OK, convince me of Postmillenialism

[Roldan]

Again, these passages will be fulfilled at His coming, no need to force a postmil interpretation into the text.

And where exactly does it state explicitly in these passages that these things occur at his coming? I think you and the other amils are forcing the text here.

Look at I Corinthians 15:23-26:

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Recall Hebrews 10:12-13, he is WAITING in HEAVEN, sitting at the right hand of the Father UNTIL his enemies are made a footstool for his feet.

So Christ SITS, He WAITS, and He REIGNS until his enemies are made a footstool for his feet.

I'm gonna post some points I made here once before some years ago and I'm curious as to what you guys thoughts are on it, so please by all means pick it apart and help a brotha out, no offense will be taken

Its kinda long but obviously Reform folk like to read so here ya go part 1


There is NO evidence for referring the OT passages to the millennium of the New, there is an overwhelming army of evidence for indentifying it with the Perfect eternal state. Isaiah 65:17 sets the stage and time for the entire prophecy: "Behold I create a new heavens and a new earth." This prophecy, recapitulated in verse 22 of the next chapter, is chronologically applied by Peter, in 2 Peter 3, and John, Revelation 21, to a time FOLLOWING the coming of Christ. They interpret Isaiah as refering to the eternal state. In both these NT passages, the Isaiah prophecy is clearly linked with a time subsequent to the millennium. Peter interprets Isaiah's "promise" as one which will be PRECEEDED by the destruction of the wicked and the melting away of the present heavens and earth. Revelation 21 locates the fulfillment of the prophecy at exactly the same time, John perfectly places it AFTER the thousand years, the resurrection and the white throne judgment. Other passages of a parallel nature also must refer to the new earth, not the millennial earth.

The contents of Isaiah's POETIC prophecy are no more literal than the description of the eternal state in Rev. 21 and 22. Who can interpret all the details of those two chapters literally? In both, Isaiah and Rev., language is used,in terms of what was considered most pleasant and astonishing in that day, to get across what words with their present limitations are incapable of correctly expressing. How else can perfection be described in words which have imperfect objects and concepts as recipients? It is difficult to understand why this passage should be misinterpreted when it clearly is indentified with the eternal state by the New Testament. The millennial references is totally without evidence, but its identification with the eternal state is affirmed by an abundance of biblical evidence.

This one passage has been singled out to demonstrate the way in which OT passages which actually refer to restoration from captivity, the New Testament age, and the eternal state are erroniously applied to the assumed golden-age.

Amillennialist or Realized Millennialist are in agreement with the Postmillenialist that we expect the millennium to be an age of imperefection. In oposiition to them, we do not view it as the fulfillment of the golden-age prophecies. We believe the prophesies to be truly GOLDEN perfect not GOLD PLATED! This is not to say that no OT prophecies refer to the present age, quite the contrary. But in accord with both Old and New Testament teaching, they find fulfillment of the "golden-age" prophecies in the eternal state, only then can it be said that all that glitters is Gold.

It is also interesting that postmil have to resort to OT prophesies that speak nothing of a golden age but refer unanimously to the golden age of new heaven and new earth which is Heaven.

The New Testament knows absolutlely nothing of IMPERFECT golden-age preaching. While there is a consistent appeal to look for the PERFECT golden-age of heaven, nothing can be found about an imperfect interim. Everywhere the eternal state is held out as the future hope of the church militant. The millennium is never preached as such. The only satisfactory explanation is that the millennium is a present reality not a future hope.

Old Testament passages frequently cited to substantiate the reality of an unrealized millennium(either in its Pre- or Post- form) do not hold any weight.

Isaiah 65:17-25 in one clear example. We both would agree that the passage speaks of a golden-age. The Postmil(as well as the Premil)will argue that the passage mentions children dying at one hundred years old, and sinners accursed at the end of the same period time. Taking this TOO literally, they insist that it must refer to an imperfect golden-age. And since the one thousand years obviously pertain to a time in which sin and death remain, they feel it is perfectly natural to superimpose the one passage on another.

