A) Mr. Walvoord who is one of the leading Dispensational Pre-Millenialists was attempting to claim historical identification for 'dispensational pre-millenialism'. Since 'dispensational pre-millenialism' and it's pre-tribulation rapture (no where taught in scripture, I might add) only resembles Historical Pre-Millenialism to a small degree (i.e. Hist. Pre-Mil is not dispensational and does not teach pre-tirbulational rapture), it is highly misleading to try to claim such historicity. There simply are no examples of what we now know as Dispensational Pre-Millenialism until 1800 years after Christ's ascension.
B) The claim that the early church was predominantly pre-millenial has been refuted by a pre-millenial -convincingly enough to change the historical view of one of pre-millenialisms leading proponents, Charles Ryrie. Therefore, since you cannot ~prove~ your claims regarding pre-millenialism and since their is historical evidence (i.e. other amillenialists of the same eras and the early creeds) which refutes your assumption, it is highly dishonest for you to continue to claim that pre-millenialism was the predominant view point.
Again, Dispensational Pre-Millenialism isn't the same thing as Historic Pre-Millenialism. So, even if the mass of ante-nicene writers ~were~ Historical Pre-Millenialist (again, there is no proof of this and substantial evidence to the contrary) it is of no bearing on the historicity of the Dispensational monster and it's pre-tribulational rapture.
RE: Barnabas -If we are in disagreement regarding Barnabas, why quote Schaff. Let's just look at Barnabas:
Summary
Barnabas, styled an Apostle in Holy Scripture, and, like St. Paul, ranked by the Church with the Twelve, though not one of them.There is no compelling reason to assume that Barnabas had the idea that there would be a 1,000 year millennium.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barnabas
Epistle of Barnabas--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter XV — The False and the True Sabbath
Further, also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue [10 commandments] which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai, "And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart." And He says in another place, "If my sons keep the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them."
The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: "And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it."
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.
Moreover, He says, "Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart." If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived.
Behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves.
Further, He says to them, "Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure." Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but that is which I have made, [namely this,] when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world.
Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens.
Implies 1,000 year millennium (but maybe not)
Conditions in millennium:
(1) Judges the ungodly
(2) Changes sun, moon, stars
(3) All things made new
New heavens and new earth is the eighth day (but not a literal 1,000 years)
There are some things to observe which weaken the case that Barnabas is teaching about a 1,000 year millennium:
(1) On the 7th day (the so-called millennium) wickedness no longer exists. Yet in the premillennial viewpoint there is still wickedness — but satan is bound and can't deceive so the effects of sin are lessened. Yet at the end of the millennium there is a global rebellion against Christ.
(2) He throws in the idea of the 8th day at the end but clearly does not intend to mean another 1,000 year period of time.
(3) The reference to the 7th day does not include any reference to 1,000 years. Yet the reference to the first six days mentioned 1,000 years many times. It seems he abandons the "day = 1,000 year" formula after the discussion about the six days.
(4) There is a hint that God skips the 7th day (because "your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me") and goes on instead directly to the eighth day. This eighth day is not 1,000 years but all eternity.
This passage assumes that human history will last exactly 6,000 years. This is false for two reasons:
(1) 6,000 years from 4,004 B.C. (Bishop Ussher's date and the earliest date anyone has ever proposed for the creation of Adam) plus 6,000 years results in the date 1997 A.D (using the solar year) or the early 1900's (using the lunar year of 360 days which is the year usually used for prophetic analysis). Most young-earth proponents usually allow for a date of 10,000 to 15,000 B.C. for the creation of Adam which makes the problem even worse.
(2) The scientific evidence testifies that the earth and the universe are very old. In this case Adam was created somewhere between 30,000 and 60,000 B.C.
It seems unlikely that Barnabas believed in a 1,000 year millennium (but it is possible that he did). However, if he did, it is based on the false Jewish idea that human history from the time of Adam would be 6,000 years.
RE: "Literalism" Until you tell me you believe, as the Bible clearly says, that the trumpet in 1 Cor 15:51,52 is indeed the "last trumpent" and not the "last trumpet of the Chruch", or the "last trumpet of this age"...I might just believe you. Since you fail to take the Bible for it's literal word at this passage as well as several other points (the "last day", "the resurrection"...), your claim of "literalism" falls on deaf ears.
Oh, and by the way, an all encompassing spiritual Kingdom ~is~ real, unless of course, you want to argue that the Holy Spirit is not real as well.
Jean
That is not what you were dealing with. We were dealing with Premillennial theology, not dispensational theology. I stated at the outset that the early Fathers were not 'strongly dispensational'. This is how you guys love to argue, find a straw man and argue against it. The MA thesis you cited addressed Ryrie's Dispensationalism, not historicalPre-Millennialism. Regarding which in the work The meaning of the Millennial the editor notes,
Although these interpretations have never been without adherents in the history of the church, in certain ages a particular outlook of the Christian era, Premillennialism appears to have been the dominant eschatological interpretation. Among its adherents were Papias, Ireanaeus, Justing Martyr, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Methodius, Commondianus and Lactatntius. During the 4th century when the Christian church was given a favored status under the emperor Constantine, the amillennial postion was accepted (p.9)
Moreover, as for Premillennialism being only found in the 19th century, it was reawakened in the 17th century,
Despite his opposition, it was a German Calvinist theologian Johann Heinrich Alsted (1588-1638) who revived the teaching of premillennialism in an acadamic form in the modern world. Alsted's book, the Beloved City(1627) which presented his views, caused the learned Anglican scholar, Joseph Mede (1586-1638) to become a Premillennialist (Ibid,p.10-11)
B) The claim that the early church was predominantly pre-millenial has been refuted by a pre-millenial -convincingly enough to change the historical view of one of pre-millenialisms leading proponents, Charles Ryrie.
