved, but it will be all the Israel of God. For God has already explained (to those listening) that ALL Israel (the nation) are not Israel! Therefore, the All Israel could never be the nation. "He who hath an ear, let him hear!' " ~ Tony Warren
Christ speaks of a 'final day'. He speaks of a singular general judgment and resurrection. He speaks of a single 2nd coming.
Acts tells us that the heavens must receive him until the restitution of ALL things.
That's the New Heavens and the New Earth.
2 Peter 3 destroys any and all forms of premillennialism - especially when read along side of 1 Corinthians 3.
2 Peter 3 never tells us about any "1000" years - let alone a "1000 years" after the resurrection.
There is neither Jew nor Greek..." [Gal.3:28, Col 3:11]
Read #232
'Jesus was human when he said these things. Then he had flesh to give. Now he isn't human anymore. Since he is no longer of the flesh, he has shown us how we may symbolically take communion in remembrance of Him.'
Good reply. It makes even more sense to me now, after having read this:
'...Transubstantiation is the doctrine, which claims that Jesus is offered every time the mass is held:
Marvellous dignity of the priests, in their hands as in the womb of the blessed virgin Mary the Son of God becomes incarnate. ***Behold, the power of the priest! ***The tongue of the priest makes God from a morsel of bread, it is more than creating the world.[vi] [[vi] Eucharist Meditations, pp.111 ]
Canon 1: If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a sign, or a figure or force, let him be anathema.[vii] Council of Trent, session 13, Chapter VIII, ratified by Vatican II.
*** The Bible, however clearly states:
***** Because by one sacrifice he has made perfect for ever those who are being made holy. Hebrews 10:14 NIV...'
Clears it up once and for all for me!!! There must be other things going on in the world, but I'm learning too many things on this thread to move on.
#7
'When the Pope warns of the danger to the Christian world of the Sword Of Islam that is rising then I will listen until then he is out of touch with reality'
__________________________________________________________
HERE COMES THE GLOBAL CHURCH:
A Gleaning Of News Releases And Assorted Writings
Concerning The Establishing Of The Global Church
POPE John Paul II To Climb Mt. SINAI With JEWISH, MUSLEM Leaders
Pope John Paul II is going to climb Mount Sinai with Jewish and Muslem leaders as he continues to CENTER THE UNITY OF THE CHURCHES AND RELIGIONS AROUND ABRAHAM OF OLD.
SOURCE:
London Times
January 6, 1997
Pope will apologise to Jews for past errors
From Richard Owen In Rome
Vatican officials said yesterday that the Pope [said] The Vatican is to apologise formally for the "anti-Semitic errors" of Catholicism as part of an attempt to reconcile the three great monotheistic religions - Christianity, Judaism and Islam - in time for the millennium. Vatican officials said yesterday [written in 1997] that the Pope had instructed a new historical-theological commission to examine the ersecution and torture of Jews by the Inquisition in 15th-century Spain and to tackle the issue of the sometimes ambivalent attitude of Catholics toward the Nazi elimination of Jewish populations in occupied Europe during the Second World War......' http://users.stargate.net/~ejt/wc18.htm
The Pope recently reiterated the apology to Jews and Muslims.
Missing from the proposed 'walk' are Protestants, maybe because they know salvation is not found on Mt. Sinai [Galatians 3]. Nor did he apologize to Protestansts for the Protestants that have been persecuted and killed by Rome.
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
2Cr 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
2Cr 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
2Cr 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
2Cr 6:17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you,
2Cr 6:18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
I wonder if the Pope has ever read the CHRISTIAN Bible. I'll keep my eye on him until he disbands this office:
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:
The Office of the Inquisition Today
Previously known as: Sacred Congregation of the Universal Inquisition 1542-1908
Previously known as: Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office 1908-1988
Currently known as: Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 1988 -Present
'...The congregation is now headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger....' http://www.geocities.com/iberianinquisition/office.html
'I wonder if the Pope has ever read the CHRISTIAN Bible.'