Careful examination, however,shows two faults with this presupposition.

First, there must be unquestionable evidence for indentifying the Isaiah prophecy with Revelation 20. This evidence is totally lacking. The two are brought together in an unatural union. Who can prove, scripturally, that when Isaiah wrote "the wolf and the lamb shall feed together" he was speaking of the SAME period that John calls the "thousand years"? There are indications in the passage itself that it is not to be treated literally like "dust" becoming the serpent's food can hardly be literal.

Ezekiel's new temple is not a physical building that will in the future be built on a mound of dirt in the earthly city of Jerusalem, but the spiritual body of Jesus the Christ (cp. Ezek. 40-48 with John 2:18-22 and I Pet. 2:1-10).


Bavinck was not too far off when he asserted that to interpret the prophecy of the Old Testament literally means that one "breaks with Christianity and lapses back into Judaism."



To the praise of our Glorious King who now reigns forever, AMEN.


Sorry for all the grammatical errors, I was too lazy to edit

also....

I believe that there is NO biblical warrant to put these events before His coming, if the golden age was such an important event why is the NT not decisive on an era pre-dating Christ return?

Christ victorious return is the NT's hope for the Church militant not an intermediate era. I think the postmil gives a false hope and does not prepare the church for spiritual war, it will be like an ambush.

But to add more to this discussion, I would also agree that to promote the expansion of the kingdom through the conquering of the gospel(the fullfilment of the great commission) in NO WAY implies some earthly golden age that at best is actually gold plated.

Yes, it is true that God has promised a time of universal worship, peace, and prosperity, but that will occur only, as the consistent witness of the NT declares, when the Lord Jesus Christ returns. Postmillennialism repeatedly emphasizes that the struggle between Christ and satan is a historical struggle that ends in historical victory. TRUE. But this it will end in TOTAL and PERFECT victory at the END of history (greek: to telos which means "completion", "perfect":1 Cor. 15:24; 1 Peter 4:7).

In other words, God's elect and God's created cosmos enter into COMPLETE(to telos) and Perfect(to telos) deliverance from sin and its consequences (see Rom. 8:18-23). The present earth and heavens will replaced with a "new heaven and a new earth, the HOME of righteousness"(2 Peter 3:13).

God's creational purpose(creative covenant) will be fulfilled in the NEW creation.

Postmil assert that Christ will be with His people to oversee the task of successfully completing its commission and that this is the postmil hope, and also claim that ONLY the postmil view can account for this, is not true at all. The realized mil certainly believe that this age will not end until Christ's purposes are fulfilled.

The postmil view has failed to establish the making disciples of all nations, baptizing and teaching them requires that fulfillment be in Postmil terms.


click on link for more.....

http://www.puritanboard.com/445280-post114.html

 

[sastark]

Let's not forget that regarding the millennium in Rev. 20, Amillennialism simply states that it is occuring now, while Postmillenialism professes that it doesn't begin until after Christ comes. The discussion as to what happens during said millennium is secondary to this issue.

Theognome

I think you may have mistyped. Postmillenialists believe Christ returns after the millenial period. They do not believe that Christ comes and then the millennium begins. That is premillenialism.

 

[Theognome]

Let's not forget that regarding the millennium in Rev. 20, Amillennialism simply states that it is occuring now, while Postmillenialism professes that it doesn't begin until after Christ comes. The discussion as to what happens during said millennium is secondary to this issue.

Theognome

I think you may have mistyped. Postmillenialists believe Christ returns after the millenial period. They do not believe that Christ comes and then the millennium begins. That is premillenialism.

Yes, you are right. Thanks for the correction.

Theognome

 

[Seb]

Whew! You were messing with my head there Bill.

 

[R Harris]

Roldan,

There are numerous problems with your thesis and the passages that you quote, but unfortunately I do not have the time to address all of them at this very moment.

