|
. Charles Haddon Spurgeon's VIEW OF THE |
|
|
MILLENNIUM |
|
|
|
Annotated Summary by |
|
|
MARK A. MCNEIL |
Posted on 09/12/2002 7:19:20 AM PDT by xzins
CONFUSED ABOUT SPURGEON'S PROPHETIC VIEWS?
|
. Charles Haddon Spurgeon's VIEW OF THE |
|
|
MILLENNIUM |
|
|
|
Annotated Summary by |
|
|
MARK A. MCNEIL |
"I am not now going into millennial theories, or into any speculation as to dates. I do not know anything at all about such things, and I am not sure that I am called to spend my time in such researches. I am rather called to minister the gospel than to open prophecy. Those who are wise in such things doubtless prize their wisdom, but I have not the time to acquire it, nor any inclination to leave soul-winning pursuits for less arousing themes. I believe it is a great deal better to leave many of these promises, and many of these gracious out-looks of believers, to exercise their full force upon our minds, without depriving them of their simple glory by aiming to discover dates and figures. Let this be settled, however, that if there be meaning in words, Israel is yet to be restored. Israel is to have a SPIRITUAL RESTORATION or a CONVERSION."
[from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 429, Ezekiel 37:1-10 (age 30)]
INTRODUCTION
There has been some considerable difference of opinion regarding the position that C. H. Spurgeon, the great Baptist preacher from the 19th century, held in the area of Eschatology — regarding the doctrine of the Millennium. Each of the three major divisions within this area of doctrine have proponents who claim Spurgeon as one of their own. Many times authors claim a different millennial view than what Spurgeon actually believed.
It is not our task to sort out the arguments for each view. Such an assignment would take a very large volume (many are available) and the issue would still not be solved for all. We would simply like to define the basic positions and then demonstrate from Spurgeon's own words which one view he held.
PREMILLENNIALISM
The first view regarding the Millennium is that of PREMILLENNIALISM. The prefix, "Pre," denotes "before." The prefix is telling us at what point in relationship to the millennium that Christ will come. This view holds that our Lord will Literally return before a 1,000-year reign of Christ begins. The millennium of Revelation 20 is taken to be literal. If not literal, it at least is speaking of an indefinite period of time following the coming of Christ during which there will be perfect peace on the earth.
Within the premillennialist camp, there have come to be two identifiable views: the "dispensationalist" position, and the "historic" position. For further information defending each of these views, one should consult Reese's The Approaching Advent of Christ [historic] and Dwight Pentecost's Things to Come [dispensational]. Though the differences between the two are important, it is not within the scope of our purpose here to delve into such matters.
AMILLENNIALISM
The second view is called AMILLENNIALISM, or sometimes called "realized eschatology". The prefix, "A-," means "no". This would suggest that those who hold this view do not believe in a millennium. This is somewhat misleading, however. This view is the the product of a consistent Spiritual interpretation of prophetic literature. To those, the millennium is not some future physical reign, but the present reign of Christ in the hearts of believers. The "millennium" is an indefinite period of time (the present age) after which Christ will physically return. Prophecy in the Church, by Oswald Allis, is a standard work for the amillennial position.
This is the position of the Roman Catholic Church, also many other Protestant denominations. It grew out of St. Augustine's spiritualizing of these issues in his writings, and the tendency of many early Christian writers to see the Church as the "new Israel" and therefore the recipient of the promises of the Old Testament for the Jewish nation. Those who hold this view do not speak of the millennium as a future happening. It is, to them, a Present Reality.
POSTMILLENNIALISM
The third, and last, major view is that of POSTMILLENNIALISM. The prefix "Post" speaks of "after." This teaching promotes the view that the physical return of Christ will Follow an actual millennium. The influence of Christianity will over-take the world for an extended period of time, then Christ will return.
