Ah, I see. My apologies!It was an honest question. Not everyone is up to speed on these things.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ah, I see. My apologies!It was an honest question. Not everyone is up to speed on these things.
I take it that it didn't work?Yes, that is the book I hoped would help convince me of post-mill.
Right. Ian Murray's The Puritan Hope is a great introduction to the postmillenianism of earlier theologians.
You caught me! Speed of all sorts eludes me these days.Iain Murray ... or is your spelling not up to speed with these things?
Well, seeing it’s an ongoing study, I’m not going to debate for or against postmillennialism. I’ll just lurk and sop up whatever gravy I can with my biscuit.To be clear, we are open to questions and discussions that help people learn. Just be careful about advocating something that is at odds with what we generally profess.
My clarification may have muddied the waters. So, to be even more clear: postmillennialism is within confessional boundaries. Advocating for it here is fine! Not everyone agrees with it, but that is what discussions are for.Well, seeing it’s an ongoing study, I’m not going to debate for or against postmillennialism. I’ll just lurk and sop up whatever gravy I can with my biscuit.
Sounds good to me.My clarification may have muddied the waters. So, to be even more clear: postmillennialism is within confessional boundaries. Advocating for it here is fine! Not everyone agrees with it, but that is what discussions are for.
As long as it is done according to our usual forum rules, etc....
Why in the world are you administrators telling me to study up on Reformed theology and confessions? I have. Why in the world can't I believe in the confessions and still believe in pre-tribulation rapture? How can a Pastor who has been at the same church for 50 years, and has studied the word of God even longer; who proclaims to be a reformer/Calvinist, and yet he believes in a pre-tribulation rapture John MacArthur)? These confessions; that I do agree with, happened shortly after the reformation. Where for more than 1100 years prior, wasn't talked about because they didn't even have a bible. The peoples interpretation of the Bible became what the institutional church spoon-fed them. Premillennialism largely disappeared after it was condemned as heretical by the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD. It wasn't until the reform movement of the early seventeenth century that we see a rebound in the number of statements that reflect the pretribulation view. And when the reformation happened, it wasn't really about end times, but reforming the church; getting the church freed from what had become of the catholic church. I know it goes deeper that, but that was just my short version. Why do you tell me to stop promoting when I'm not. I am discussing my views; which are Biblical by the way, with others who have a different point of view; so that I may learn the difference of views. What good is a forum when all you want to discuss is one view? Pretribulationalist are much more closer to the reformed view than you think. We are brothers and sisters in Christ, and just because I happen to believe in pretib rapture don't mean I disagree with the confessions; or that I'm trying to convert people to my view. Let us reason with one another. What are you afraid of any way? And to say that you are not in some way a dispensationalist, is just not true. You believe the Old Testament is Not the New Testament right? Are they not different dispensations? Please!! I am not promoting unconfessional views, I'm just having a conversation about my views; which in my opinion don't go against the confessions. Why isn't pretrib mentioned in the confessions? Perhaps it's because the main focus was on the reformation of the church and not anything else. Confessions that were drawn up then were focused on salvational issues that would reform the church. So it makes since why escapology (End Times) wasn't mentioned much. I pray you don't find me disrespectful, because that is not my intention. And if I in some way offended you, please forgive me. God Bless and thank youModeration.
Richard, you've been advised to study up on Reformed Theology and the Confessions. Here you come across as advocating for dispensationalism.
Stop promoting that. It is part of your promise not to promote unconfessional views. It is good for you to learn what confessional views are.
Given that probably the majority of the drafters of the Westminster Satandards would have been postmillennial, I'd say so. Although the Westminster Standards can be read in a way the allows for amillennialism, and perhaps even premillennialism, there is certainly an argument to be made that it sort of assumes postmillennialism. See WLC 191 for example.I will say this, he’s open to learning the other eschatologies. Would postmillennialism fall under confessional? I know several Reformed have held to it. I know it teaches a general resurrection so I’d say it is. Asking for clarification as I don’t want to be a rebel rouser on here.
I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this video.
I’m not sure I’m understanding what is being said here. What is "conflating the Israelite civil law with the moral law," and who is advocating it? Surely you’re not referring to upholding the general equity of the civil law, because that is clearly confessional, and numerous major Reformed theologians in the past have asserted that it is the magistrate's duty to uphold such.In case it's causing confusion, and since it was mentioned in the thread, Theonomy (in the sense of conflating the Israelite civil law with the moral law), is unconfessional. That said, some of what people seem these days to label as Theonomy (e.g. the duty of the civil magistrate to uphold both tables of the moral law) is plainly confessional.
