Featured The early Church was not Pre, but Postmillenial. ???

Studying what the early church fathers believed on this subject is interesting, but because there is such a variety of eschatological opinions among them, it is practically impossible to determine exactly what they believed.

 

true, but there would seem to be a solid leaning towards what we would call historical pre Mil...

 

That is only true for some of them. Besides, there are also much of their writings that have yet to be translated.

 

The good news is that we can read them, but should get eschatology from what the scriptures alone have to say!

 

Ultimately, what we believe about anything must conform to the Scriptures, but I think it is wise to consider those who came before us. It isn't a guarantee against heresy, but it helps and also exhibits humility.

 

Yes, Historical theology is valuable, just as long as that does not override the Bible....

 

Seeking the opinions of godly men, men who've studied the Scriptures, is always good.

Eschatology is not the clearest concept in the Bible. What is clear is that there are aspects of a Christian's life that are valid regardless of one's eschatological view: personal holiness, preaching the Gospel and making disciples. IF we do those things, we have done our part as faithful servants regardless of which eschatological view ultimately proves [most] accurate.

Also: I'm a wary of theologians who claim certainty on things about which the Bible does not grant certainty.

About a year ago when my men's Bible Study was working through Revelation, we studied the commentaries of many different men of God. The ones with the most certainty, in particular, John MacArthur, based that certainty on a series of extra-biblical premises that were not necessarily true. They weren't necessarily false either, but basing theology on arguments that cannot be established with much certainty intra- or extra-biblically, seems a mistake to me.

 

I agree with that statement. Nonetheless, it is the scriptures alone and not what the church fathers commented on that must be our source of truth in such matters.

The book of Revelation is almost entirely future....and it is almost entirely chronological. That can only mean a pre-millenial return of Christ and Him sitting on the throne of David for a thousand years. In Revelation 20 where this matter is spoken of, that 1,000 year period is mentioned six times in seven verses. As far as I am concerned it is 'case closed'.

Best wishes.

 

I think eschatology is very interesting. Ultimately, though, it all comes down to this:

But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18)

...and it won't be secret!

 

Book of Revelation - Future for us or future for John?

I'm not arguing, because unless one is a full preterist (and I am certainly not) then there's enough of the future in Revelation to keep me busy.

I believe that the letters to the seven churches were seven letters to seven real churches in Asia Minor in the First Century, AD. I further believe that the seven characterizations remain valid in the 21st Century.

 

Supersoldier71:

For both.

Primarily it speaks of that particular group of seven churches, yes. But just as Lucifer the devil was prefigured in the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14 so that we look beyond him understanding the true spirit & personality of Satan that worked through that pagan king...the same application can be made concerning those seven churches...the sixth and seventh of them in particular.

If this principle be true then each of those seven churches bespeak of the seven periods of church history with Philadelphia prefiguring the 6th & last years of the age of grace just prior to the Rapture. The seventh church prefiguring the coming church of Antichrist & in union with that awful coming dictator. This position posits the little remnant/faithful church (the 6th) will be raptured but the left-behind church(Laodicean) will be the coming one world church of Antichrist/harlot church which is depicted in union with that coming world dictator as seen in Rev. 17 & 18.

But if this is not true then the promise made to the Philadelphia is negated because there was no rapture during the first century existence of that local church & no evidence that anything evil happened to that local body of Christ.

Have you ever wondered why the Lord Jesus sent just seven letters to the churches of Asia Minor and none of the other churches received such a blessing? Only if the church age theory is correct does this make any sense.

 

It's 0528 and I'm pressed for time, but to answer your last question: because 7 is completeness. Seven literal churches ordained by God to be representative of all churches.

Either way requires assigning an unusually long period of time to the word "soon".

God bless.

 

"Soon" in heaven is not the same as 'soon' in any earthly vernacular.

 

"Soon" when speaking to humans generally means soon or the instructions to follow are useless when one is trying to make himself ready. God knows this and structures His communications accordingly.