This view appears to be a mixture of the principles that work to produce the first two views. It is not consistently spiritual or literal in its interpretation of the prophetic material relevant to this issue. Perhaps the foremost writing for this position today is The Millennium, by Loraine Boettner.
Spurgeon's VIEW 
With basic definitions before us, then, let's look at some quotes from Spurgeon to see what his position was on the Millennium.
"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial — that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial — that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]
Spurgeon here specifically identifies the Postmillennial view with a clear DENIAL of any adherence to it! Those who attempt to claim Spurgeon for this viewpoint do not demonstrate their contention by referring to clear comparisons such as this one. They rather go to sermons not specifically dealing with both positions and pull out of them ideas that are "compatible" with Postmillennial thinking. This is a faulty way of proving a point, however* — especially when they meet squarely with a Spurgeon statement like the one above, and those below.
*NOTE: Furthur, a few postmillennialists (especially GARY NORTH), are guilty of misrepresenting Spurgeon constantly in articles and books; NORTH has repeatedly alleged that "Spurgeon was Postmillennial" — yet neither his supplied quotations "say" so, and/or he deliberately does not present a statement by Spurgeon that North will speculate "implies" a Postmillennial position. Our advice is to ignore anything North states regarding Spurgeon's views and Prophecy!
Again, consider Spurgeon's View here in light of 'Postmillennial' teaching...
"Paul does not paint the future with rose-colour: he is no smooth-tongued prophet of a golden age, into which this dull earth may be imagined to be glowing. There are sanguine brethren who are looking forward to everything growing better and better and better, until, at last, this present age ripens into a millennium. They will not be able to sustain their hopes, for Scripture gives them no solid basis to rest upon. We who believe that there will be no millennial reign without the King, and who expect no rule of righteousness except from the appearing of the righteous Lord, are nearer the mark. Apart from the second Advent of our Lord, the world is more likely to sink into a pandemonium than to rise into a millennium. A divine interposition seems to me the hope set before us in Scripture, and, indeed, to be the only hope adequate to the occasion. We look to the darkening down of things; the state of mankind, however improved politically, may yet grow worse and worse spiritually." [from The Form of Godliness Without the Power MTP Vol 35, Year 1889, pg. 301, 2 Timothy 3:5 (age 54)]
"We are to expect the literal advent of Jesus Christ, for he himself by his angel told us, 'This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven,' which must mean literally and in person. We expect a reigning Christ on earth; that seems to us to be very plain, and to be put so literally that we dare not spiritualise it. We anticipate a first and a second resurrection; a first resurrection of the righteous, and a second resurrection of the ungodly, who shall be judged, condemned, and punished for ever by the sentence of the great King." [from Things to Come MTP Vol 15, Year 1869, pg. 329, 1 Corinthians 3:22 (age 35)]
Here, stress is laid upon the Literal Nature of the second coming. Also, after this literal return is stressed a reigning upon the earth.
"We have done once for all with the foolish ideas of certain of the early heretics, that Christ's appearance upon earth was but a phantom. We know that he was really, personally, and physically here on earth. But it is not quite so clear to some persons that he is to come really, personally, and literally, the second time. I know there are some who are labouring to get rid of the fact of a personal reign, but as I take it, the coming and the reign are so connected together, that we must have a spiritual coming if we are to have a spiritual reign. Now we believe and hold that Christ shall come a second time suddenly, to raise his saints at the first judgment, and they shall reign with him afterwards. The rest of the dead live not till after the thousand years are finished. Then shall they rise from their tombs at the sounding of the trumpet, and their judgment shall come and they shall receive the deeds which they have done in their bodies." [from The Two Advents of Christ MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pg. 39, Hebrews 9:27-28 (age 28)]
[from The Sinner's End MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pgs. 712-713, Psalms 73:17-18 (age 28)], Spurgeon is discussing the final condition of the sinner — "Let us go on to consider their end. The day of days, that dreadful day has come. The millennial rest is over, the righteous have had their thousand years of glory upon earth."