________________________________________________________
AD CAELI REGINAM
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XII
ON PROCLAIMING THE QUEENSHIP OF MARY
[Mary, Queen of Heaven]
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:OCMOH-U_egQJ:www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_11101954_ad-caeli-reginam_en.html+VATICAN.VA+QUEEN+OF+HEAVEN+AD+CAELI+REGINAM&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
40. Hence it cannot be doubted that Mary most Holy is far above all other creatures in dignity, and after her Son possesses primacy over all. "You have surpassed every creature," sings St. Sophronius. "What can be more sublime than your joy, O Virgin Mother? What more noble than this grace, which you alone have received from God"?[52] To this St. Germanus adds: "Your honor and dignity surpass the whole of creation; your greatness places you above the angels."[53] And St. John Damascene goes so far as to say: "Limitless is the difference between God's servants and His Mother."[54]
Mat 12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, [his] mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
Mat 12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
Mat 12:49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
Mat 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mat/Mat012.html#48
ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS:
http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/fatima_statue.jpg
Exd 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Exd 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth:
Exd 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;
I guess I answered my own question.
'....the Roman hierarchy has formally announced its intention to destroy their country, where she is entrenching herself with strength and promoting herself with subtlety. In L'Aurora of December, 1950, 'Father' Patrick O'Brien announced: "We, the Hierarchy of the Holy Catholic Church, [...] if necessary, shall change, amend, or blot out the present Constitution so that the President may enforce his, or rather our, humanitarian programme and all phases of human rights [!] as laid down by our saintly Popes and the Holy Mother Church. [...] We are going to have our laws made and enforced according to the Holy See and the Popes and the canon law of the Papal throne. Our entire social structure must be rebuilt on that basis. Our educational laws must be constructed to end the atheism, the Red peril of totalitarianism, Protestantism, Communism, Socialism and all other of like ilk and stamp, be driven from this fair land. [...] We control America and we do not propose to stop until America or Americans are genuinely Roman Catholic and remain so."
The Union and Echo, the official diocesan organ of the Roman Catholic Church in Buffalo, declared in December 1950 that at the rate of 126,000 converts a year in the United States it would take too long to "convert" (i.e. Romanise) America: "We must convert [...] Politics, Economics, Sociology, Business, Entertainment, Labour and Management, the Department of State and the Executive Branch of our Government to Christian and hence Catholic principles." ....' IANPAISLEY.ORG
Here we go again?
Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
STARWISE. Re: Your post #109 and THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA [also at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html ]
You said: 'I also believe that this Pope is particularly gifted with vision, and his current words may be reflective of his saintly spiritual gifts and connection to the Blessed Madonna of his heart.'
....Fatima is undoubtedly the most prophetic of modern apparitions. The first and second parts of the “secret”—which are here published in sequence so as to complete the documentation—refer especially to the frightening vision of hell, devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the Second World War, and finally the prediction of the immense damage that Russia would do to humanity by abandoning the Christian faith and embracing Communist totalitarianism.
In 1917 no one could have imagined all this: the three pastorinhos of Fatima see, listen and remember, and Lucia, the surviving witness, commits it all to paper when ordered to do so by the Bishop of Leiria and with Our Lady's permission....'
and thor76 said in #209:
'What one must realize - whether or not you believe in Fatima, or are Catholic, is that this pope IS the Pope of Fatima. Read up on what happened at Fatima.
Then realize this: in 1917 Islam was largely unheard of in the West. This was true even some 40 years ago - it was a foot note in history, whose power was long past. ***** Neither in 1917 nor in 1960 would nyone have envisioned Islam as being a "geo religion" - much less having tremendous military and political power.
Thus, in addition to the other ramifications of Our Lady's appritions and messeges at Fatima, we have the ascendanccy of Islam - all to clearly hinted at in the word "Fatima" itself.......which is the name of the daughter of Mohammed.
This also bears out numerous private revelations which speak of a resurgence of Islam.'
