Continuing the eschatology

[agedman]

First of all Thank you for getting us back on track, second thank you for information, presented very well. I will read them.

Darby, typical of any scholar, is not always a simple read. And, few take the enormous amount of time to read, rather rely on what others report. IMO, this is perhaps some of what was behind Spurgeon’s remarks. He perhaps relied on what others reported. Do we all not face that same dilemma in modern news sources?

However, being able to say in a discussion,”Look, I have read .... first hand sources and this is what is presented,” is a mark of one who attends to scholarship.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Polycarp (69-155), Epistle to the Philippians:
“For if we be well pleasing unto Him in this present world, we shall receive the future world also, according as He promised us to raise us from the dead, and that if we conduct ourselves worthily of Him we shall also reign with Him, if indeed we have faith.”
(Lightfoot trans., par. 5)

Amen to Polycarp, but personally, I don't see anything specifically Premil about that. It seems to work perfectly well with Amil.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I am leaving the place where I have Internet so I must be brief for now. My one question is why did you dare to add to the verse you quoted? Nowhere does Acts 1:11 say "physical".

That is a fact.

Yes, He rose physically from the grave. But not a single verse in Scripture says He was to return physically.

You're joking, right?
He left visibly 'while they watched' (Acts 1:9). He will return 'in like manner.' If words have any meaning, that means visibly.

 

[John of Japan]

Amen to Polycarp, but personally, I don't see anything specifically Premil about that. It seems to work perfectly well with Amil.

I am not aware of an amil scheme which has the saints ruling with Jesus after the 2nd coming. That's a premil concept. In the eternal state we are not rulers.

 

[TCassidy]

If I need to learn some honesty then whats it implying
Antonyms of honest dishonest, fibbing, lying, mendacious, prevaricating, untruthful
Thesaurus results for HONEST

Said in the context of "You made the false claim that in order to take the word "star" literally Roby would have to believe it had to be the big ball of glowing gas type star. I showed you that is false."

You kept dodging that fact. Dishonestly is not always lying. Sometimes it is the failure to acknowledge truth.

 

[agedman]

I am not aware of an amil scheme which has the saints ruling with Jesus after the 2nd coming. That's a premil concept. In the eternal state we are not rulers.

I was wondering the same thing.

The only scheme in which the prophets would fit is premill.

Too often the ones who reject premillennialism are actually rejecting the LaHaye/Jenkins propaganda, not being understanding that their view is but a single scheme in which premillennialism can be considered.

Not all dispensation schemes are “Darby dispensation.”

Dispensations can be used merely as a tool to present a useable outline of Scripture. It is as using covenates, or archeological terms, a way of referring to periods of time.

 

[Covenanter]

Show me some statements of Polycarp's premillennialism. Please, asking nicely.

No, from the Word of God in its entirety.

Polycarp (69-155), Epistle to the Philippians:
“For if we be well pleasing unto Him in this present world, we shall receive the future world also, according as He promised us to raise us from the dead, and that if we conduct ourselves worthily of Him we shall also reign with Him, if indeed we have faith.”
(Lightfoot trans., par. 5)

Clement:

4 For the Lord said, I come to gather together all the nations, tribes, and languages. Herein He speaketh of the day of His appearing, when He shall come and redeem us, each man according to his works. 5 And the unbelievers shall see His glory and His might: and they shall be amazed when they see the kingdom of the world given to Jesus,

Lightfoot trans., 2 Clement 17.4-5

Neither passage as cited says anything about a future millennium, intermediate between the present Gospel age & the NH&NE.

To answer the objection premils raise -

who are we going to reign over, if all the wicked are in hell?​

Jesus spoke about reigning:

Mat. 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them.26 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. 27 And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”​

In his intro to his readers, John writes:

Rev. 1:4 ..... Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth.
To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, 6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.​

We have the status of kings and priests to His God and Father now, as the redeemed people of God. No need to wait until a supposed future millennium.

And Clement is writing of the return of our Lord Jesus in glory for general resurrection & judgment, as Jesus stated:

John 5:28 Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. ​

He has in previous verses taught a first resurrection for those who hear his Word & believe -

24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. 25 Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, 27 and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man.
​

Notice Jesus said, "the hour is coming, and now is" so there is no question of him there referring to the future bodily resurrection, rather he contrasts conversion resurrection with bodily resurrection of the dead.

No, John, we need explicit statements about a future intermediate millennium, & those quotations from Polycarp & Clement won't do.

 

[agedman]

Neither passage as cited says anything about a future millennium, intermediate between the present Gospel age & the NH&NE.