In the quotes above, the order of events fits perfectly the PREmillennial point of view. The final end of the sinner is faced after the righteous have enjoyed a thousand years with Christ.
| . | |
|
|
"Our Hope is the Personal PRE-MILLENNIAL RETURN of the Lord Jesus Christ in Glory."
|
|
|
— August 1891, age 58 |
Of the various articles and writings by those who deny the conclusion that we feel is obvious, none that I have found bases itself on the same type of quotes we have produced (many others could have been given — see those that follow). To the contrary, their's are based on "interpreting" Spurgeon's statements apart from such quotes that we have given.
| . |
|
We feel safe in concluding, then, |
|
that of the three views we began with, |
|
Spurgeon expressly states that he believes in a |
|
Literal Return of Jesus Christ |
|
BEFORE |
|
a Literal Millennium on the Earth. |
|
——————————————————————————— |
|
. |
|
Written by Mark A. McNeil (Houston TX USA), B.A., M.A., & PhD. Student |
|
Author of An Evaluation of the 'Oneness Pentecostal' Movement |
|
$3 + $1 shipping — Published by Pilgrim Publications — also Read C. H. SPURGEON on "PRETERISM" <<< Click Link Join our company... Psalm 68:11 "The Lord gave the WORD: |
|
Great was the COMPANY of those that PUBLISHED it." Please, Copy this article, pass it on, and mail to others. |
|
Permission granted by Bob L. Ross — No Copyright
|
|
NOTES OF INTEREST Watching and Waiting Magazine |
|
by C. W. H. Griffiths Published by Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony |
|
1 Donald Way, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 9JB United Kingdom |
|
Stephen A. Toms, secretary |
|
— Write and Request the Complete Article |
From the Summer 1990 issue of this magazine, C. W. H. Griffiths states Spurgeon "was a valued standard bearer for historic Pre-millennialism," and then presents an excellent article defending his Pre-millennial position.
Documenting additional quotations which we have added and expanded below —
Spurgeon (age 43) — There is moreover to be a reign of Christ. I cannot read the Scriptures without perceiving that there is to be a pre-millennial reign, as I believe, upon the earth and that there shall be new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness...
Spurgeon (age 49) — Then all His people who are alive at the time of His coming shall be suddenly transformed, so as to be delivered from all the frailties and imperfections of their mortal bodies: The dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed. Then we shall be presented spirit, soul, and body without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; in the clear and absolute perfection of our sanctified manhood, presented unto Christ Himself.
Spurgeon (age 50) — When the Lord comes there will be no more death; we who are alive and remain (as some of us may be — we cannot tell) will undergo a sudden transformation — for flesh and blood, as they are, cannot inherit the kingdom of God — and by that transformation our bodies shall be made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.
Spurgeon (age 52) — His coming will cause great sorrow. What does the text say about his coming? All kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Then this sorrow will be very general.
Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pgs. 427-430, Ezekiel 37:1-10] — Under the preaching of the Word the vilest sinners can be reclaimed, the most stubborn wills can be subdued, the most unholy lives can be sanctified. When the holy "breath" comes from the four winds, when the divine Spirit descends to own the Word, then multitudes of sinners, as on Pentecost's hallowed day, stand up upon their feet, an exceeding great army, to praise the Lord their God. But, mark you, this is not the first and proper interpretation of the text; it is indeed nothing more than a very striking parallel case to the one before us. It is not the case itself; it is only a similar one, for the way in which God restores a nation is, practically, the way in which he restores an individual. The way in which Israel shall be saved is the same by which any one individual sinner shall be saved. It is not, however, the one case which the prophet is aiming at; he is looking at the vast mass of cases, the multitudes of instances to be found among the Jewish people, of gracious quickening, and holy resurrection. His first and primary intention was to speak of them, and though it is right and lawful to take a passage in its widest possible meaning, since "no Scripture is of private interpretation," yet I hold it to be treason to God's Word to neglect its primary meaning, and constantly to say — "Such-and-such is the primary meaning, but it is of no consequence, and I shall use the words for another object." The preacher of God's truth should not give up the Holy Ghost's meaning; he should take care that he does not even put it in the back ground. The first meaning of a text, the Spirit's meaning, is that which would be brought out first, and though the rest may fairly spring out of it, yet the first sense should have the chief place. Let it have the uppermost place in the synagogue, let it be looked upon as at least not inferior, either in interest or importance, to any other meaning which may come out of the text.
