C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
For all the post-mils out there -
How would you give a "one liner" on defining postmilennialism?
How would you give a "one liner" on defining postmilennialism?
One sentence on Postmillenialism
- Thread starter C. Matthew McMahon
- Start date
- Status
New wine skin
Puritan Board Freshman
A modern day distortion of classic Ahhhhhhhhmilenialism
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
Seth.Here's another one-liner:
"Postmillenialism is the one and only optimistic eschatology."
Amil and all forms of Premil believe that Satan will ultimately prevail against the church, until Jesus shows up at the last minute to save the day. That's pessimism until the moment before Christ returns. But Postmillenialism teaches that Christ will prevail *through* His church. The gates of hell will never prevail against it.
Presbyrino
Puritan Board Freshman
The Triumph of the Gospel!
New wine skin
Puritan Board Freshman
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Here's another one-liner:
"Postmillenialism is the one and only optimistic eschatology."
Amil and all forms of Premil believe that Satan will ultimately prevail against the church, until Jesus shows up at the last minute to save the day. That's pessimism until the moment before Christ returns. But Postmillenialism teaches that Christ will prevail *through* His church. The gates of hell will never prevail against it.
Your definition of Amil is different from mine. The wheat and chaff rise up side by side, but that doesnt mean evil in anyway "prevails" or that I am pessimistic. Amil confirms that Christ is Conqueror and Conquering despite the mayhem going on in the world. My opinion is that we are in the Millennium now, and are given a partial deposit of the Holy Spirit blessing with expectation of the hope for the full deposit and the resurrection into Glory with Christ at the Parousia. Since Amil and Post distinction is often splinting hairs I am making this clear in this thread. To discuss PostMil means distinguishing Amil and Postmil.
New wine skin
Puritan Board Freshman
definition should include distinctives... All christians hopefully would think the Gospel will triumph.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
Scott,
I repeat:
"Postmillenialism is the one and only optimistic eschatology."
Amillenialists believe that far more people will go to hell than to Heaven. Amils believe that Christ died to save few of Adam's descendents.
Postmillenialists believe that far more people will go to Heaven than to hell. Postmils believe that Christ died to save most of Adam's descendants.
So, I would definitely say that optimism is a distinctive between Postmil and Amil.
I repeat:
"Postmillenialism is the one and only optimistic eschatology."
Amillenialists believe that far more people will go to hell than to Heaven. Amils believe that Christ died to save few of Adam's descendents.
Postmillenialists believe that far more people will go to Heaven than to hell. Postmils believe that Christ died to save most of Adam's descendants.
So, I would definitely say that optimism is a distinctive between Postmil and Amil.
Romans922
Puritan Board Professor
There is not a distinction between how many will go to Heaven. Both would agree that all the elect will go to Heaven. Scripture warrants no distinction outside of that. To say that amill's believe far more will go to hell than to heaven or to say that postmill's believe far more will go to heaven and not hell is making a distinction that is outside of Scripture and unneeded.
I believe all the elect will go to heaven.
sastark
Puritan Board Graduate
But is there a distinction over the number of the elect? We both agree that all the elect will go to heaven, of course. I think the question then becomes how many people are elect? I think the postmil would say "A majority of people throughout all of history" while the amil would say "A minority of people throughout history" though I do not want to put words in my amil brothers' mouths.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
A belief system
Postmillennialism: The system seeing God give Christ the nations (inclusive of earthly entities) as Christ's inheritance, seeing the kingdom (inclusive of the inheritance) expand (both heavenly and earthwardly) until all enemies are defeated (sin, death, systematic unbelief).
Postmillennialism: The system seeing God give Christ the nations (inclusive of earthly entities) as Christ's inheritance, seeing the kingdom (inclusive of the inheritance) expand (both heavenly and earthwardly) until all enemies are defeated (sin, death, systematic unbelief).
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
First a caveat: I am not one of those closet-postmillenialist amillenialists who say they are optimistic but rather I hold to the creed of pessimism and cynicism which I have been raised in since I was a boy. 