Again, the issue was not historical dispensationalism but Premillennialism. Moreover, Ryrie was not the one I was citing, Walvoord was.
Therefore, since you cannot ~prove~ your claims regarding pre-millenialism and since their is historical evidence (i.e. other amillenialists of the same eras and the early creeds) which refutes your assumption, it is highly dishonest for you to continue to claim that pre-millenialism was the predominant view point.
I gave you the historical evidence, you give me a MA Thesis that is addressing dispensationalism not Premillennialism and I'm the one who is dishonest?
Again, Dispensational Pre-Millenialism isn't the same thing as Historic Pre-Millenialism. So, even if the mass of ante-nicene writers ~were~ Historical Pre-Millenialist (again, there is no proof of this and substantial evidence to the contrary)
There isn't proof? I showed you quotes from different authors including Justin Martyr!
it is of no bearing on the historicity of the Dispensational monster and it's pre-tribulational rapture.
No one in any of the posts ever discussed the Rapture or Dispensationalism. We started this discussion over Premillennialism. This is just an attempt to run and hide from the fact that the evidence proves you wrong! The history of the early centuries shows that the first 2 centuries were Premillennial as does the fact that Barnabas was a Premillennialist!
RE: Barnabas -If we are in disagreement regarding Barnabas, why quote Schaff. Let's just look at Barnabas: Summary Barnabas, styled an Apostle in Holy Scripture, and, like St. Paul, ranked by the Church with the Twelve, though not one of them. There is no compelling reason to assume that Barnabas had the idea that there would be a 1,000 year millennium.
There isn't? Shall we see!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Barnabas Epistle of Barnabas Chapter XV — The False and the True Sabbath Further, also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue [10 commandments] which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai, "And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart." And He says in another place, "If my sons keep the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them." The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: "And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it." 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.
that is the Millennial reign!
Moreover, He says, "Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart." If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves. Further, He says to them, "Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure." Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but that is which I have made, [namely this,] when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens. Implies 1,000 year millennium (but maybe not)
No implying about it, it is the Millennial reign.
Conditions in millennium: (1) Judges the ungodly (2) Changes sun, moon, stars (3) All things made new New heavens and new earth is the eighth day (but not a literal 1,000 years) There are some things to observe which weaken the case that Barnabas is teaching about a 1,000 year millennium: (1) On the 7th day (the so-called millennium) wickedness no longer exists.
Now, where does Barnabas say this? He says wickedness is destroyed when the Lord returns, but that does not mean more wickedness cannot develop later. The Premillennial view is that the Lord does destroy all the wicked and the Millennial starts off pure and then degenerates. Barnabas view is totally consistent with the Premillennial view.
Yet in the premillennial viewpoint there is still wickedness — but satan is bound and can't deceive so the effects of sin are lessened. Yet at the end of the millennium there is a global rebellion against Christ.
That is correct because the Old nature is still present in mankind.
(2) He throws in the idea of the 8th day at the end but clearly does not intend to mean another 1,000 year period of time.
Ofcourse not, that begins the eternal state
(3) The reference to the 7th day does not include any reference to 1,000 years. Yet the reference to the first six days mentioned 1,000 years many times. It seems he abandons the "day = 1,000 year" formula after the discussion about the six days. (4) There is a hint that God skips the 7th day (because "your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me") and goes on instead directly to the eighth day. This eighth day is not 1,000 years but all eternity. This passage assumes that human history will last exactly 6,000 years. This is false for two reasons: (1) 6,000 years from 4,004 B.C. (Bishop Ussher's date and the earliest date anyone has ever proposed for the creation of Adam) plus 6,000 years results in the date 1997 A.D (using the solar year) or the early 1900's (using the lunar year of 360 days which is the year usually used for prophetic analysis). Most young-earth proponents usually allow for a date of 10,000 to 15,000 B.C. for the creation of Adam which makes the problem even worse. (2) The scientific evidence testifies that the earth and the universe are very old. In this case Adam was created somewhere between 30,000 and 60,000 B.C. It seems unlikely that Barnabas believed in a 1,000 year millennium (but it is possible that he did). However, if he did, it is based on the false Jewish idea that human history from the time of Adam would be 6,000 years.
Well, what has that have to do with the fact that he believed it! Moreover, the issue of the age of the earth is not as definite as you think it is. The earth can still be very old and still only have 6,000 years of human history. Every hear of the Gap interpretation of Genesis?
From: The Kingdom of Israel -by John Shepard RE: "Literalism" Until you tell me you believe, as the Bible clearly says, that the trumpet in 1 Cor 15:51,52 is indeed the "last trumpent" and not the "last trumpet of the Chruch", or the "last trumpet of this age"...I might just believe you. Since you fail to take the Bible for it's literal word at this passage as well as several other points (the "last day", "the resurrection"...), your claim of "literalism" falls on deaf ears.
Well, the 'last trump' could easily mean the final one in a series, not the final one ever sounded. We have trumpets being sounded in Revelation (Rev.8:2).
Oh, and by the way, an all encompassing spiritual Kingdom ~is~ real, unless of course, you want to argue that the Holy Spirit is not real as well.
Yes, the spiritual kingdom is real (the Kingdom of God) and so will be the Kingdom of Heaven be real also, a physical Kingdom with The Lord Jesus Christ ruling as the Son of God on the Throne of David (Ps.2,89,2Sam.7:14)
Hey, Jean next time you post me, bring some facts dealing with the real question, not the one in your mind.
This is what the issue we were discussing was about, Premillennialism vs Amillennialism in the first 3 centuries of church history, not dispensationalism.