The meaning of our text, as opened up by the context, is most evidently, if words mean anything, first, that there shall be a political restoration of the Jews to their own land and to their own nationality; and then, secondly, there is in the text, and in the context, a most plain declaration, that there shall be a spiritual restoration, a conversion in fact, of the tribes of Israel.
The promise is that they shall renounce their idols, and, behold, they have already done so. "Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols." Whatever faults the Jew may have besides, he certainly has no idolatry. "The Lord thy God is one God," is a truth far better conceived by the Jew than by any other man on earth except the Christian. Weaned for ever from the worship of all images, of whatever sort, the Jewish nation has now become infatuated with traditions or duped by philosophy. She is to have, however, instead of these delusions, a spiritual religion: she is to love her God. "They shall be my people, and I will be their God." The unseen but omnipotent Jehovah is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth by his ancient people; they are to come before him in his own appointed way, accepting the Mediator whom their sires rejected; coming into covenant relation with God, for so our text tells us — "I will make a covenant of peace with them," and Jesus is our peace, therefore we gather that Jehovah shall enter into the covenant of grace with them, that covenant of which Christ is the federal head, the substance, and the surety. They are to walk in God's ordinances and statutes, and so exhibit the practical effects of being united to Christ who hath given them peace. All these promises certainly imply that the people of Israel are to be converted to God, and that this conversion is to be permanent, for the tabernacle of God is to be with them, the Most High is, in an especial manner, to have his sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore; so that whatever nations may apostatize and turn from the Lord in these latter days, the nation of Israel never can, for she shall be effectually and permanently converted, the hearts of the fathers shall be turned with the hearts of the children unto the Lord their God, and they shall be the people of God, world without end.
We look forward, then, for these two things. I am not going to theorize upon which of them will come first, whether they shall be restored first, and converted afterwards, or converted first, and then restored. They are to be restored, and they are to be converted too. Let the Lord send these blessings in his own order, and we shall be well content whichever way they shall come. We take this for our joy and our comfort, that this thing shall be, and that both in the spiritual and in the temporal throne, the King Messiah shall sit, and reign among his people gloriously.
Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Lamb — the Light MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 439, Revelation 21:23] — (Spurgeon says of the millennial earth), They shall not say one to another, "Know the Lord: for all shall know him, from the least to the greatest." There may be even in that period certain solemn assemblies and Sabbath-days, but they will not be of the same kind as we have now; for the whole earth will be a temple, every day will be a Sabbath, the avocations of men will all be priestly, they shall be a nation of priests — distinctly so, and they shall day without night serve God in his temple, so that everything to which they set their hand shall be a part of the song which shall go up to the Most High. Oh! blessed day. Would God it had dawned, when these temples should be left, because the whole world should be a temple for God. But whatever may be the splendours of that day — and truly here is a temptation to let our imagination revel — however bright may be the walls set with chalcedony and amethyst, however splendid the gates which are of one pearl, whatever may be the magnificence set forth by the "streets of gold," this we know, that the sum and substance, the light and glory of the whole will be the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, "for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." Now, I want the Christian to meditate over this. In the highest, holiest, and happiest era that shall ever dawn upon this poor earth, Christ is to be her light. When she puts on her wedding garments, and adorns herself as a bride is adorned with jewels, Christ is to be her glory and her beauty. There shall be no ear-rings in her ears made with other gold than that which cometh from his mine of love; there shall be no crown set upon her brow fashioned by any other hand than his hands of wisdom and of