Seriously though, I get tired of people using those terms pessimism and optimism beause they mean different things to different people. One person's optimism would seem to another to be a naive assessment of human nature and anothers pessimism would seem to another to be a hopeless and rapture ready mentality etc. Let us discuss the issues, not our psychological state of mind.
BTW, no amillenialist believes that God's Church or His purposes are defeated in history or outside of history because there may be less believers and that there will not a widespread conversion of Gentiles in the last days. Even postmillenialists (at those I have read) believe that there will be a final apostacy before the return of Christ (albeit short). God's will is done, says the amil, and therefore God is glorified. Where is the defeat in that?
Personally what I cast my hope on is the following:
1 Kings 19:18 "Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which have not kissed him." cf. Romans 11:4
The hope? God's church will never fully be destroyed even as the beginning of Jesus' ministry demonstrates that there were not that many believers either before or after His preaching (at least among the covenant people).
Isaiah 55:11 "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."
When I preach the gospel, the Lord will have a response: faith or unbelief. And the church will be added unto and the world will attack, but God's people will remain unharmed. And even if they die their deaths will not be in vain. God will be glorified! (see the book of Revelation).
Philippians 3:20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,
Colossians 1:5 "because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel"
Titus 2:13 "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"
Hebrews 9:28 "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."
I realize that no true postmillenialist would argue against these passages but my point is that I see uniformity in the NT message that our hope is not in this earth but in the new heavens and new earth which will be inagurated when Christ returns.
It seems to me that this is what kept the apostles going; not hope of a great victory before the Lord returns (of any kind). The victory has been won by Christ but I don't see what that has to do with a 'glory age' before Christ returns. Indeed, any victory which we have here can not compare to what is coming. So, quite frankly, I don't see what the point is of a general or worldwide conversion (forgive me if I misrepresent in the words that I choose, but I think my postmil brothers know what I mean here). Sure it would be great if it happened, but (at least for myself) only if it happened now.
And who knows when it will happen? And again, it cannot compare to the life to come. So what would motivate someone more (yeah I know postmils would probably say this is a false antithesis...)? An eternal kingdom that cannot fade away or a kingdom here on earth that will, in one way or another, not be like that of the kingdom to come?
To use OT passages to prove this worldwide phenomenom, it seems to me, misses the point precisely because the prophets could not see the Messiah as we can. They did not differentiate between the first and second coming of the Messiah because they were so far away they saw them as one event. The closer one is to it, they see that (humanly speaking) they are separated by thousands of years. What happens in between that is Christ's kingdom expanding, but it does not necessitate that the victorious eschatological voice of the prophets be interjected in this age, but rather the age to come. Why? This is the consistent witness of the apostles, which btw I have documented elsewhere,
http://tinyurl.com/ay5d5 (scroll down to the last post on this page)
and one that sees eschatology as already and not yet in their proper dimension and balance.
By way of criticism, I find that postmillenialists (especially those of the Reconstructionist type) get very agitated at us Reformed folks who will not follow the program because we are actually preventing God's kingdom from expanding. Now this is a blanket statement, but it is one that is constantly propagated by these types (Wilson, Schlissel etc.). Quite frankly I get sick and tired of it, and I AM sick and tired of it. I have heard some of it here and I think it needs to stop.
That's all for now. I hope I made some sense and I have made more friends than enemies.
Seriously though, I get tired of people using those terms pessimism and optimism beause they mean different things to different people. One person's optimism would seem to another to be a naive assessment of human nature and anothers pessimism would seem to another to be a hopeless and rapture ready mentality etc. Let us discuss the issues, not our psychological state of mind.
BTW, no amillenialist believes that God's Church or His purposes are defeated in history or outside of history because there may be less believers and that there will not a widespread conversion of Gentiles in the last days. Even postmillenialists (at those I have read) believe that there will be a final apostacy before the return of Christ (albeit short). God's will is done, says the amil, and therefore God is glorified. Where is the defeat in that?