BTW - Gentry/DeMar/Mathison deal extensively with your arguments; have you not read any of their works?

Also, Patrick Fairbairn's The Interpretation of Prophecy deals with many of the things you said, and he, along with others, provide convincing arguments that Revelation 21 is NOT chronological to chapter 20, in the same manner that Revelation 12 is not chronological to chapter 11.

 

[Roldan]

Roldan,

There are numerous problems with your thesis and the passages that you quote, but unfortunately I do not have the time to address all of them at this very moment.

BTW - Gentry/DeMar/Mathison deal extensively with your arguments; have you not read any of their works?

Also, Patrick Fairbairn's The Interpretation of Prophecy deals with many of the things you said, and he, along with others, provide convincing arguments that Revelation 21 is NOT chronological to chapter 20, in the same manner that Revelation 12 is not chronological to chapter 11.

Yes I have actually, when I almost became a postmil...but they do exactly as what I presented above so my point still stands...

Its all a matter of correct hermeneutic and staying consistent with it..

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Greetings:

The silver bullet that kills the "Golden Age" theory is found in the very verses that teach the Millennium:

(20:3)And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season .. (v.7) And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the eath, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

If, "after the thousand years" (the Millennium) Satan will be released from his prison to persecute the saints on earth, then it does not speak much for a "Golden Age prior to Christ's return" does it?

Blessings,

Rob

 

[Confessor]

If, "after the thousand years" (the Millennium) Satan will be released from his prison to persecute the saints on earth, then it does not speak much for a "Golden Age prior to Christ's return" does it?

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

 

[Peairtach]

Can Jesus fail? Can He be less successful in taking possession of the Earth than David and Solomon were in taking possession of the land that God gave them, from the Euphrates to the Great Sea (Medi)?

He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth. (Psalm 72:8)

According to amillenialism history - including church history - is going nowhere.

Excuse me? Ummm...that is quite untrue. According to Ammillenialism history, especially church history, is marching forward to the final consumation when Christ returns to judge the living and the dead, and to openly acknowledge and acquit all those who believe on Him. We are awaiting the day when the kingdom of God will be fully realized, when there is no more mixture of wheat and chaff in the Church of Christ, but will be a pure and spotless bride. That, my friend, is where history is going. Just because we ammillenialists think of success differently than do the posties, doesn't mean we think history is going nowhere. Get the doctrines of those you disagree with straight.

Do you not believe that good and evil will grow together equally and that the good will not be able to overcome the evil? That there will then be a falling away before the good overcomes the evil and that the triumph of evil will only be stopped by Christ's return?

That is in history Christ will not triumph by His Word, by His Spirit, by His Church and by His Providence. He will only triumph by His final, visible Second Advent, and even then there will be many more unsaved than saved?

Can you have a real apostasy at the end of the millennium, without a Golden/Silver Age? There has to be something to fall away from?

Re Isaiah 65, the powers of the new heavens and the new earth are already here. The beginning of the New Creation was in principle Christ's resurrection and the new birth is its beginning in us, which will eventually lead to a perfected and glorified soul, a glorified body and a creation that is incorruptible and undefiled and separated from sin. We celebrate the beginning of the new heavens and new earth every Lord's Day.

Obviously postmils believe certain aspects of the new heavens and new earth are delayed until Christ's Second Advent.

 

[Curt]

So far, you guys are making a great case for me to remain in the historic pre-mil camp.

 

[Confessor]

So far, you guys are making a great case for me to remain in the historic pre-mil camp.

It would have helped for you to point out that that is what you were. For whatever reason, I assumed you were amil and was trying to establish the "golden age" part on top.

There's essentially two divides regarding the millennium: when Christ will come in relation to the millennium, and what the nature of the millennium will be. Amillers agree with postmillers on the first divide but disagree on the second. So there's another "tier" which must be overcome to convince premillers of postmil.

And for that purpose, I point you to this.