What is your basis for applying the same exegetical principle to that particular passage in Isaiah as Revelation? Contextually they are not the same, nor especially similar. I do NOT see a pre-Rapture Rapture either implied or explicit in Revelation 3:7-13, nor is there anything in the text that states that the Laodiceans will be "left-behind".

It is much more logical to assume that at the very least there may be dual fulfilment of this text, that it happened, and is still to come, but the process that you utilize would have resulted in Scripture that would have been mostly without meaning to the people to whom it was given. That would be highly unusual.

And historically, lots of evil things did happen to those early congregations, that is not really disputed.

 

Define the 'twinkling of an eye' and then prove it happened to Christians at any time in the past.

Concerning your statement 'generally speaking'....do some deeper thinking on this. When did Jesus die on the cross? Do you know what year that happened? Would you agree with me that he died in approx. A.D 33? Historically that is probably the date of Jesus death. But what if I told you that He died before the foundation of the world?

Proof: "Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.'

Now, please explain this also. It seems that 'soon' can have a different meaning than what we are accustomed to.

Even so, how 'soon' did Jesus return to earth, visibly, physically, literally as the angels told the disciples he would at His ascension into heaven? Name the date of His appearance.

2 Timothy 4:8
Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

Give that date, please, & then prove it with both scriptural and historical evidence.

Because Isaiah and John were BOTH looking into the future at things that have not happened as it concerns the return of Christ to earth (in which 'every eye shall see him', Rev. 1:7).

You don't wish to see it. Nonetheless the pre-trib rapture is found in the words of Jesus Christ Himself.

Luke 21:35-36 King
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

So to 'escape' is to stand before the Son of man. So says the Holy Spirit. ("to meet the Lord in the air") II Thess. 4:17.

And when we all go up in that incredibly exciting moment you will be with us and you won't be arguing about it any longer. If you are a true Christian you will rejoice & be just as excited as the rest of us.

Prove that the local church at Philadelphia was persecuted and experienced the trouble Christ told them he would keep from the hour of temptation that would ensnare the whole world (tribulation). Give solid historical documention and just how they were delivered from that snare that will come on the whole world. And...JUST WHAT WAS THAT TIME OF 'TEMPTATION' THAT CAME ON THE ENTIRE WORLD? Tell us, please and give the date and circumstances.

Please do not miss a single question that I have posed to you for I am going to leave the board for a time very soon.

Lastly, explain why the Lord Jesus Christ wrote to ONLY the seven churches of Asia minor and not to any other local church in the Roman empire.

I wish to make perhaps one last answer to you and the others on this thread because I have other things I need to give attention to. But it is sad to me to have to urge my Christian brothers to accept the promise of joy, the thrill, & the anticipation of meeting the Lord in the air at the coming rapture. He promised us this would bring us comfort to escape the terrible time of horror that is to come upon all the world in the tribulation. These promises are yet future, for they have never happened in the past...certainly not on the world-wide scale the scripture speaks of.

Best wishes.

 

P.S. the promise of the Messiah sitting upon the throne of David is the death blow to a number of different heresies: Amillenialism, preterist & partial preterist, Seventh Day Adventist, and Jehovah Witness views & even theistic evolution are destroyed utterly by a good understanding of that prophecy.

Why? Because the Lord Jesus Christ has not yet sat upon the throne of David nor have the kingdoms of this world submitted to Him as the prophecy tells us will happen. Question: but how do we know that the throne of David is earthly and not the same as the throne Christ sits upon at this moment next to the Father?

Here's how:

Zechariah 14:9
9 And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.

The Lord Jesus Christ will rule the world, on earth, from Jerusalem for a thousand years. It is written, it is fixed by the Father, and it will be done.

 

And there you go, claiming that beliefs that are within the bounds of orthodoxy, are heretical.

You could've led with that and saved us both some time.

God bless.