if even the demons can agree...

[satz]

Mark3:22And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.
23And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
24And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
25And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
26And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.


Jesus says that even Satan's kingdom is not divided. Why then does God's church seem to be? I am not saying there needs to be some kind of world wide church government or what not, but if you look at christianity today, churches have such different doctrine and practice that fellowship can be limited at best.

There are some churches that seem to spend all their time preaching about seperation from other christians and other churches. And the sad thing is that they are probably right. With the way some churches are going today...

Does anyone find this depressing? It is strange, before i am to reformed theology, i would walk around town and see all the other churches and consider them to be my fellows in Christ. Now when ever i see another church or someone professing christianity, my first reaction is one of suspicion.
Off course i am not blaming the theology...i am just saying now that i am more discerning, i seem to see that the picture of comtemporary christianity is much more ugly than i thought.

Does anyone else feel this way?

[Edited on 14-2-2005 by satz]

 

[BobVigneault]

But God said to Jonah, "Do you do well to be angry for the plant?" And he said, "Yes, I do well to be angry, angry enough to die." 10And the LORD said, "You pity the plant, for which you did not labor, nor did you make it grow, which came into being in a night and perished in a night. 11And should not I pity Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know their right hand from their left, and also much cattle?"

Mark, I think it would be better for you to think of the folks in these churches as your fellows in Christ. There is a famine in the land for the Word of God, if you have been blessed to have studied enough to have discernment and can separate error from good teaching, then have pity on your fellows in these churches. In most churches I go into I find such hunger for the Word but no one to teach. The so called shepherds have their pet verses and pop psychology. These blind leaders will not tolerate good teaching.

But remember, your brothers and sisters are in those churches and they need to hear the Word. You should be suspicious of the teaching that passes for preaching these days but you should also have mercy on the sheep who have a lazy shepherd. Don't get depressed, teach! Prepare yourself and teach. Find 2 or 3 hungry people and teach them what you know, teach them what has changed your life. Teach them the doctrines of grace from the scriptures. Will you make someone mad? You bet! But if faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God then you are a very precious commodity in your town of weak professors.

That should invigorate you Mark, not depress you. God bless your witness friend.

 

[Peter]

There is One general visible Church under the NT. There ought to be one common church government over the whole earth, this would be most conducive to unity and the over all edification of the Church. Divisions and sects are evil and will be removed in the millennium.

 

[Scott]

"There is One general visible Church under the NT. There ought to be one common church government over the whole earth, this would be most conducive to unity and the over all edification of the Church. Divisions and sects are evil and will be removed in the millennium."

Nicely said.

 

[Scott]

Mark:

I feel the same way you do. The situation of the modern church seems to have parallels to ancient Israel. Israel was created to be a unified confederacy of twelve tribes. After the death of Solomon it split into two separate kingdoms (Judah and Israel a/k/a the Northern and Southern Kingdoms). This set up insoluble problems. For example, the center of worship was in one kingdom that was hostile to members of the second kingdom. Members of the second kingdom could not participate in divine worship due to the separation. Yet, God still treated both groups as His people. The only real solution was unity. In a glorious passage, Hezekiah strove for this unity by inviting members Israel to join with Judah in the celebration of the Passover. See 1 Chronicles 30. God gave the people “unity of mind.”

 

[Answerman]

I believe that the long history of the ups and downs in Christ's church is God's way of purifying His bride. Everytime a major heresy arises, God raises up Godly men to stand up for His truth and brings His church through, eventhough at the time it may seem like the enemy would triumph over Christ's church.

But as a postmillenialist, I believe that Christ's church will eventually triumph in history. The millennium being defined as the time from Christ's ascension to Christ's return. Hence the "millenial" kingdom is not something that comes by observation but something that slowly grows throughout history like leaven through a lump of dough (with an occational punching down only to rise again).

 

[Peter]

Originally posted by Answerman
I believe that the long history of the ups and downs in Christ's church is God's way of purifying His bride. Everytime a major heresy arises, God raises up Godly men to stand up for His truth and brings His church through, eventhough at the time it may seem like the enemy would triumph over Christ's church.

But as a postmillenialist, I believe that Christ's church will eventually triumph in history. The millennium being defined as the time from Christ's ascension to Christ's return. Hence the "millenial" kingdom is not something that comes by observation but something that slowly grows throughout history like leaven through a lump of dough (with an occational punching down only to rise again).

except you're not a postmillennialist, your an Amill that's optimistic. The millennium is yet future! See:http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=7479

 

[Answerman]

Peter, it sounds like what you are saying is that what makes one an a-millennial is a belief in when the millennium started and not the nature of the millennium. Am I understanding you correctly? If so, then I have to disagree. I think the essential difference in the a-mil and post-mil position is the nature of the millennial kingdom.

