Hey:

Well, then answer me this: What is the difference between your presentation of Postmillennialism and Amillennialism?

And, then how does this fit with Revelation 20:7ff?

Blessings,

-CH

__________________
In Essentials Unity, in non-Essentials Liberty, in all things Charity.

Robert Paul Wieland
Springs Reformed Presbyterian Church
Colorado Springs, CO
RPCNA

Postmillennialism necessarily sees a Christianization of the world. Amillennialism, ala Vos, allows for it but not necessarily so.

__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College

Postmillennialism (and premil) actually best allow for this verse. If some amils see the entire church age ala 2 Timothy 3 as apostate, then it makes no sense for Satan to be released from his prison to deceive the nations. How can you apostasize from an apostasy?

Hey:

Would this "Christianization" of the world include the spheres of politics and economics? Do not P-Mills argue that as people get converted to the gospel there is a concurrent "fallout" in a "Christianization" of the political and economic spheres?

As an A-Mill I understand the "Christianization of the world" in the Biblical use of the word "World" - i.e. The Elect. Thus, we are in the Millennium. Satan was bound by the ministry, death, and resurrection of Christ, "I saw Satan fall like lightning." The Gospel is being spread through the whole world, and the Elect are being converted.

You carefully missed the point - If Christ is going to return at the end of a "Golden Age" then what is all this about Satan being released and gatering the Gentiles to persecute the Church?

Blessings,

-CH

I am not postmil and do have Rev 20 type critiques of them, but later maybe.

Per your first paragraph: some postmils do. But they don't have to. Your Banner of Truth guys, many of them socialists, do not care much about Christianizing economics, but they are very much postmil. On the other end the theonomists have written extensively on this topic, but there is no unified consensus.

Per second paragraph: "world" can but not usually means "elect." It can mean, as any summary of a Greek lexicon will show, "that system which is against Christ," "the cosmos," "elect," "non-elect."

Per your 3rd paragraph: I understood what you are saying. Excepting Warfield, postmils believe at the end of the church age/millennium (thus postmils would agree with you, contra myself, that we are in the millennium now). At the end of that there is a great rebellion/apostasy. Satan is presumably loosed. Christ returns and defeats him, or something like that.

This is an unadvised statement. My position conforms to the analogia fidei, and therefore is in the mainstream of reformed interpretation. The fact is that there is not a "consensus" interpretation of these passages, and so room is left for the development of an approach which provides for better harmony. To refer to a related example -- the fact that most traditional interpreters of 1 Cor. 13:10 see "the perfect" as a reference to the heavenly state does not render the modern cessationist interpretation an extreme position.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."