grace. She sits to reign, but it shall be upon his throne; she feeds, but it shall be upon his bread; she triumphs, but it shall be because of the might which ever belongs to him who is the Rock of Ages. Come then, Christian, contemplate for a moment thy beloved Lord. Jesus, in a millennial age, shall be the light and the glory of the city of the new Jerusalem. Observe then, that Jesus makes the light of the millennium, because his presence will be that which distinguishes that age from the present. That age is to be akin to paradise. Paradise God first made upon earth, and paradise God will last make. Satan destroyed it; and God will never have defeated his enemy until he has re-established paradise, until once again a new Eden shall bless the eyes of God's creatures. Now, the very glory and privilege of Eden I take to be not the river which flowed through it with its four branches, nor that it came from the land of Havilah which hath dust of gold — I do not think the glory of Eden lay in its grassy walks, or in the boughs bending with luscious fruit — but its glory lay in this, that the "Lord God walked in the garden in the cool of the day." Here was Adam's highest privilege, that he had companionship with the Most High. In those days angels sweetly sang that the tabernacle of God was with man, and that he did dwell amongst them. Brethren, the paradise which is to be regained for us will have this for its essential and distinguishing mark, that the Lord shall dwell amongst us. This is the name by which the city is to be called — Jehovah Shammah, the Lord is there. It is true we have the presence of Christ in the Church now — "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." We have the promise of his constant indwelling: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." But still that is vicariously by his Spirit, but soon he is to be personally with us. That very man who once died upon Calvary is to live here. He — that same Jesus — who was taken up from us, shall come in like manner as he was taken up from the gazers of Galilee. Rejoice, rejoice, beloved, that he comes, actually and really comes; and this shall be the joy of that age, that he is among his saints, and dwelleth in them, with them, and talketh and walketh in their midst.
|
"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial — that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial — that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]
|
Can the elect be deceived?
Woody it has sure seemed as if you have been making a salvation connection...even in the ability to present the gospel...
You were Arminian once....
Can the elect be deceived???
Can the elect be deceived?
So does this mean that Pastor Jerry and Pastor Steve and YOUR Pastor do not the fullness of the gospel as you the engineer and the financial expert do??
So does this mean that Pastor Jerry and Pastor Steve and YOUR Pastor do not TEACH the fullness of the gospel as you the engineer and the financial expert do??
Do you believe that it is possible to block the acceptance of the gospel message by an elect man because the type or style of the presentation of the gospel?
Yous replyI've never heard them preach on certain gospel passages so I can't say if their first devotion is to the gospel or not. As for my pastor, whenever he has talked about a gospel passage that is regarding the end, he has preached the truth. And I know that he has quite a few preTrib believers in our church.
I find this an incredible post Woody ..You have posted with Jerry for years and you do not know if he presents the gospel correctly? You are a posting friend with Pastor Steve That is pride talking and walking guy...
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth woody...first denying that your end time position effects your salvation...inspite of calling it the GOSPEL over and over...
THEN after denying that it affects ones salvation you say it affects the way two friends that are Pastors present the gospel (We are not talking end times here Woody ...cause YOU said that the end times position is not the gospel right?)
Will you please clarify exactly what you do mean...
I did not ask how your Pastor presents the ends time message..I asked if he premil position affected the way he presented the gospel??
I understand your ~need~ to declare vs 6 to be a recapitulation of vs 4,5. You ~need~ to insist that this is John 'explaining' the 'previous' vision.
The problem, however, is that this gives an awkward reading to vs 6.
John tells us that the 'first resurrection' is that the saints 'lived and reigned' a thousand years.
He goes on to tell us that these 'souls' who have 'lived and reigned' are blessed because they ~SHALL~ be priests and kings and ~SHALL~ reign a thousand years.