Maybe there are different opinions on what makes a person a-mil or post-mil (just as there are disagreements on what makes one a theonomist) but just on a surface level the prefixes should give the position away. A- means to negate, post- means after. I realize that a-millennialists do not say that there is no millennium, so the term is somewhat of a misnomer, but what I have always understood that what they mean when they use the prefix "A" has to do with the nature and the duration of the millennium, with the emphasis put on what was meant by the nature of the millennium and not the duration of the millennium although that element is there.

Now I realize that some a-millennialists will concede the possibility of a “golden age” but this is not what characterizes their system, whereas for the post-mil the “golden age” is an essential element to their system. So In my humble opinion the litmus test for determining which camp one falls into is whether or not their system DEMANDS a “golden age” where there will be visible signs of the Gospel of Jesus Christ permeating society and bringing true prosperity as a result (both spiritually and physically). The key being how they interpret certain prophetic texts such as Isaiah 65:17-25 and other text that speak of a blessed state where the creation is still not fully redeemed. And at this point, ironically enough, is where the pre-mils and post-mils have some agreement in contrast with the a-mil position.

Am I making any sense?

 

[satz]

Originally posted by maxdetail
But God said to Jonah, "Do you do well to be angry for the plant?" And he said, "Yes, I do well to be angry, angry enough to die." 10And the LORD said, "You pity the plant, for which you did not labor, nor did you make it grow, which came into being in a night and perished in a night. 11And should not I pity Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know their right hand from their left, and also much cattle?"

Mark, I think it would be better for you to think of the folks in these churches as your fellows in Christ. There is a famine in the land for the Word of God, if you have been blessed to have studied enough to have discernment and can separate error from good teaching, then have pity on your fellows in these churches. In most churches I go into I find such hunger for the Word but no one to teach. The so called shepherds have their pet verses and pop psychology. These blind leaders will not tolerate good teaching.

But remember, your brothers and sisters are in those churches and they need to hear the Word. You should be suspicious of the teaching that passes for preaching these days but you should also have mercy on the sheep who have a lazy shepherd. Don't get depressed, teach! Prepare yourself and teach. Find 2 or 3 hungry people and teach them what you know, teach them what has changed your life. Teach them the doctrines of grace from the scriptures. Will you make someone mad? You bet! But if faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God then you are a very precious commodity in your town of weak professors.

That should invigorate you Mark, not depress you. God bless your witness friend.

thanks for your advice and encouragement.

I hope i did not give the impression i looked down upon those who might have 'wrong doctrine'. I fully understand it is only by the grace of God that i am any 'better' ( if indeed i can use that word than they, i am also acutely aware of the fact that i often fail to make proper use of the greater grace God has granted me.

I think you are right in that the answer to the problem is be ready to teach the truth at all times, patiently and lovingly. I was just voicing my frustration over seperation that plagues the church today.

 

[andreas]

***Jesus says that even Satan's kingdom is not divided. Why then does God's church seem to be?***

The true church,the eternal church,the body of Christ is not divided.What is divided is the external,corporate church,which is made up of true believers(precious stones,gold and silver)and people who merely attend church,but are not saved(wood,hay,stubble)


"9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;" 1 Cor.3.

FEAR NOT, FOR THE BODY OF Christ,HIS BRIDE ,IS NOT DIVIDED.

andreas.

 

[Peter]

David,
I see what youre saying, but, your definition deviates from the historical definition of Postmillennialism. Prior to the 20th century a Postmillennialist was someone who believed the millennium was the future "golden age", and someone who believed the golden age was just the culmination of the millennium, which began at Xs advent, was an amillennialist. In the thread I hyperlinked to some ppl actually made the point of saying the majority of self styled Amillennialists used to be optimistic. Granted, language is dynamic, so if Postmill has recently come to be defined as anyone with an optimistic view of the last days I find it acceptable if you wish to call yourself Postmil. The only problem with that is it can tend towards equivocation. When people like Bahnsen say the Puritans were all Postmillennial does he mean they all had an hopeful outlook for the future, or does it mean they all believed the millennium began with the 1st coming of Christ + the former?

 

[Answerman]

Peter,

Can you point me to some sources where the historical definition of Postmillennialism is dealt with?

Maybe I am wrong on this, but the way that I have always heard these two systems compared always emphasises how the postmillenial view is the only view that necessitates a "golden age" based on their understanding of certain passages whereas the amils do not make this a necessary part of their system. I must admit I have not yet studied the history of the terms amillennial and postmillennial, I am just basing my understanding on what you might call the common modern understanding of these two systems.

I would be curious to see how the first people that called themselves "postmillennial" interpreted certain passages, then I could probably be able to makeout what were the essential parts of their system in contrast with people who would have characterized themselves as amillennial living at that same time.