 

[R Harris]

So far, you guys are making a great case for me to remain in the historic pre-mil camp.

All right - convince ME that the 1000 in Revelation 20 is to be taken literally.

Think about it - Christ (supposedly in a state of glorification, which would blind the casual observer) sets up this kingdom, which is suppose to last exactly 1000 years. Well, from that point forward, all one has to do is countdown to the final judgment and plan accordingly. How much sense does that make?

I have always found it interesting that no detail is provided - either from Scripture or the premils themselves - for what happens on a day to day basis in this 1000 year period.

The fact that something which would be so prominent - a literal 1000 period on the earth with all the saints - is only mentioned once in Scripture - not even addressed by Paul, Peter, or anyone else - makes it an impossible and indeed false teaching.

 

[Confessor]

So far, you guys are making a great case for me to remain in the historic pre-mil camp.

All right - convince ME that the 1000 in Revelation 20 is to be taken literally.

Think about it - Christ (supposedly in a state of glorification, which would blind the casual observer) sets up this kingdom, which is suppose to last exactly 1000 years. Well, from that point forward, all one has to do is countdown to the final judgment and plan accordingly. How much sense does that make?

I have always found it interesting that no detail is provided - either from Scripture or the premils themselves - for what happens on a day to day basis in this 1000 year period.

The fact that something which would be so prominent - a literal 1000 period on the earth with all the saints - is only mentioned once in Scripture - not even addressed by Paul, Peter, or anyone else - makes it an impossible and indeed false teaching.

It is equally absurd that the glorified saints would be taken from heaven, from the glorious countenance of the Father, back to earth. Imagine how terrible of a decrease that would be!

 

[CalvinandHodges]

If, "after the thousand years" (the Millennium) Satan will be released from his prison to persecute the saints on earth, then it does not speak much for a "Golden Age prior to Christ's return" does it?

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

Hi:

That is very nice, but where is your Scripture for such an assertion?

Since the Scriptures say that Satan was bound at the beginning of the millennium, "that he should deceive the nations no more," then we can figure that this binding was done so that the Gospel could go out to all nations:

And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven, Lk 10:18.

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mt 28:18,19.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, Mk 16:15.

And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem, Lk 24:47.

Prior to the ministry of Jesus the Oracles (Gospel) of God was only for the Jews, and select individual Gentiles. Now that Satan has been bound through the ministry of Jesus Christ, the Oracles (Gospel) of God is for both Jew and Gentile.

Blessings,

Rob

 

[Confessor]

If, "after the thousand years" (the Millennium) Satan will be released from his prison to persecute the saints on earth, then it does not speak much for a "Golden Age prior to Christ's return" does it?

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

Hi:

That is very nice, but where is your Scripture for such an assertion?

Since the Scriptures say that Satan was bound at the beginning of the millennium, "that he should deceive the nations no more," then we can figure that this binding was done so that the Gospel could go out to all nations:

And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven, Lk 10:18.

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mt 28:18,19.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, Mk 16:15.

And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem, Lk 24:47.

Prior to the ministry of Jesus the Oracles (Gospel) of God was only for the Jews, and select individual Gentiles. Now that Satan has been bound through the ministry of Jesus Christ, the Oracles (Gospel) of God is for both Jew and Gentile.

Blessings,

Rob

I agree with all that. How that does preclude the explanation I gave?

I mean, amillennarians agree that the millennium is coterminal with the Church Age (i.e. is occurring now). And Rev. 20 teaches that Satan will be let loose at the end of the millennium. I don't see where we disagree here.

 

[Curt]

So far, you guys are making a great case for me to remain in the historic pre-mil camp.

All right - convince ME that the 1000 in Revelation 20 is to be taken literally.

Think about it - Christ (supposedly in a state of glorification, which would blind the casual observer) sets up this kingdom, which is suppose to last exactly 1000 years. Well, from that point forward, all one has to do is countdown to the final judgment and plan accordingly. How much sense does that make?