Someone could and did envision all this, as he too, had a vision from a spirit guide. That someone was Albert Pike in 1871.
This from:
JosephCard. RATZINGER
Prefect of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith
[i.e., OFFICE OF THE INQUISITION]
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html
'....The concluding part of the “secret” uses images which Lucia may have seen in devotional books and which draw their inspiration from long-standing intuitions of faith. It is a consoling vision, which seeks to open a history of blood and tears to the healing power of God. Beneath the arms of the cross angels gather up the blood of the martyrs, and with it they give life to the souls making their way to God. [angels do not give life nor, as far as I know, do they gather blood of the martyrs] Here, the blood of Christ and the blood of the martyrs are considered as one: the blood of the martyrs runs down from the arms of the cross. The martyrs die in communion with the Passion of Christ, and their death becomes one with his. For the sake of the body of Christ, they complete what is still lacking in his afflictions (cf. Col 1:24). Their life has itself become a Eucharist, part of the mystery of the grain of wheat which in dying yields abundant fruit. The blood of the martyrs is the seed of Christians, said Tertullian. As from Christ's death, from his wounded side, the Church was born, so the death of the witnesses is fruitful for the future life of the [????Catholic???] Church. Therefore, the vision of the third part of the “secret”, so distressing at first, concludes with an image of hope: no suffering is in vain, and it is a suffering Church, a Church of martyrs, which becomes a sign-post for man in his search for God. The loving arms of God welcome not only those who suffer like Lazarus, who found great solace there and mysteriously represents Christ, who wished to become for us the poor Lazarus. There is something more: from the suffering of the witnesses there comes a purifying and renewing power, because their suffering is the actualization of the suffering of Christ himself and a communication in the here and now of its saving effect.
And so we come to the final question: What is the meaning of the “secret” of Fatima as a whole (in its three parts)? What does it say to us? First of all we must affirm with Cardinal Sodano: “... the events to which the third part of the ‘secret' of Fatima refers now seem part of the past”. Insofar as individual events are described, they belong to the past. Those who expected exciting apocalyptic revelations about the end of the world or the future course of history are bound to be disappointed. Fatima does not satisfy our curiosity in this way, just as Christian faith in general cannot be reduced to an object of mere curiosity. What remains was already evident when we began our reflections on the text of the “secret”: the exhortation to prayer as the path of “salvation for souls” [unscriptural] and, likewise, the summons to penance and conversion. [??to Mary, the Pope, the CATHOLIC faith, perhaps?? Also unscriptural.]
Since many teachings of this church can and have been shown to be in direct contradiction to the Word of God, I would have to say this about the 'visions':
First, there is an inordinate obsession with BLOOD, particulary coming from a church that has the blood of millions on its hands. It also reminds me of the Jesuit Oath.
Second,
Lev 19:31 — Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I [am] the LORD your God. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Lev/19/31.html
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
2Cr 11:13 For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
2Cr 11:14 *** And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
'Come out of her, my people.'
OK - I get the point.....you are seemingly an anti- catholic evangelical using this thread to post your opposition to the RCC.
Nomally I would tell someone with such a viewpoint to "take a hike"..........but I do have a more profound comment.
Many Protestants - and evangelicals in particular - see the Roman Catholic Church as either the seat of the Antichrist, or as the "whore of Babylon, drunk on the blood of the martyrs".
It might surprise you to learn that many conservative, traditional Catholic Biblical Scholars think exactly the same thing may be indicated in scripture.
But there is a difference: TENSE.
You are referring to the present tense. Those of us Catholics who agree with traditional scripture scholars believe that this may well be the case - but in the FUTURE. It is predicted in scripture that there will be a mass apostacy. Those of us who have studied know this.
It has not all literally happened yet. It may well happend in the future - near future. Perhaps in my lifetime.
But regardless of this prophecy or the all too real probability of its near future coming true, that is no reason to "knock" the Roman Catholic Church........which is THE CHURCH which Christ himself founded - from which ultimately, all Christian denominations came.
Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church........not the baptists, presbyterians, Dutch reformed, Heugonats, Quakers, Methodists, and many and sundry other Christian denominations. These were all founded by mortal men - either as a revolt against the Catholic church, or as a further doctrinal schism against each other. While their believers/adherants do indeed follow the Lord Jesus Christ, the denomination they adhere to was totally man made.
That much is historical fact. Now if you personally do not like or have a quarrel with aspect of church history, or the actions of individuals, so be it. If you do not accept our doctrines - fine.
But otherwise kindly leave my church - the Roman Catholic Church alone. It is not inherently evil - neither are the various Protestant Churches. Nor is it perfect, being composed of mortal men.......and neither are any of the Protestant churches.
After all the first Bishops of the Church were the Apostles - and they sure were not perfect! The first Pope was Peter......whom Christ chose not for his intelligence, or spiritual/moral strength. But for his weakness. God always chooses the weak as his vessels, and makes them great despite their weaknesses, for his greater glory.
All the OT promises were fulfilled in Christ . . .
Hardly, at least not in His First Coming. Take just one of my earlier examples, Zechariah 14: Why isn't the Mount of Olives split in half from the touch of Christ's foot? Exactly when did the flesh of those who attacked Jerusalem dissolve while they stood on their feet? In what sense have all the nations gone yearly to Jerusalem to celebrate Sukkot (the Feast of Tabernacles)? When has Egypt or any other nation been struck with drought for a year for failing to do so?
The only way you can claim these promises to be "fulfilled in Christ" is to allegorize them to the point of insensibility. Hey, I can use the same method to prove the prophecies of Nostradomus, so in what sense is such an approach honoring to the Word of God?
Now, since you're hung up on Cerinthius, let's actually look at some of the orthodox fathers. I'm being extremely brief in my quotes here, and I strongly recommend you read them all in context, since most of those here actually go into great detail on their End Time views:
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V.30:
We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 80 and 110:But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: the name, however, is suppressed, because it is not worthy of being proclaimed by the Holy Spirit. For if it had been declared by Him, he (Antichrist) might perhaps continue for a long period. But now as "he was, and is not, and shall ascend out of the abyss, and goes into perdition,"260 as one who has no existence; so neither has his name been declared, for the name of that which does not exist is not proclaimed. But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day; and restoring to Abraham the promised inheritance, in which kingdom the Lord declared, that "many coming from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."
But I and others, who are fight-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged,[as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare. . .Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chap. 25:O unreasoning men! understanding not what has been proved by all these passages, that two advents of Christ have been announced: the one, in which He is set forth as suffering, inglorious, dishonoured, and crucified; but the other, in which He shall come from heaven with glory, when the man of apostasy, who speaks strange things against the Most High, shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the earth against us the Christians.
In the Revelation of John, again, the order of these times is spread out to view, which "the souls of the martyrs" are taught to wait for beneath the altar, whilst they earnestly pray to be avenged and judged: (taught, I say, to wait), in order that the world may first drink to the dregs the plagues that await it out of the vials of the angels, and that the city of fornication may receive from the ten kings its deserved doom, and that the beast Antichrist with his false prophet may wage war on the Church of God; and that, after the casting of the devil into the bottomless pit for a while, the blessed prerogative of the first resurrection may be ordained from the thrones; and then again, after the consignment of him to the fire, that the judgment of the final and universal resurrection may be determined out of the books.From Hippolytus:
"Now Daniel will set forth this subject to us. For he says, And one week will make a covenant with many, and it shall be that in the midst (half) of the week my sacrifice and oblation shall cease. By one week, therefore, he meant the last week which is to be at the end of the whole world of which week the two prophets Enoch and Elias will take up the half. For they will preach 1,260 days clothed in sackcloth, proclaiming repentance to the people and to all the nations."From The Epistle of Barnabas, chap. 15:
--Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 43, 47"For he says, I shall make a covenant of one week, and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and libation will be removed. For by one week he indicates the showing forth of the seven years which shall be in the last times. And the half of the week the two prophets, along with John, will take for the purpose of proclaiming to all the world the advent of Antichrist, that is to say, for a thousand two hundred and sixty days clothed in sackcloth."
