Postmillenialism? Still a holdable view?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Catechised in Heidelberg

Puritan Board Freshman
Hey guys,


I am sure that I am not the first one opening a thread to a question like this. I don't have a firm opinion on Eschatology yet. All I can say is, that I cannot really see the dispensational view in the Scriptures, but I find Postmillenialism quite attractive. But I want to submit my view to the Bible. Is Postmill still a holdable view? Are there any Postmills here?
I ordered RCs "The last days according to Jesus" to get an overview. Any other introductory literature?
Thanks already, God bless
 
There are plenty of postmillennialists.

I found this book very helpful in explaining postmillennial view, though it's more directed at amillennialists: An Eschatology of Victory by Kik
 
I am a postmillennialist (of the historicist variety). Unfortunately there aren't a lot of good introductions available that I am aware of. Steven Dilday on Sermon audio probably comes closest to the most accessible that I am aware of.

As to your question: is it still a view that can be held? Absolutely! There is a common misconception I find when I tell people that I am a postmillennialist and that is that postmils hold to a view that the world is gradually getting better. That is a view that has more in common with early twentieth century liberalism in my view that postmillennialism. God intervenes in history in dramatic ways. Think of the exodus, for example. Israel wasn't gradually freed from slavery in Egypt. No, when things looked dark--even worse for them--God intervened. Or think of the return from Babylon. God had told Israel how long the captivity would last. But "when Zion's bondage God turned back, as men that dreamed were we." (Psalm 126.1 SMV). There was still a way in which it was done that left God's people amazed. I believe that at some point God will intervene in history in a dramatic way to fulfill several outstanding prophecies. When he does we will be able to look back and see it in a clearer light.
 
Are there any Postmills here?

I guess the best answer I can give is that I am a modified Postmil or maybe better an optimistic Amill. I think there will be loads more progress of the gospel, but I don't think there is going to be a date yet future that the Postmills traditionally hoped for. Well, maybe not an exact date but a time that, in retrospect, was before and after the beginning of the Millennium. Although I think the name Amillennialism is unfortunate because every Amill believes there is a millennium, they just don't expect things to end up as good as the Postmills hope they will. Some Amills seem to me like the Dispensationalist always crying, "the sky is falling in, and our only hope is to be on the last helicopter to leave Saigon before the North overruns the city." Many Amills I have spoken with think it is, or has been about as good as it gets.

Lately, my study of Danial, Zechariah, Revelation, and several other minor prophets have led me to think that there will yet be tremendous growth of the Kingdom of God as we near the end. But there will also be multitudes of unbelievers who get it (epistemologically self-aware) and will persecute and kill the converts almost as fast as they are made.

In sum:
I think it will be the best of times and the worst of times until the coming of Christ.

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,
it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness
it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity,
it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness,
it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair."


― Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities​
 
I am a postmillennialist (of the historicist variety). Unfortunately there aren't a lot of good introductions available that I am aware of. Steven Dilday on Sermon audio probably comes closest to the most accessible that I am aware of.

As to your question: is it still a view that can be held? Absolutely! There is a common misconception I find when I tell people that I am a postmillennialist and that is that postmils hold to a view that the world is gradually getting better. That is a view that has more in common with early twentieth century liberalism in my view that postmillennialism. God intervenes in history in dramatic ways. Think of the exodus, for example. Israel wasn't gradually freed from slavery in Egypt. No, when things looked dark--even worse for them--God intervened. Or think of the return from Babylon. God had told Israel how long the captivity would last. But "when Zion's bondage God turned back, as men that dreamed were we." (Psalm 126.1 SMV). There was still a way in which it was done that left God's people amazed. I believe that at some point God will intervene in history in a dramatic way to fulfill several outstanding prophecies. When he does we will be able to look back and see it in a clearer light.
There's a close relationship between postmillenialism and the social gospel up until around the time of the first world war. Geerhardos Vos refutes the position in an appendix to The Eschatology of the Psalter.
 
One very useful book is "The High King of Heaven" by Dean Davis. This book defends the Amill position, but its particular strength is explaining how Reformed theology (Covenant Theology, Biblical Theology etc) impact on how one understands eschatology, and particularly exegesis. Even if you disagree with some of the conclusions, it will help you think through important interpretative issues.
 