It's making the civil law just a part of the moral law, rather than distinguishing the two. As far as I'm aware, the folks at Apologia advocate this, and it seems to be a view which some (oddly) conflate with postmillennialism, which is why I mention it. As far as I know that is the distinguishing viewpoint of Theonomy, I could be wrong.I’m not sure I’m understanding what is being said here. What is "conflating the Israelite civil law with the moral law," and who is advocating it? Surely you’re not referring to upholding the general equity of the civil law, because that is clearly confessional, and numerous major Reformed theologians in the past have asserted that it is the magistrate's duty to uphold such.
I don't think this is correct. I am a Theonomist, yet I do not conflate the moral and the civil law (although I still don't really know what that means). The civil law is most certainly grounded in and an exposition of the moral law, but that is hardly conflating the two. The distinguishing mark of Theonomy, in my opinion, is the insistence that the general equity of the Old Testament civil law, all the way down to the very punishments, is to be enforced in all societies today.It's making the civil law just a part of the moral law, rather than distinguishing the two. ... As far as I know that is the distinguishing viewpoint of Theonomy...
Why in the world are you administrators telling me to study up on Reformed theology and confessions? I have. Why in the world can't I believe in the confessions and still believe in pre-tribulation rapture?
What are you afraid of any way?
I'm with you, I watched it thinking it would explain something. The only impression I left with is that I dress and present myself really conservatively compared to most today.I thought the video was boring and lacking in information. The moderator was especially unhelpful as he meandered hither and yon in a stream of consciousness.
Everyone,
Please see my next post titled
Towards a Precising Definition of the Amill & Postmill Positions.
-OR-
Let’s Get on the Same Page
Richard, we don't usually engage in discussions over moderation. But for the benefit of others, here is a brief explanation:
We are a confessional board. That means we voluntarily gather to discuss things relating to the historic confessions. It helps keep things in focus.
Dispensationalism has so many elements that are outside of the historic confessions that they become big distractions to our discussions here. Even in this thread a discussion on postmillenialism is being pulled in different directions and missing the point.
It is like a group of cartographers gathering to discuss the best ways to map a spherical earth onto a flat page. If someone comes along and says, "wait a minute, the earth is flat. What's the problem?", it is an unhelpful distraction.
We not saying you must believe in such and such. We are not afraid of others having different views. But for the purposes of this board, we are trying to keep distractions from derailing discussions. That is the main reason we do not allow promotion of unconfessional views.
This isn't the place for you, brother. It's probably best to move on now.I honestly Love you and everyone here, but I just cannot figure out why these confessions are the soul catalyst. They are a declaration of faith, not the written word of God. Yes they are important; that we understand how others believe, but why are only those confessions recognized? Because they were the first to be written? Do other confessions made by the church at large today hold no weight? Clearly there are churches today (or over the last 100 years) whose confessions of faith hold true to the word of God, and yet discuses disminsationalism, or pre-trib rapture; and because they do, you would believe they are not holding true to God's word; because your confessions don't speak of these things? There for yours is the only one that holds true and there is no other discussion. This whole line of reasoning just don't make much since. I will leave the Puritan Board for the sake of not causing you anymore distress. God Bless you; and see you in the clouds
I’m hoping he takes the info given to him and prayerfully studies them.This isn't the place for you, brother. It's probably best to move on now.
You may or may not see this, but I’ll type this anyway. Confessions are the best way to state your beliefs, both in a local church, and also on an Internet forum. No one needs to adhere to every belief, but they have to agree with the majority of that confession to be given membership of that church or forum. It’s like you having someone who wants to join a reformed church. If they reject certain points of that church’s confession, they shouldn’t be given membership, seeing this could lead to problems down the road.I honestly Love you and everyone here, but I just cannot figure out why these confessions are the soul catalyst. They are a declaration of faith, not the written word of God. Yes they are important; that we understand how others believe, but why are only those confessions recognized? Because they were the first to be written? Do other confessions made by the church at large today hold no weight? Clearly there are churches today (or over the last 100 years) whose confessions of faith hold true to the word of God, and yet discuses disminsationalism, or pre-trib rapture; and because they do, you would believe they are not holding true to God's word; because your confessions don't speak of these things? There for yours is the only one that holds true and there is no other discussion. This whole line of reasoning just don't make much since. I will leave the Puritan Board for the sake of not causing you anymore distress. God Bless you; and see you in the clouds
I would love to hear anyone's thoughts on this video. It's 12 minutes long and I have to say the philosophy of the doctrine is very appealing. Of course we want to believe what's most biblical, but the teaching seems very invigorating and motivational, so I need to discern it well.
This isn't the place for you, brother. It's probably best to move on now.
Coming here to seek to convert us to aberrant views just isn't going to work!This isn't the place for you, brother. It's probably best to move on now.