--Appendix to the Works of Hippolytus, XXI
Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, "He finished in six days." This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, "Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years." Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. "And He rested on the seventh day." This meaneth: when His Son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the-sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day.Papias of Hierapolis (as acknowledged by Eusebius, though the historian tries to distance that father from the Apostle John), Commodian, Lactantius, Victorinus, Apollinaris, and Methodius were likewise premillennial.
Of course, all of that is secondary to what the Scriptures actually teach, so let's return to the actual text of Revelation 20 for a moment. You'll have to pardon me for simply copying and pasting what I've already written on the subject, since I'm essentially as lazy as the next guy: First, let us take note that this passage gives us a rather precise placement for the Millennium: After the Beast of chapter 13 rises to power and forces the world to worship his image and take his Mark, after Satan is bound in the Abyss, and after the resurrection of the dead who the Beast executed, but beginning a thousand years before the Great White Throne judgment of verses 11-15. If we examine the passage in the context of those immediately surrounding it, we find out that the Millennium must come after Armageddon and the Second Coming as well. Simply taking this chapter at face value, it seems that premillennialism wins hands down, unless the proponents of the other views are able to demonstrate the final, complete, and literal/normal fulfillment of the many prophecies that we have covered in this book.
To give them credit, many do make the attempt, but they are compelled to take an extremely allegorical view of the whole of Revelation in order to do so. For example, Professor David J. Engelsma wrote a series of articles defending amillennialism that originally appeared in The Standard Bearer. In the second article, dealing with Revelation 20, he summarizes the amillennial position when he writes, “’A thousand years’ is a figurative, or symbolical, description of the entire age of the new covenant. The number 1,000 is a symbolical number, made up as it is of the number 10.”[2] The reader will note that he gives no solid Scriptural reasoning to take the number as symbolic, but much like those who insist that only the Ruach HaKodesh in the Church can be the Restrainer spoken of in 2 Thessalonians, Engelsma simply declares that it is so. However, Scripture does not bear out this assertion. In fact, in every place that the number 10 appears in Scripture or even Revelation, it seems to be used perfectly literally, e.g. the ten kings who will follow the Beast.
In discussing the binding of Satan in the Abyss, he goes on to say, “The binding of Satan represents the sovereign control and restraint of the devil by the Lord Yeshua that prevents him from deceiving the nations. During the present age, Satan cannot unite the nations under Antichrist.”[3] He is correct that Satan is subject to the Lord’s restraint (see 2 Th. 2:7 again). However, the Bible does not simply speak about a general restraint against Satan’s will; it speaks of binding Satan in the Abyss. This begs the question that we discussed back in chapter nine: What exactly is the Abyss? Amillennialists will frequently take the position that the Abyss in Revelation 9:1-11 (in which he held that the “locusts” were actually symbolic of Islam’s spread), 17:8, and here in chapter 20 simply signifies “chaos.” The problem with that position is that it is not a Biblical view! The Abyss is not just a Greek term for chaos, it is a place so set apart and so dreadful that the demons who called themselves Legion begged Yeshua not to send them to it before their time (Luke 8:31)! It is this same dreadful place that Peter and Jude referred to when they spoke of the angels that sinned by leaving their own place being bound in chains of darkness (2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6). When Peter refers to it by the name Tartarus, he is using a word that to the Greeks meant a place beneath even the depths of Hades. To suggest that Satan could be bound in this place of darkness, this bottomless pit, and still be “the god of this age (or world),” as Sha’ul called him over twenty years after the crucifixion (Cor. 4:4) is patently ridiculous. As Tenney puts it:
The “binding of Satan,” by which he is restrained from deceiving the nations (20:2, 3) is hardly compatible with the expression of Ephesians which names him as the “prince of the powers of the air, of the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2). The binding must consequently be future.[4]Amillennialism is the logical equivalent of claiming that a murderer is in jail at the same time that he’s really out on the street slaying his next victim! Imagine the public outcry if the police said, “Yes, he was in jail—in principle. Well, at least he wasn’t as free to act as before we arrested him. Hey, we stopped him from murdering two other people before he got the third, didn’t we?”