I have always found it interesting that no detail is provided - either from Scripture or the premils themselves - for what happens on a day to day basis in this 1000 year period.

The fact that something which would be so prominent - a literal 1000 period on the earth with all the saints - is only mentioned once in Scripture - not even addressed by Paul, Peter, or anyone else - makes it an impossible and indeed false teaching.

OK, poorly stated on my part. I simply meant that my head was spinning. I'm not confirmed in any of the reformed eschatological views (and certainly NOT in the other major view).

I do swing from A to Post and thought you folks might help with lighting up some of the dark corners.

 

[CalvinandHodges]

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

Hi:

That is very nice, but where is your Scripture for such an assertion?

Since the Scriptures say that Satan was bound at the beginning of the millennium, "that he should deceive the nations no more," then we can figure that this binding was done so that the Gospel could go out to all nations:

And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven, Lk 10:18.

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mt 28:18,19.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, Mk 16:15.

And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem, Lk 24:47.

Prior to the ministry of Jesus the Oracles (Gospel) of God was only for the Jews, and select individual Gentiles. Now that Satan has been bound through the ministry of Jesus Christ, the Oracles (Gospel) of God is for both Jew and Gentile.

Blessings,

Rob

I agree with all that. How that does preclude the explanation I gave?

I mean, amillennarians agree that the millennium is coterminal with the Church Age (i.e. is occurring now). And Rev. 20 teaches that Satan will be let loose at the end of the millennium. I don't see where we disagree here.

Hi:

The Amillennialist is a Postmillennialist except that we deny that there will be a "Golden Age at the end of the millennium." Prior to Lorraine Boettner the Amill position was called "Postmillennial." Divines once referred to a certain offshoot of Postmillennialism that held to a "Golden Age" theory.

There is little difference between the Amill and Postmill positions as they are understood today - except for the particular view of the "Golden Age."

The classic response to the Revelation 20 citation above from the Postmill camp is that, "Things will get better and better - children will die at 100 years old - economic and political stability will be cemented in a worldwide preaching and acceptance of the Gospel - and then everything will collapse when Satan is loosed again..."

There is a worlldwide preaching of the Gospel - it has been happening for the last 2000 years or so. Starting from Jerusalem in the first century the Gospel is being diffused throughout the whole world during the Millennium - the Church Age.

After the Millennium Satan will be released, the Gentile nations (Gog and Magog) will be hardened against the Gospel, and the saints will be persecuted in a Great Tribulation that can only be halted by Jesus returning with fire in His Second Coming to destroy and cast Satan into Hell. The Judgment throne will be set up and all of mankind judged by their deeds out of the Book of Life. The Saints will enter the eternal state in Heaven, and the reprobate the eternal state in Hell.

Blessings,

Rob

 

[Curt]

Hi:

That is very nice, but where is your Scripture for such an assertion?

Since the Scriptures say that Satan was bound at the beginning of the millennium, "that he should deceive the nations no more," then we can figure that this binding was done so that the Gospel could go out to all nations:

And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven, Lk 10:18.

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mt 28:18,19.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, Mk 16:15.

And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem, Lk 24:47.

Prior to the ministry of Jesus the Oracles (Gospel) of God was only for the Jews, and select individual Gentiles. Now that Satan has been bound through the ministry of Jesus Christ, the Oracles (Gospel) of God is for both Jew and Gentile.

Blessings,

Rob

I agree with all that. How that does preclude the explanation I gave?

I mean, amillennarians agree that the millennium is coterminal with the Church Age (i.e. is occurring now). And Rev. 20 teaches that Satan will be let loose at the end of the millennium. I don't see where we disagree here.

Hi:

The Amillennialist is a Postmillennialist except that we deny that there will be a "Golden Age at the end of the millennium." Prior to Lorraine Boettner the Amill position was called "Postmillennial." Divines once referred to a certain offshoot of Postmillennialism that held to a "Golden Age" theory.