If this is a recapitulation of vs 4,5 then the wording is quite awkward:
Blessed are those who 'lived and reigned a thousand years' for they shall be priests... and they shall reign a thousand years... -well....DUH! What kind of 'explanation' is that. Talk about stating the obvious!
Now, if John had said in vs 6: "Blessed are those who were beheaded and those who didn't worship the beast or receive his mark for they ~shall~ be priests...and they ~shall~ reign a thousand years.." -you would have a point. However, John does ~not~ put things this way.
There is absolutely ~NO~ indication that John is 'leaving' his 'vision' at vs 6 to travel back to his 1st century audience, give them a brief over view and then return to his vision. ~IF~ John had started verse 7 with 'and I saw', you ~might~ be able to make that case, but that would be very iffy in that.
No, there is absolutly ~NO~ indication that John leaves his vision in vs 6.
John ~even continues~ to declare, in vs 7 what the future holds! He tells us that the Beast 'shall be' loosed and that he 'shall go out' to deceive the nations again! In a normal, non-eisegesical reading, this is obviously John fortelling of future events unlike the past/present reality he is describing in vs 1-5.
It's basic reading, Mom. It ~doesn't~ support your view. I'm 'sorry', but you simply can't claim John is 'leaving' his vision to give a summary here. It just doesn't work. But I understand your irresistable desire and need to declare this to be so.
Furthermore, I have been told by many pre-mills that the '1000' years is specifically referenced as "the thousand years". This is the way the '1000' years are written in the greek in vs 4,5 and 7.
However(!), in vs 6, the Greek reads: "~a~ thousand years".
vs 6 is future to John, Mom. vs 4,5 are what he is 'seeing' and are thus 'past/present' to his 'vision'. vs 6,7,8 have yet to happen.
Just like Paul tells us in Eph. 2: "That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus"
It ~is~ that simple, Mom.
Jean
The thing that struck me when I first had the difference between the federal and the "realisitc" view explained to me was that I had instinctively adopted the realistic view very early on in my reading of Romans. It made sense, and I saw no reason to think otherwise. My brother is ordained (although he is not pastoring a church, as his calling is that of a teacher), and has worked through quite a bit of this and other topics for a book he is writing. He gave me a rough draft of the section of his book dealing with Righteousness in Christ, where he systematically goes through both the Federalist and Realistic views of man's fall and redemption. The realistic view makes so much more sense, it is so much simpler, and actually gives great reassurance when the understanding of how these things work is applied to our standing in Christ.
I know some have wrestled with what happens when we sin (are we at that moment not saved?), and this answers that question with the understanding of our union with Christ, and how that union in a sense "covers" us between the instant we sin and the instant we confess and ask forgiveness. No more of that "I'm in, I'm out, I'm in, I'm out" thinking that only brings condemnation. That doesn't diminish the seriousness of sin, it just means that our standing in Christ is much stronger than the sin we still find ourselves committing, even though we don't want to. It was very liberating for me to learn that!
Yes, you did. And John 11:25,26 calls this a 'resurrection' and that we subsequently 'live'! The same terminology John uses in Rev 20!
"...the dispute lays in the reign of Christ on earth..."
Do I need to remind you ~AGAIN~ that Rev 20 makes no mention that this '1000' year reign in vs 4,5 takes place on earth! None, nada, nichts, zilch, keine! ~NONE~ It is completely read into the text!
Furthermore, there is absolutley ~NO~ N.T. mention of a temporary 1000 year earthly reign. None, nada, nichts, zilch, keine! ~NONE~ There is ~NO~ support in the N.T. for a temporary reign on earth which follows Christ's 2nd coming and preceedes the institution of the New Heavens and the New Earth.
~RATHER~ there is ~AMPLE~, ~CLEAR~, and ~EXPLICIT~ teaching in the N.T. that the earth will be burned up at the time Christ returns in Glory -and ~not~ 1000 years later!
