OK, convince me of Postmillenialism

[Reformed Rush]

The anticipated reigning and judging of which Paul speaks does not seem to occur in the intermediate state. Is this a distinct explanation of reigning and judging apart from the intermediate state?

The saints reign with Christ now (Eph. 2:6), and yet what they shall be is not yet visible (1 John 3:2). At death the souls of believers immediately pass into glory and hence reign with Christ in a personal sense, but it will not be until the resurrection that this reign assumes a visible form for all the world to see.

We believe the reign of the church (intermediate state) was established in the event recorded in Matthew 16:19; when the "keys of the kingdom" (gospel authority) were given to Peter; representing a general commission to all believers in Christ; whose preachings of Scriptures until the return of Christ, will act as a two-edged sword of judgment to all who hear.

(As we all know, the RCC has perverted this Scripture badly.)

Would our understanding be correct in your view?

 

[CalvinandHodges]

I would suggest that either the thosand years does not represent the intermediate state, or, the intermediate state does expire prior to Judgment Day.

The second option is impossible by definition.

Greetings:

Only on how you define the "intermediate state."

Blessings,

Rob

 

[MW]

We believe the reign of the church (intermediate state) was established in the event recorded in Matthew 16:19;

The intermediate state usually refers to the condition of the individual after death but before the resurrection. Shorter Catechism answer 37 provides a clear statement as to the believer's intermediate state. Matt. 16 certainly indicates that the NT church was established on the confession of the true Christ. There the promise is made that the gates of hell (the grave) should not prevail against the church. Hence one might safely affirm that the promise takes in the intermediate state, but I would not go as far as saying that the reign of the church is to be equated with it. The keys of the kingdom are utilised in this present life; but in the intermediate state each one goes to their own place.

 

[Reformed Rush]

We believe the reign of the church (intermediate state) was established in the event recorded in Matthew 16:19;

The intermediate state usually refers to the condition of the individual after death but before the resurrection. Shorter Catechism answer 37 provides a clear statement as to the believer's intermediate state.

Understood.

Matt. 16 certainly indicates that the NT church was established on the confession of the true Christ. There the promise is made that the gates of hell (the grave) should not prevail against the church.

Agreed.

Hence one might safely affirm that the promise takes in the intermediate state, but I would not go as far as saying that the reign of the church is to be equated with it. The keys of the kingdom are utilised in this present life; but in the intermediate state each one goes to their own place.

Agreed.

In heaven, intermediately before the final Day, "each one goes to their own place."

We guess, what what we desire to clarify, is if or whether the preaching of the church performs and accomplishes God's decrees, as to who will be eternally loosed or bound, and if this is not part of believers being given a shared reign to bring about the purposes of God?

If the church is God's means of saving men as well as judging men, through the proclamation of the gospel, would this not qualify as a reign here on earth, reflecting the heavenly reign?

A reign, not contingent upon the church, but according to divine commission given to the church?

We don't want to take this too far, if we are indeed off track. Please be honest with us!

 

[Roldan]

He wasn't talking about eisegesis, but about understanding the framework of Scripture. Just as we can very easily see God's unconditional election in tons of passages when reading it through that lens (though not imposing that on the text), so also we can see plenary earthly victory for Christ when we read with that lens.

Oh ok, yeah I know what he meant but that still doesn't negate what I said. I believe that the added interpretation of a Golden Age prior to Christ return is indeed eisegesis and a wrong starting framework to begin with.

 

[MW]

We guess, what what we desire to clarify, is if or whether the preaching of the church performs and accomplishes God's decrees, as to who will be eternally loosed or bound, and if this is not part of believers being given a shared reign to bring about the purposes of God?

If the church is God's means of saving men as well as judging men, through the proclamation of the gospel, would this not qualify as a reign here on earth, reflecting the heavenly reign?

A reign, not contingent upon the church, but according to divine commission given to the church?

That all sounds perfectly reasonable, as long as the usual qualifiers are applied to the church's role -- ministerial and fallible. The church only seeks to bind and loose by following God's will, and this power is always understood to be liable to err.

 

[Confessor]

I would suggest that either the thosand years does not represent the intermediate state, or, the intermediate state does expire prior to Judgment Day.

The second option is impossible by definition.

Greetings:

Only on how you define the "intermediate state."

Blessings,

Rob

What are the different options for defining it?

 

[sealdaSupralapsarian]

Yo,

Post Mill starts with the Genesis account. If Satan seed (Him and his children) is going to have his head crushed by the womans seed (Christ and his children) then how is that going to happen if Satan seed out number that of Christ???...LOL.... Amill/Premill/Dispensational's people crack me up. Gotta love em.

I think there has been plenty of scripture laid out on here for the ample text that show a Post Mill understanding of Christ Kingdom expansion while the devil's kingdom shrinks (not grow at the same pace or more) but there was an assertion made that the scripture posted was having post mill read into it. I think it was Ricky Ro. However, the assertion he has there is a false pretense as if he isn't reading amill into the same text. Where does it say in those text that Christ has to come again to set up his rule throughout the nations. He's already come to set up his Kingdom. He has already ascended and waits for all things and we do mean all things to be placed under his feet. Christ was given all power in both Heaven and Earth. Not just this spiritual debo or Big Man on Campus as if the physical realm can remain affected and his reign still be made known.