Personally what I cast my hope on is the following:
1 Kings 19:18 "Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which have not kissed him." cf. Romans 11:4
The hope? God's church will never fully be destroyed even as the beginning of Jesus' ministry demonstrates that there were not that many believers either before or after His preaching (at least among the covenant people).
Isaiah 55:11 "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."
When I preach the gospel, the Lord will have a response: faith or unbelief. And the church will be added unto and the world will attack, but God's people will remain unharmed. And even if they die their deaths will not be in vain. God will be glorified! (see the book of Revelation).
Philippians 3:20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,
Colossians 1:5 "because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel"
Titus 2:13 "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"
Hebrews 9:28 "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."
I realize that no true postmillenialist would argue against these passages but my point is that I see uniformity in the NT message that our hope is not in this earth but in the new heavens and new earth which will be inagurated when Christ returns.
It seems to me that this is what kept the apostles going; not hope of a great victory before the Lord returns (of any kind). The victory has been won by Christ but I don't see what that has to do with a 'glory age' before Christ returns. Indeed, any victory which we have here can not compare to what is coming. So, quite frankly, I don't see what the point is of a general or worldwide conversion (forgive me if I misrepresent in the words that I choose, but I think my postmil brothers know what I mean here). Sure it would be great if it happened, but (at least for myself) only if it happened now.
And who knows when it will happen? And again, it cannot compare to the life to come. So what would motivate someone more (yeah I know postmils would probably say this is a false antithesis...)? An eternal kingdom that cannot fade away or a kingdom here on earth that will, in one way or another, not be like that of the kingdom to come?
To use OT passages to prove this worldwide phenomenom, it seems to me, misses the point precisely because the prophets could not see the Messiah as we can. They did not differentiate between the first and second coming of the Messiah because they were so far away they saw them as one event. The closer one is to it, they see that (humanly speaking) they are separated by thousands of years. What happens in between that is Christ's kingdom expanding, but it does not necessitate that the victorious eschatological voice of the prophets be interjected in this age, but rather the age to come. Why? This is the consistent witness of the apostles, which btw I have documented elsewhere,
http://tinyurl.com/ay5d5 (scroll down to the last post on this page)
and one that sees eschatology as already and not yet in their proper dimension and balance.
By way of criticism, I find that postmillenialists (especially those of the Reconstructionist type) get very agitated at us Reformed folks who will not follow the program because we are actually preventing God's kingdom from expanding. Now this is a blanket statement, but it is one that is constantly propagated by these types (Wilson, Schlissel etc.). Quite frankly I get sick and tired of it, and I AM sick and tired of it. I have heard some of it here and I think it needs to stop.
That's all for now. I hope I made some sense and I have made more friends than enemies.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I have never, ever argued that our hope should be primarily for earth, not heaven. Rather, I have contended for the view that since we are on earth, given a commission for earth's takeover, and so we should prefer less darkness to more. No, it will never be perfected on earth, even in teh latter day glory. Still while we are here...
The verses you quoted? Yes, good stuff...now complete the biblical picture. Paul stated that our suffering is unto victory. I have no disagreement with the verses
The verses you quoted? Yes, good stuff...now complete the biblical picture. Paul stated that our suffering is unto victory. I have no disagreement with the verses
C. Matthew McMahon
Christian Preacher
If Paul says that in latter times many will depart from the faith, do you think Postmillennialism's ideology will recover that blow?
Joseph,
You don't' know many amils then. Run a quick search on PB on my username and "optimism" and "optimist" and you will quickly see your generalization is fallacious.
I warrant that even Paul Manata (gumba!) will vouch for my optimism.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Sorry, I meant Paul manata and he was using an illustration
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I ditto Fred on this one. I have been called amillennial on this board several times, because of my view of the millennium/church age. Quite a few amillers I know, and most on this board, will be rather optmistic.