There is little difference between the Amill and Postmill positions as they are understood today - except for the particular view of the "Golden Age."

The classic response to the Revelation 20 citation above from the Postmill camp is that, "Things will get better and better - children will die at 100 years old - economic and political stability will be cemented in a worldwide preaching and acceptance of the Gospel - and then everything will collapse when Satan is loosed again..."

There is a worlldwide preaching of the Gospel - it has been happening for the last 2000 years or so. Starting from Jerusalem in the first century the Gospel is being diffused throughout the whole world during the Millennium - the Church Age.

After the Millennium Satan will be released, the Gentile nations (Gog and Magog) will be hardened against the Gospel, and the saints will be persecuted in a Great Tribulation that can only be halted by Jesus returning with fire in His Second Coming to destroy and cast Satan into Hell. The Judgment throne will be set up and all of mankind judged by their deeds out of the Book of Life. The Saints will enter the eternal state in Heaven, and the reprobate the eternal state in Hell.

Blessings,

Rob

Thanks, this exactly the sort of response I was hoping for.

 

[Confessor]

The classic response to the Revelation 20 citation above from the Postmill camp is that, "Things will get better and better - children will die at 100 years old - economic and political stability will be cemented in a worldwide preaching and acceptance of the Gospel - and then everything will collapse when Satan is loosed again..."

Yes. That is the "classic response" of postmillers. How does it follow, then, that the final apostasy is a silver-bullet argument against postmil?

 

[CalvinandHodges]

The classic response to the Revelation 20 citation above from the Postmill camp is that, "Things will get better and better - children will die at 100 years old - economic and political stability will be cemented in a worldwide preaching and acceptance of the Gospel - and then everything will collapse when Satan is loosed again..."

Yes. That is the "classic response" of postmillers. How does it follow, then, that the final apostasy is a silver-bullet argument against postmil?

There is no passage in Scripture that treats the Millennium as a "Golden Age." Nor is there any indication that "at the end of the Millennium there will be a Golden Age."

Blessings,

Rob

 

[Archlute]

So far, you guys are making a great case for me to remain in the historic pre-mil camp.

It would have helped for you to point out that that is what you were. For whatever reason, I assumed you were amil and was trying to establish the "golden age" part on top.

There's essentially two divides regarding the millennium: when Christ will come in relation to the millennium, and what the nature of the millennium will be. Amillers agree with postmillers on the first divide but disagree on the second. So there's another "tier" which must be overcome to convince premillers of postmil.

And for that purpose, I point you to this.

Interesting that you should mention that, Curt. I was reading Chuck Hill's work Regnum Caelorum, regarding the chiliasm of some of the theologians of the early church, and was struck by the similarity between the earthly-oriented literalness of the millennium in both pre and post-mill views.

 

[Confessor]

The classic response to the Revelation 20 citation above from the Postmill camp is that, "Things will get better and better - children will die at 100 years old - economic and political stability will be cemented in a worldwide preaching and acceptance of the Gospel - and then everything will collapse when Satan is loosed again..."

Yes. That is the "classic response" of postmillers. How does it follow, then, that the final apostasy is a silver-bullet argument against postmil?

There is no passage in Scripture that treats the Millennium as a "Golden Age." Nor is there any indication that "at the end of the Millennium there will be a Golden Age."

While I'd disagree with that, I assert that the proposition "Scripture does not anywhere treat the millennium as a golden age" does not entail the proposition "the final apostasy disproves postmillennialism," which is what you originally mentioned. My response was only to the latter proposition; you originally said the final apostasy was a silver bullet against a golden age.

Otherwise, I am not personally prepared to positively argue for a golden age at the moment.

 

[Roldan]

If, "after the thousand years" (the Millennium) Satan will be released from his prison to persecute the saints on earth, then it does not speak much for a "Golden Age prior to Christ's return" does it?