Furthermore, there is absolutley ~no~ O.T. passage which claims a temporary 1000 year reign of Christ on earth ~after~ his second coming and ~before~ he ushers in the New Heavens and the New Earth! ~NONE~ Oh, but there ~will~ be a reign on earth, just not ~this~ earth. It will be on the New Heavens and the New Earth (wherin dwells righteousness) and it will last ~forever~!
"...not that eternity began for each of us on the day of our rebirth"
Actually...it does!
2 Corinthians 6
2 (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, ~now~ is the accepted time; behold, ~now~ is the day of salvation.)
John 11
26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
Salvation is ~now~, Mom. For you and for me! Eternitiy ~has~ begun. We shall ~NEVER~ die!
"You are setting up straw men.."
No, I haven't been misrepresenting your view. I have only been attempting to bring you the teaching of the Scriptures. I never said you didn't believe these things. I have only attempted to show you the similarities in these parallel passages.
Mom, 1,2 and 3 John are 'anonymous' works. There is no mention in these passages that John is the author. What is one of the main reasons we attribute these books to John? Because of the similar use of wordings and language.
Likewise, the way John words Rev 20:4,5 is of utmost importance and we can garner meaning -in case of unclarity or dispute- when we see just how the same author uses the same wordings and language. That is why John 5:24,25 and John 11:25,26 are so helpful in these 'disputed' situations. John uses this language in his gospel. In that Gospel account, it is abundantly clear what he refers to. That he, in ch. 11, calls our regeneration a 'resurrection' is no mere coincidence. It has ~everything~ to do with Rev 20:4.
"Jean why would John need a vision of a place he was already at?
This is the book about the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" written by the Apostle John, "who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw." Why ~wouldn't~ it include past events. Wouldn't that give us proper context of the future things John is telling us about?
Or, are you trying to tell me that you are ~PRESUMING~ that this book ~only~ speaks of future events???
If so, what is your basis for this ~ASSUMPTION~?
"Revelation is written for believers not the unsaved...why would they need to know these things if they had already occurred ???"
Really? These believers ~knew~ the entire history of the Christian faith?
Mom, the reason ~they~ need 'to know these things' which 'have already occurred' is for the very same reason ~we~ need to know these things! They are believers, yes, but they did not 'hear or see' the things the way John and the aposltes did nor did they 'handle' our Lord like the apostles did. Are you trying to tell me you have no need to study past historical biblical events now that ~you~ believe?
"What are we watching for Jean?? "
This is the book about the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" written by the Apostle John, "who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw." John's intention is to tell us about Christ. I don't understand your point?
Jean
You and I have BOTH of us demonstrated the existence of PREMILLENNIALISM in the earliest church.
"You have not demonstrated the existence of AMILLENNIALISM in the earliest church. "
Yes, as I recall, your question had something to do with the ~possibility~ that the 'many' Martyr speaks of were 'postmillennialists'. Well, xzins, amillennialists ~ARE~ Postmillennialists! The term 'amillennial', 'amillennialism' or 'amillennialist' ~didn't~ exist until about 100 years ago. (Coinded by the former Netherlands P.M. and Calvinist theologian Abraham Kuyper, I believe). The term 'amillennialist' was brought about to distinguish two variations of 'postmillennialism' -what we today call postmillennialism and what we today call amillennialism. They are both 'post' millennial.
They ~both~ agree that Christ comes at the end of the age to judge all men and to destroy the old heavens and earth and to usher in the New Heavens and the New Earth. Since, as Mom has said, ~this~ is the point of contention -you have just lost your own argument!
Furthermore, if we look at the actual beliefs of the most prominant 'Postmillennialists' (as opposed to 'amillennialists'), such as B.B. Warfield and Kenneth Gentry, we find that they interpret the '1000' years of Rev 20 just like the amillennialists do. They view the '1000' years as our current reign. The 'Golden Age' of Postmillennialism has nothing to do with this '1000' years spoken of in Rev 20.