Hey guys,


I am sure that I am not the first one opening a thread to a question like this. I don't have a firm opinion on Eschatology yet. All I can say is, that I cannot really see the dispensational view in the Scriptures, but I find Postmillenialism quite attractive. But I want to submit my view to the Bible. Is Postmill still a holdable view? Are there any Postmills here?
I ordered RCs "The last days according to Jesus" to get an overview. Any other introductory literature?
Thanks already, God bless
Check out Iain Murray's, The Puritan Hope. This settled me.
 
There's a close relationship between postmillenialism and the social gospel up until around the time of the first world war. Geerhardos Vos refutes the position in an appendix to The Eschatology of the Psalter.

Jean,

Thank you for this reference to Vos. Is this work the same one included in the volume "The Eschatology of the Old Testament"?

Regarding the relationship between postmill and the social gospel, this is something I've been thinking about a lot in our present day. I know of a few churches that have made this drift towards a full embrace of the social gospel and the common denominator, so far as I can tell, has been their postmill eschatology. I'll have to search for the Vos article and see if it's available online.
 
Jean,

Thank you for this reference to Vos. Is this work the same one included in the volume "The Eschatology of the Old Testament"?

Regarding the relationship between postmill and the social gospel, this is something I've been thinking about a lot in our present day. I know of a few churches that have made this drift towards a full embrace of the social gospel and the common denominator, so far as I can tell, has been their postmill eschatology. I'll have to search for the Vos article and see if it's available online.
I had a stand-alone book, a rather small volume. If I remember correctly, the postmillenialists at the turn of that century, had a reduced view of the fall, therefore the man of the progressive era could be perfected.
 
I would encourage postmillennialists to make their case from exegesis alone. Too often I see sweeping statements about "the earth being covered by the knowledge of the Lord" as proof of postmillennialism. An amillennialist can spiritualize that to make it mean simply bible studies. A premillennialist would see it as the millennial reign. In either case, it doesn't give a prima facie proof of postmillennialism.

Iain Murray's book is fantastic, but a premillennialist could agree with every word in it.
 
Thank you for this reference to Vos. Is this work the same one included in the volume "The Eschatology of the Old Testament"?

Regarding the relationship between postmill and the social gospel, this is something I've been thinking about a lot in our present day. I know of a few churches that have made this drift towards a full embrace of the social gospel and the common denominator, so far as I can tell, has been their postmill eschatology. I'll have to search for the Vos article and see if it's available online.

It's available attached to this post. And yes, it is the last chapter of "The Eschatology of the Old Testament." Vos called himself a Postmill but that was only as opposed to the Premill position. He became known to most as an Amill. I included the Contents page as a reference.

Don't worry. I will tell Bryce Craig, owner of P&R I sent this to the PB.
 

Attachments

  • Eschatology of the Old Testament.pdf
    1.4 MB · Views: 8
It needs to find a way to deal with the "darkening" passages in the NT.

I think I found the solution. Both things will happen at the same time. While Christianity is spreading, there will simultaneously be an increase in the self-aware wicked, even as their numbers decrease. See my rambling post #5 above
 
After reading Kim Riddlebarger’s A Case for Amillennialism, it’s hard for me to be persuaded by any other view.

A premillennialist would see it as the millennial reign.

So would an Amillenialist. We would submit we are currently living in the millennial reign of Christ, which began immediately following his resurrection. Matthew 28:18-20 “And Jesus came and said to them, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.’"
 
Last edited:
I think I found the solution. Both things will happen at the same time. While Christianity is spreading, there will simultaneously be an increase in the self-aware wicked, even as their numbers decrease. See my rambling post #5 above

Except their numbers aren't decreasing. If Rev. 12-14 applies to the church age, then Satan is deceiving all the nations.
 

I mean someday--not necessarily now. As far as I know, Christianity could dwindle to one-tenth its size, or become somewhat hidden all together as in the Middle Ages. I don't believe there is any consistent upward motion like a straight line graph starting now and heading toward the future.

And please notice I said somewhat hidden as it is clear from Scriptures that the true Church has always existed on earth.
 
Thank you for your fantastic and encouraging words. It is good to see that this kind of eschatology is still discussed. Yesterday, I listened to Martyn Lloyd-Jones on the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (in Great Biblical Doctrines) and got convicted by his words that it would be wrong to seek for an exact date and get an obsession with a topic that must not be handled dogmatically.
But still I want to get at least an opinion about it. Thank you so much for your book suggestions! I appreciate all of your words a lot!
 