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

The problem is my brotha is that these apostates weren't really Christian in the first place to have a Christianized world now was it....if the supposed emphasis is on the postmil definition of gospel succession to make christians then this apostacy just defeated this purpose and there goes the victorious view of the postmil.....

 

[Confessor]

If, "after the thousand years" (the Millennium) Satan will be released from his prison to persecute the saints on earth, then it does not speak much for a "Golden Age prior to Christ's return" does it?

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

The problem is my brotha is that these apostates weren't really Christian in the first place to have a Christianized world now was it....if the supposed emphasis is on the postmil definition of gospel succession to make christians then this apostacy just defeated this purpose and there goes the victorious view of the postmil.....

Postmil does not necessitate a 100% conversion of the world. Furthermore, it can easily make sense how there would be tons of prosperity then an apostasy, unless you presuppose some "percentage level of regenerated people" which cannot decrease at any point.

 

[Roldan]

That just means that a brief apostasy will follow the lengthy golden age.

The problem is my brotha is that these apostates weren't really Christian in the first place to have a Christianized world now was it....if the supposed emphasis is on the postmil definition of gospel succession to make christians then this apostacy just defeated this purpose and there goes the victorious view of the postmil.....

Postmil does not necessitate a 100% conversion of the world. Furthermore, it can easily make sense how there would be tons of prosperity then an apostasy, unless you presuppose some "percentage level of regenerated people" which cannot decrease at any point.

And this is the continuous backtracking I get from postmil's. First they say there will be a Christianization of the nations then when the apostacy issue is brought up they say "well we don't mean everybody" but if its not everybody then its NOT AN APOSTACY then is it.......In order for one to be an apostate one has to first claim to be in the Faith. So again the question is how victorious was the gospel if not ALL his enemies are subjected to the gospel and put under Christ feet? (according to the postmil of course)

This is extremely problematic for the Postmil position. Sure we Amil's believe in an Apostacy in the end but then again we don't go around claiming a Christianized world.

 

[Mushroom]

My limited intellect has mulled these various interpretations over and over, while remembering that even the Apostles had interpreted OT prophesy wrong until the Lord set them straight on the matter Himself. I get dizzy from jumping to one side or the other based on how convincing the latest argument I've read was. So I've come to this conclusion:

That regardless of how you mark the time or order of events of the Revelation, the main point of the book should not be missed, and that is that Jesus be revealed to us. In it I see His majesty, His righteousness, His mercy, His glory, His triumph, His holiness, His beauty, His love, and an innumerable other facets of His glory - whether I have the timeline right or not. And seeing those things, I love Him more and more, and that love assures me that when He comes like a thief in the night, it will not come as a surprise to His own.

Now if your gonna start saying He's already come... then we have a problem.

 

[Confessor]

And this is the continuous backtracking I get from postmil's. First they say there will be a Christianization of the nations then when the apostacy issue is brought up they say "well we don't mean everybody" but if its not everybody then its NOT AN APOSTACY then is it.......In order for one to be an apostate one has to first claim to be in the Faith. So again the question is how victorious was the gospel if not ALL his enemies are subjected to the gospel and put under Christ feet? (according to the postmil of course)

Your argument ("if its not everybody then its NOT AN APOSTACY then is it") can be put in the logical form

(1) If the world is not fully (100%) Christianized, then there is no final apostasy.

Seeing as you grant the antecedent of (1) because you're an amillennarian, and seeing as you posited (1) in the first place, it follows that, to be consistent, you must grant the consequent, that there is no final apostasy. But this would deny clear Scripture in Rev. 20. Therefore your attempted argument against postmil would, if true, be destructive of amil (and both forms of premil) as well.

-----

The fact of the matter is that Christianization and ubiquitous Gospel success does not entail 100% true conversions. Postmillers would never argue for 100% conversion based on the "all" prophecies; but they would claim that those prophecies do indicate more than a mere plucking of .05% of the people from every nation. When prophecies say that all the ends of the earth will turn to the Lord (I can't remember if that is one, but for argument's sake...), for instance, they mean not 100% conversion, but they do imply massive conversion.