So there has to be continuity between the promise of Abraham and the reign of Christ.

Romans 4:16-18
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 17 (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed—God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did; 18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.”

How many nations do you see Abraham being the father of???....LOL... I mean I can count on 1 hand right now I think. Unless you want to count Islam too...

Thus Post Mill (Not Optimistic Amill you have nothing to be optimistic about) offers this continuity and accounts for the Fall, Abrahams Promise, and Christ victory on the Cross.

Just some thoughts off the top of the dome.

Grace and Peace,
seal

 

[Mushroom]

Mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Mat 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

I have not come to a conclusion as to my millenial view, and have leaned toward post-mil, but these verses seem to refute the idea that the woman's Seed's children will outnumber the serpent's seed's. Numbers don't equate with victory. I don't see how this holds water or supports post-mil.

 

[Reformed Rush]

Romans 4:16-18
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 17 (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed—God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did; 18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.”

How many nations do you see Abraham being the father of???....LOL... I mean I can count on 1 hand right now I think. Unless you want to count Islam too...

I believe Abraham's children (all forgiven souls imputed with Christ's righteousness) will be gathered out from all the nations, according to Rev. 5:9:

" . . . For You were slain, and have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation."

And that the invisible church of God (saints of all nationalities) is a "holy nation" unto themselves:

"You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God . . ." I Peter 2:9-10

Ronda
(Amillinnialist)

 

[Peairtach]

Mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Mat 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

I have not come to a conclusion as to my millenial view, and have leaned toward post-mil, but these verses seem to refute the idea that the woman's Seed's children will outnumber the serpent's seed's. Numbers don't equate with victory. I don't see how this holds water or supports post-mil.

Is this referring to a relative few? I.e. is our Lord indicating that of those who hear the Gospel only a subset believe? Therefore our Lord is encouraging us to make sure we are of those who enter. When the final tally comes in every indication is that it is going to be a big number, "as the stars in the sky", "as the sand on the seashore", etc., and we are never given the indication that the number of the lost is going to be big in relation to the number of the saved. Does the Bible mention the number of the lost at all?

Re passages such as II Timothy 3:1-9, which speak of the evils of the interadventual period in which we are living, you may notice from verse 9 that such evils willl have an end. The postmillenialist knows that things might often get worse before they get better.

Revelation 12:12 says that "the devil [has] great wrath because he knows that he has a short time." (NKJV)

If the Devil has only a symbolical 3 1/2 years of the symbolical 1,000 year reign of Christ and the saints until he is shut up and sealed, it's no wonder if he is getting madder and more desperate as the last circa 2,000 years has unfolded.

 

[sealdaSupralapsarian]

Romans 4:16-18
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 17 (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed—God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did; 18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.”

How many nations do you see Abraham being the father of???....LOL... I mean I can count on 1 hand right now I think. Unless you want to count Islam too...

I believe Abraham's children (all forgiven souls imputed with Christ's righteousness) will be gathered out from all the nations, according to Rev. 5:9:

" . . . For You were slain, and have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation."

And that the invisible church of God (saints of all nationalities) is a "holy nation" unto themselves:

"You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who once were not a people but are now the people of God . . ." I Peter 2:9-10

Ronda
(Amillinnialist)

Sister of the Beloved Ronda,

What you speak of is Soteriology. We being chosen and apart of the invisible church is completely salvic in its sphere of rhetoric. Yet what does that look like in our realm. When you look at Revelation 5:9 please look also at vs 10. For it says that the priest will reign on Earth. That's the visible aspect of Abraham descendants. David was a priest who reigned on Earth. Solomon was a priest who reigned on Earth. Abraham was a priest who reigned on Earth.

So, I see tremendous discontinuity in the view that reigning or Christ ruling is only linked to the invisible salvation of the church. That ruling will be visible and glorious when many of us all die off and God brings in those remnants who will chase and pursue the nations to obey the commands of the LORD Jesus.

Thus the Abrahamic promise is that of dominion. Israel didn't Spiritual have dominion they had physical over the Earth Dominion as well.

Grace and Peace,
seal

 

[BoldBeliever]

Let's take a different tack here and start at the back of the book.

Rev. 20 clearly states that AFTER the thousand* years Satan would be released from the bottomless pit and bring Magog to battle against the holy city (obviously a Church metaphor). The end of this battle results in:

1. Judgment Day (fire from heaven destroying the wicked)
2. The Last Day (which Jesus said was the day of resurrection)
3. A new heaven and new earth

No mention of any of the things which pre-mils associate with their version of the Second Coming (or should I say Second and Third Coming).

*Brother Charlie has given me some insight and correction on the use of chilioi/chilias. Apparently the thousand years is not a literal and exact time period, but the word chilioi has little to do with that.

Pre-mils have simply made hash of history with their teaching. It's confusing, and most of all UNBIBLICAL.