Professor Engelsma’s position is even more self-contradictory than that, however. He states that it is being bound in the Abyss during the Millennium is what keeps Satan from bringing forth his Man of Sin. That brings us to the second characteristic of the Millennium: It begins with the First Resurrection, which specifically includes those slain by the Beast for not taking his mark! How could saints be resurrected from having been executed by the Antichrist before being executed by the Antichrist?
In attempting to answer this, amillennialism takes a very non-Biblical view of resurrection: “Living with Messiah in heaven in the soul at the instant of physical death is the ‘first resurrection. . . The saint goes to heaven by resurrection, and only by resurrection. There are two stages. The first is the resurrection of the soul. This is the resurrection of Revelation 20:5. The second is the resurrection of the body. This is the second resurrection, implied by the first resurrection of Revelation 20:5.”[5] However, the Jewish and Christian concept of the resurrection has always been that of a physical, bodily resurrection. As Johnson states, “The word anastasis, which occurs over forty times in the NT, is used almost exclusively of physical resurrection (Luke 2:34 is the only exception).”[6] Actually, there is no reason not to regard Luke 2:34 as an oblique reference to the resurrection, one drawn from Daniel 12:2. The very physical, bodily nature of the resurrection was the cornerstone of Paul's teaching on the subject:
But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterwards those who are Christ's at His coming. (1 Cor. 15:20-23)In other words, if Christ's resurrection was a bodily one (and no one who says otherwise has any business calling himself a Christian), then ours will be too. To say that Revelation 20 speaks of a resurrection of the soul is to say that we have a different resurrection than Christ's. When Scripture speaks of those who die in Christ, it does speak of them being with Christ (2 Cor. 5:1), but it also speaks of them sleeping, to rise at His coming (1 Th. 4:16).
Furthermore, just ignore the chapter headings for a moment (which were added long after Revelation was actually penned) and just read Revelation 19 and 20 together at one time. Is there any reason at all to believe that the 1000 years comes out of chronological order to precede the appearance of Messiah at Armageddon and the destruction of the Beast and the False Prophet? Absolutely none, provided that the reader is not trying impute a certain preconceived position to it. In fact, without Revelation 20:1-3, we are left with a dangling plot thread, as it were: We know the fate of the Beast and the False Prophet, but what happened to Satan?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2] Engelsma, Prof. David J. , “A Defense of (Reformed) Amillennialism,” originally printed in The Standard Bearer, April 1, 1995 through December 15, 1996, retrieved from http://www.prca.org/articles/amillennialism.html on June 26, 2004.
[3] ibid.
[4] Tenney, Merrill C., Interpreting Revelation: A Reasonable Guide to Understanding the Last Book in the Bible (Hendrickson, 2001), p. 89
[5] Engelsma, ibid.
[6] Johnson, Alan F., Revelation (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 12, Gaebelein, Frank E., ed.) (Zondervan, 1981), p. 584
The Premillennial view appeals to the traditions of men. It is basically an offshoot of the old Judaic traditions in the law-bound belief in nationalism, earthly Kingdoms, and genealogical glory.
Uh, those "Judaic traditions" comprise 3/4ths of the Bible. If you choose not to take the Tanakh seriously and misunderstand half the New Testament, that's between you and God. For my part, I choose to take Him at His Word, and if He says that the Messiah will rule from David's throne in Jerusalem (Isa. 9:7, Lk. 1:32-33), I don't consider myself qualified to argue with Him or to try to explain away His clear words.