 

[Archlute]

Yes, Brad. I was about to append to my above post that I am an "apathetic amillenialist" regarding most of these discussions.

While I am convinced by the amil summation of the Scriptures, and while I think that I have seen some silliness (maybe even potentially harmful silliness?) coming from some postmil folk whom I have known, it is still my belief that our main task of proclaiming the Gospel of sins forgiven in Christ and maintaining the obedience of the church to the commands of Christ and His apostles regarding the work of the kingdom can still be accomplished effectively regardless of one's holding of any of the recognizably orthodox eschatological positions.

It's somewhat like a having two guys on a team arguing between themselves about the theory and benefits of future hide site emplacements when the spotter is telling them that they need to pull the trigger right now. First things first!

 

[Reformed Rush]

My limited intellect has mulled these various interpretations over and over, while remembering that even the Apostles had interpreted OT prophesy wrong until the Lord set them straight on the matter Himself. I get dizzy from jumping to one side or the other based on how convincing the latest argument I've read was. So I've come to this conclusion:

That regardless of how you mark the time or order of events of the Revelation, the main point of the book should not be missed, and that is that Jesus be revealed to us. In it I see His majesty, His righteousness, His mercy, His glory, His triumph, His holiness, His beauty, His love, and an innumerable other facets of His glory - whether I have the timeline right or not. And seeing those things, I love Him more and more, and that love assures me that when He comes like a thief in the night, it will not come as a surprise to His own.

Now if your gonna start saying He's already come... then we have a problem.

Brad,

Good post.

Good thinking.

Good theology.

Good spirit.

Good exhortation.


When one stays properly (biblically) focused on Jesus Christ, and His accomplishments, and His revealed purposes . . . the distracting notions of a supposed "millennium" or "golden age" ("chiliasm") fades into oblivion.

J&R
(Amils, of course)

 

[CalvinandHodges]

Yes. That is the "classic response" of postmillers. How does it follow, then, that the final apostasy is a silver-bullet argument against postmil?

There is no passage in Scripture that treats the Millennium as a "Golden Age." Nor is there any indication that "at the end of the Millennium there will be a Golden Age."

While I'd disagree with that, I assert that the proposition "Scripture does not anywhere treat the millennium as a golden age" does not entail the proposition "the final apostasy disproves postmillennialism," which is what you originally mentioned. My response was only to the latter proposition; you originally said the final apostasy was a silver bullet against a golden age.

Otherwise, I am not personally prepared to positively argue for a golden age at the moment.

Greetings:

You made a fair and good point. Check out these statements by noted Postmills:

Ken Gentry:

Postmillennialism expects the proclaiming of the Spirit-blessed gospel of Jesus Christ to win the vast majority of human beings to salvation in the present age. Increasing gospel success will gradually produce a time in history prior to Christ's return in which faith, righteousness, peace, and prosperity will prevail in the affairs of people and of nations. After an extensive era of such conditions the Lord will return visibly, bodily, and in great glory, ending history with the general resurrection and the great judgment of all humankind

Keith Mathison:

According to postmillennialism, in the present age the Holy Spirit will draw unprecedented multitudes to Christ through the faithful preaching of the gospel. Among the multitudes who will be converted are the ethnic Israelites who have thus far rejected the Messiah. At the end of the present age, Christ will return, there will be the general resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment will take place

I would also bring to your attention the "postive" nature of Postmillennialism - which is something that P-mills boast about greatly. To make the "positive" claims that P-mills like to make concerning the end of the world, and then to read about a Great Tribulation prior to the Second Coming is antithetical to what most P-mills teach.

Only when they are pushed concerning the "loosing of Satan" will they admit that there will be a tribulation before Judgment day. So, their "positivism" turns into "negativism" and they become just like the "Pessi-Millennialists" that they ridicule so much.

Grace and Peace,

Rob