Now, if you remember, ~both~ these views (amil and postmil) profess with the earliest confession of the early church, The Apostles Creed, that Jesus will come "to judge the living and the dead". This is not Pre-Millennial by any means! Pre-Millennial thought teaches that Jesus does not come from heaven to 'judge the living and the dead' -perhaps ~eventually~, but Jesus comes ~primarily~ to establish this temporary earthly kingdom. This ~does not fit~ with the Apostles Creed -the earliest confession of the early early church!
Now, if we were to, for the sake of argument, state that amillennialism was ~not~ present until Origen's time and if we were to accept, for the sake of argument, your intended point that only views present in the early church are possibly true, then you have just argued against your stated dispensational theories. For they ~were not~ present in the early church. They are a wholesale fabrication invented roughly 200 years ago. Postmillennialists are ~not~ dispensational. Historic Premillennialists were/are ~not~ dispensational (not even 'close'). Amillennialists are ~not~ dispensational.
I would hope, then, that if you intend to prove to me that because Amillennialism was not evident in the early church (it was) it has no foundation for being the truth, then you would take your own advice and dispell your mind of this silly notion of dispensationalism!
"It only comes about when allegorical Origen comes on the scene."
Not ~remotely~ true. Even with your contention that it was 'postmillennialism' that was evident in the early church we know that in Postmillenialism (both branches) we have Christ coming in order to judge the living and the dead, destroy the old earth and heavens and institute the New Heavens and the New Earth.
"Not a peep about it before then."
Again, not remotely true. Just look, as I have shown you many many times, at the Apostles Creed! Very Very 'post' millennial!
"And even then, it is only the hint of how Origen is trying to account for the fact that Christ hasn't yet returned....that is, it is born out of despair. "
Your attempt to lie and re-write Church history to show the validity of your Pre-Millennial theories is what is desperate and quite laughable!
Your ignorance of Church history precludes you!
Jean
I said your post by Justin Martyr doesn't say anything at all about those other Christians who don't believe in his brand of premillennialism.
Nothing, nada, nichts. NOt a word.
I said that they could have been postmil for all you know or that they could have simply been a different brand of premillennial.
It isn't said. Since Justin doesn't say, it's safer to think they were a different variety of premill than anything else, since that variety of doctrine WAS EXPLICITLY acknowledged.
Your answer, therefore, is less than helpful. There are plenty of people on this list who have an excellent sense of church history. I'm sure if I get anything flat out wrong that they will correct me. And I'll willingly accept correction for anything pointed out that's wrong.
But that doesn't change the fact that Justin Martyr NOPLACE mentions amillennialism....anywhere....ever.
Equating ones millenial view with the Gospel is, IMHO, dangerous. Eschatology and Soteriology are worlds apart.
I haven't read all of the posts on this, and related, threads, but I have read most of what I have been BUMPed to. As a result, I continue to remain firmly in the "pan-millenial" camp, while still leaning to a Historical Pre-Millenial viewpoint. I do not believe that II Peter 3 "utterly destroys" pre-millenialism (even though I have read, and re-read, that chapter with an open and inquiring mind), nor do I believe that any pre-millenial texts absolutely destroy the a-millenial position.
In fact, as I look back on this whole discussion I see that much more heat than light has been generated. That is why I come to appreciate even more the wisdom of the position of the Baptist Faith and Message:
X. Last Things
God, in His own time and in His own way, will bring the world to its appropriate end. According to His promise, Jesus Christ will return personally and visibly in glory to the earth; the dead will be raised; and Christ will judge all men in righteousness. The unrighteous will be consigned to Hell, the place of everlasting punishment. The righteous in their resurrected and glorified bodies will receive their reward and will dwell forever in Heaven with the Lord.
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.