Blending Old testament Judaic traditions and beliefs of a coming earthly Messiah establishing a political government, with New Testament Christianity - that Messiah reigns 1000 years is an accommodation to old Judaic worldly ideas.
Do you have any idea how gnostic that statement--indeed, your entire post--is? The God of the Bible keeps His physical promises physically. When He promised Abraham a physical seed to carry on his line, did He or did He not fulfill that promise exactly as given? When He had Samuel annoint David king over Israel, did not David eventually sit on Israel's literal throne?
Although it's funny that you should reject the literal Millennium because it had Jewish origins. Once again with the pasting: One of the frequent objections to premillennialism is that it rests upon a particular and (to some) strange interpretation of a single passage of Scripture. Not so! The concept of a Millennium of rest, peace, and justice is imbedded in the Tanakh and always has been. Many Jewish Rabbis have always acknowledged the concept of a Millennial Kingdom of the Messiah, even down to the length of its duration. “[T]he thousand years began to be associated with the Jewish cosmic-week framework in which the history of the world is viewed as lasting a week of millennia, or seven thousand years. The last day millennium is the Sabbath-rest millennium, followed by the eighth day of the age to come.”[1] Eastman and Smith demonstrate this Millennial expectation of the ancient rabbis with the following quote by Rabbi Kattina in the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedron 96b-99a):
The world endures 6000years and one thousand it shall be laid waste, that is, the enemies of God shallbe laid waste, wereof it is said, “the Lord alone shall be exalted in thatday.” As out of seven years every seventh is a year of remission, so out of the seven thousand years of the world, the seventh millennium shall be the 1000 years of remission, that God alone maybe exalted in that day.[2]This Millennial expectation is not isolated to the Rabbis in the time just before the Lord walked the earth. Eastman and Smith also quote from Rabbi Abba Hillel’s 1927 book, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel: “Be it remembered that it is not the Messiah who brings about the Millennium. It is the inevitable advent of the Millennium which carries along with it the Messiah and his appointed activities.”[3]
To such evidence, the amillennialist would likely object that non-Christian sources cannot be trusted to give a correct view of Scripture, since they do not have the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I acknowledge that one must be extremely careful in using them, but the point being made here is simply this: Where did these rabbis get this concept of a Millennium in which God alone would be exalted if it cannot be found imbedded, however subtly, in the Tanakh?
In fact, the vast majority of what we know about the Millennium comes from the Tanakh—all Revelation specifies is the length of time. As we saw earlier, Zechariah tells us that the Lord will be King over the whole world, and that every year, representatives of every nation who fought against Jerusalem in the Last Battle will go to worship the King at the Feast of Tabernacles. Those who refuse will suffer having no rain for the following year, a punishment that apparently falls on Egypt at least once (14:9,16-19). This speaks of a time after the Second Coming, but before the New Jerusalem comes down, after which “there will be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying” (Rev. 21:3) and therefore, no more sin and rebellion. Without the Millennium, it becomes impossible to reconcile these promises. The Millennium will be a time of peace, when Yeshua Messiah Himself rules over the nations, and mankind recycles the weapons of war into plowshares and pruning hooks (Isa. 2:4), but not a time of perfection.