I found quote this to be at the very least thought provoking.

Charles Spurgeon
"Only fools and madmen are positive in their interpretations of the Apocalypse."

I apply this to the traditional reformed view(s) of the end times and I would not include the dispensationalist view. Most believe that Spurgeon was a classical Pre-Mil.
 
Last edited:
I found quote this to be at the very least thought provoking.

Charles Spurgeon
"Only fools and madmen are positive in their interpretations of the Apocalypse."

I apply this to the traditional reformed view(s) of the end times and I would not include the dispensationalist view. Most believe that Spurgeon was a classical Post-Mil.

Do you mean to say "Classical Premil?" I am not aware of anyone (on any side) that holds that Spurgeon was postmil.
 
There's a close relationship between postmillenialism and the social gospel up until around the time of the first world war. Geerhardos Vos refutes the position in an appendix to The Eschatology of the Psalter.

I agree, and would even say that such a link continues to this day for many proponents of the 'social gospel'. Their view of progress historically was one of naturalistic theology and industrialization; then progress became viewed as the result of social action.

Now it seems also that many postmil believers are theonomists/reconstructionists.

To the OP: I would say Postmillennialism is a tenable view. I am historicist-postmil and believe that God will continue to advance His Church through the blessing of His Word (in line with the Puritan Hope).
 
If you are looking to get your hands on a postmil commentary you might find David Clark's book The Message From Patmos of great worth. After skimming through the work myself, I came realize that postmil tends to take prophecy at face value much like the premillenarian. I am sympathetic to this view for such reasons: Keith Mathison writes, [1] "I agree with Bauckham that it is a very serious mistake to understand the images of Revelation as timeless symbols. It would be the same as if we were to interpret Jeremiah’s very specific prophecies about the coming destruction of Judah by Babylon in an idealist manner". Ultimately, I find this critique overreaching, but this method of interpretation fits well with partial-preterism for reasons stated in the above quote, which support it's viability. So, to your question: it's "holdable" thanks to the science of partial-preterism.

What turns me away, personally, is the insistence upon ordinary/face value/literal method of interpretation regarding prophecy. For example, David Clark believed that the 144,000 in Rev 7 are literal, ethnic Jews. Of course not all interpreters are the same. Anyways, I hope this helps! I love the postmillenial optimism!

[1] https://www.ligonier.org/blog/top-5-commentaries-on-the-book-of-revelation/
 
Last edited:
Hi UniqueName, thank you for your contribution and welcome to the PB. Please set up your signature per PB rules by following the link below.
 
If you are looking to get your hands on a postmil commentary you might find David Clark's book The Message From Patmos of great worth. After skimming through the work myself, I came realize that postmil tends to take prophecy at face value much like the premillenarian. I am sympathetic to this view for such reasons: Keith Mathison writes, [1] "I agree with Bauckham that it is a very serious mistake to understand the images of Revelation as timeless symbols. It would be the same as if we were to interpret Jeremiah’s very specific prophecies about the coming destruction of Judah by Babylon in an idealist manner". Ultimately, I find this critique overreaching, but this method of interpretation fits well with partial-preterism for reasons stated in the above quote, which support it's viability. So, to your question: it's "holdable" thanks to the science of partial-preterism.

What turns me away, personally, is the insistence upon ordinary/face value/literal method of interpretation regarding prophecy. For example, David Clark believed that the 144,000 in Rev 7 are literal, ethnic Jews. Of course not all interpreters are the same. Anyways, I hope this helps! I love the postmillenial optimism!

[1] https://www.ligonier.org/blog/top-5-commentaries-on-the-book-of-revelation/


Thank you very much, I will have a look at it :)
 
Jacob, I saw you laud Alan Kurschner's Eschatos Ministries above (post #2). Recognizing his name from the link you provided (we dueled over textual matters years back), so I looked at his site and found an article where he attacks the Amil view, which was pretty weak, “Satan Is Not Bound by a Bungee Cord, as Amillennialists Would Have You Believe”, and is easily refuted.

As I’m on lockdown here in the COVID-19 epicenter (NYC), I have some spare time to respond to him, if Damien (of the OP) doesn’t mind my dealing with a related eschatology (and you may even find it—the Amil view—appealing, @DamienEdwards1689).

I’ll work on it a little, and then post, Lord willing He keep me healthy—being vulnerable to this bug (at 78).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top