Part of the beauty of the Confession on this point is that the language is not exclusive of either postmill or amill tendencies, which is probalby wise.
Yes, Jacob. In fact there is precious little difference btw classic amils and postmils. "Pessimistic" amillenialism arose this century, mostly with William Cox.
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Sorry, I meant Paul manata and he was using an illustration
Okay. So Paul said that suffering is unto victory. But even I have no problem with that.
2 Timothy 3:12-14 "Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them."
Why does the victory have to be in relation to a 'golden age?' Our victory is later, since we suffer now. As the better Paul said [sorry Paul M. I couldn't resist
] Romans 8:20-24 "For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees?"
Our hope is in the coming age; the new heavens and new earth; a purifying recreation where we will have our new bodies to enjoy God's fellowship forever. Our suffering is for a time, glorifying God, and then we go to glory!
[Edited on 8-3-2005 by poimen]
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Thank you, Daniel,
Rather than arguing in circles as I am wont to do, I thank you for your quotes and will consider them.
I think, though, in some ways we are talking past one another on the verses.
Rather than arguing in circles as I am wont to do, I thank you for your quotes and will consider them.
I think, though, in some ways we are talking past one another on the verses.
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Thank you, Daniel,
Rather than arguing in circles as I am wont to do, I thank you for your quotes and will consider them.
I think, though, in some ways we are talking past one another on the verses.
Thank you sir!
I am not sure if I agree with the 'talking past one another' part but I am willing to listen to any answer you might have (or anyone else).
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Originally posted by poimen
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Thank you, Daniel,
Rather than arguing in circles as I am wont to do, I thank you for your quotes and will consider them.
I think, though, in some ways we are talking past one another on the verses.
Thank you sir!
I am not sure if I agree with the 'talking past one another' part but I am willing to listen to any answer you might have (or anyone else).
Right, I just think my answer is better suited for another thread.
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Originally posted by poimen
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Thank you, Daniel,
Rather than arguing in circles as I am wont to do, I thank you for your quotes and will consider them.
I think, though, in some ways we are talking past one another on the verses.
Thank you sir!
I am not sure if I agree with the 'talking past one another' part but I am willing to listen to any answer you might have (or anyone else).
Right, I just think my answer is better suited for another thread.
You realize that this issue would be so much clearer if you would simply agree with the 'straw man' arguments against postmillenialists for which people like me argue.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Originally posted by poimen
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Originally posted by poimen
Originally posted by Draught Horse
Thank you, Daniel,
Rather than arguing in circles as I am wont to do, I thank you for your quotes and will consider them.
I think, though, in some ways we are talking past one another on the verses.
Thank you sir!
I am not sure if I agree with the 'talking past one another' part but I am willing to listen to any answer you might have (or anyone else).
Right, I just think my answer is better suited for another thread.
You realize that this issue would be so much clearer if you would simply agree with the 'straw man' arguments against postmillenialists for which people like me argue.
You win.
Richard King
Puritan Board Senior
I found a bunch of definitions for several terms I see on this board. Postmillenialism was on the Modern Reformation site BUT they couldn't do it in one sentence.
http://www.modernreformation.org/glossary.htm
http://www.modernreformation.org/glossary.htm
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
Fair enough . . . and good news too . . . The Amils I have known of have been pretty pessimistic. I'm glad to hear that's not always the case.
However, that leaves me a little confused. What is the difference between postmil and amil, if not optimism/pessimism? I always thought we viewed the millennium the same way, except for our views on the overall success of the Gospel.
(BTW, I am aware that there have been some postmils, like J. Edwards, who espoused a literal future millennium . . . I am obviously not talking about them.)
The majority of postmills historically. As you have pointed out there is no difference between optimistic amills and the current trend of postmillennialism popularized by RJ Rushdoony. This form of postmill is infact amillennialism, but as fred said, amillennialism became pessimistic and i believe those with a positive eschatology felt the need to distinguish themselves from the doom-and-gloomers.
- Status