Ironside describes the Millennium as “a coming time when men will no longer be deceived and led astray by the great tempter . . . If men sin during the millennium it will not be on account of having been deceived. It will simply be because of self-will, and the yielding to the lusts of their own hearts.”[4][4] As Murphy points out, there are three sources of sin in human existence as described in Ephesians 2:1-2—1) Our own flesh, which lusts after its own desires, 2) the world, which encourages us to social sin via “peer pressure,” and 3) the Enemy, through his army of evil spirits.[5][5] In the Millennium, the Enemy and his angels and demons will all be locked away, and the world will be perfectly ruled “with an iron scepter” by the Lord Yeshua Messiah, doing away with society’s pressure to sin—and yet, mortal Man will still sin (though not as egregiously as before) because of the nature of the flesh. In what way could God better demonstrate the corruption of the human heart quite aside from all external sources of temptation!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Johnson, p. 585
[2]Eastman, Mark and Chuck Smith, The Search for Messiah (Joy, 1996), p. 114
[3]ibid., p. 92
[4]Ironside, H.A., Lectures on the Book of Revelation (37th printing, Loizeaux Brothers, 1985), p. 335
[5]Murphy, Dr. Ed, The Handbook For Spiritual Warfare, Revised and Updated (Thomas Nelson, 2003), pp.100-104
And on that note, I wish you a good night. Given that you refuse to take the Bible normally whenever it disagrees with your theology, and given that I refuse to adopt any theology that goes against the plain meaning of the Scriptures, I don't see that this conversation can progress any further. I leave you with these thoughts:
1) The earliest of the Church Fathers, and all of those connected with the Apostle John whose views we know, were premillennial. Amillennialism came two centuries later.
2) Cerinthius happened to be premillennial (and probably because he picked it up from John), but he was hardly the originator of the view as some have slanderously painted the situation.
3) The dichotomy of spiritual=good and physical=bad is a distinctly gnostic philosophy, and one that has nothing to do with the Bible.
4) Premillennialism has an origin even earlier than the penning of the Revelation. Indeed, Revelation 20 is an affirmation of a much earlier belief that developed from the Tanakh (the Old Testament).
5) A reflexive hostility to all forms of Jewish thought will inevitably lead one to false conclusions. Why? Simply put, Jesus was Jewish, and so was Paul (indeed, he remained a Pharisee of the Pharisees to the end of his life), and Peter, and John, and all the rest of the Apostles. They even continued to keep Torah, and by no means thought it ended with the crucifixion of Christ (see Acts 21:15-26). So long as you retain that kneejerk hostility to anything that seems "too Jewish" to your mind, you will never truly understand the Scriptures. Indeed, as Paul wrote:
What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.Again, goodnight and God bless.
--Romans 3:1-2
What scares me is not so much that you have posted this - as is your right.......but that you actually expect that somebody is going to wade through the whole thing.
Some us us have........um.......like......JOBS???
Did you ever consider giving us the "reader's digest condensed version"? A concise synposis in a paragraph or two?
Apparantly not............
That Dave Macpherson in your coverup link appears to be a crackpot. The link below not only recaps his antics but demonstrates at least two other pretrib sources well before the time frame you are mentioning
You mean that stickers that say in the event of rapture, this car will be without a driver? And you think thousands perhaps millions of wrecked cars is going to be secret? It ain't going to be secret. But it is going to be quick and world wide.
I agree the second return is obvious. But the rapture is not the second return. We meet Jesus in the air. Jesus doesn't touch down, at that time.
God has many people. He is able to see to it that not a single one of his elect will be lost. It doesn't depend on them in the slightest. [Romans 8:28-30; 9:11-13; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4-6 etc., etc.]
I agree that none of the elect will be lost. But it does depend on them accepting salvation. God knows ahead of time who will choose to accept salvation. God doesn't force anybody to accept and He doesn't prevent anyone from accepting. He desires all men to accept but not all men will. The names of the elect were written before the foundation of the world, but that doesn't mean that we don't have free will. It just means that God has foreknowledge.
Here is part of the problem with the post trib view. We know that the second coming Jesus returns with the elect. We also know that at the rapture Christians who are alive meet Jesus in the air.
It just doesn't make sense for us to meet Jesus in the air and then immediately return.
Actually that was John, not Jesus, but yes there have been many Anti-christs. But Revelations makes it clear that there will be one in-particular that figures prominently in the end time events.
Ultimately it is the wicked that are removed. But at some point Christians who are alive at the time meet Jesus in the air. This is the first rapture. While the kindom of God will not perish, the earth and the Heavens will be destroyed by fire (2 Pet) and a new heaven and earth will be created. (Rev)
I think Tony Blair has it in him to be great.....
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.