To answer the objection premils raise -

who are we going to reign over, if all the wicked are in hell?​

Jesus spoke about reigning:

Mat. 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them.26 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. 27 And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”​

...

So you take the passage not just to be for believer assemblies, but for the ungodly political structures, also.

Doesn’t that seem a stretch considering Paul’s statement(s) concerning the character shown to world leaders?

 

[John of Japan]

I was wondering the same thing.

The only scheme in which the prophets would fit is premill.

Too often the ones who reject premillennialism are actually rejecting the LaHaye/Jenkins propaganda, not being understanding that their view is but a single scheme in which premillennialism can be considered.

Not all dispensation schemes are “Darby dispensation.”

Dispensations can be used merely as a tool to present a useable outline of Scripture. It is as using covenates, or archeological terms, a way of referring to periods of time.

Well said.

 

[John of Japan]

Here is an excellent scholarly article in the Journal of Evangelical Theological Society (JETS) postulating the Apostle John as the originator of premilennialism:
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/31/31-4/31-4-pp411-427_JETS.pdf

 

[prophecy70]

Darby, typical of any scholar, is not always a simple read. And, few take the enormous amount of time to read, rather rely on what others report. IMO, this is perhaps some of what was behind Spurgeon’s remarks. He perhaps relied on what others reported. Do we all not face that same dilemma in modern news sources?

However, being able to say in a discussion,”Look, I have read .... first hand sources and this is what is presented,” is a mark of one who attends to scholarship.

So there is no truth in any of this?
After Dr. Maitland came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). In 1850, Newman wrote his “Letter on Anglican Difficulties,” revealing that one of the goals in the Oxford Movement was to finally absorb “the various English denominations and parties” back into the Church of Rome. After publishing a pamphlet endorsing Todd’s futurism about a one-man Antichrist, Newman soon became a full Roman Catholic, and later even a highly honored Cardinal. Through the influence of Maitland, Todd, Newman, and others, a definite “Romeward movement was already arising, destined to sweep away the old Protestant landmarks, as with a flood.”10

Then came the much-respected Scottish Presbyterian minister, Edward Irving (1792-1834), the acknowledged forerunner of both the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Irving pastored the large Chalcedonian Chapel in London with over 1,000 members. When Irving turned to the prophecies, he eventually accepted the one-man Antichrist idea of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, yet he went a step further. Somewhere around 1830, Edward Irving began to teach the unique idea of a two-phase return of Christ, the first phase being a secret rapture prior to the rise of the Antichrist. Where he got this idea is a matter of much dispute. Journalist Dave MacPherson believes Irving accepted it is a result of a prophetic revelation given to a young Scottish girl named Margaret McDonald.11


Left Behind by the Jesuits - Scriptures Prove Secret Pre-tribulation Rapture is Anti-biblical

 

[agedman]

So there is no truth in any of this?
After Dr. Maitland came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). In 1850, Newman wrote his “Letter on Anglican Difficulties,” revealing that one of the goals in the Oxford Movement was to finally absorb “the various English denominations and parties” back into the Church of Rome. After publishing a pamphlet endorsing Todd’s futurism about a one-man Antichrist, Newman soon became a full Roman Catholic, and later even a highly honored Cardinal. Through the influence of Maitland, Todd, Newman, and others, a definite “Romeward movement was already arising, destined to sweep away the old Protestant landmarks, as with a flood.”10

Then came the much-respected Scottish Presbyterian minister, Edward Irving (1792-1834), the acknowledged forerunner of both the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Irving pastored the large Chalcedonian Chapel in London with over 1,000 members. When Irving turned to the prophecies, he eventually accepted the one-man Antichrist idea of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, yet he went a step further. Somewhere around 1830, Edward Irving began to teach the unique idea of a two-phase return of Christ, the first phase being a secret rapture prior to the rise of the Antichrist. Where he got this idea is a matter of much dispute. Journalist Dave MacPherson believes Irving accepted it is a result of a prophetic revelation given to a young Scottish girl named Margaret McDonald.11


Left Behind by the Jesuits - Scriptures Prove Secret Pre-tribulation Rapture is Anti-biblical

It matters little if someone explores conspiracy theories. Or even considers such as factual.

Even the chief ruler of the Jews prophecied concerning the death of Christ, and he was an unbeliever.

What is ultimately responsible behavior is examining all teaching (heard or read) through the Scriptures.

As Paul said, “21But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; 22abstain from every form of evil.”

And again, Paul warns believers, “ 13For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds.”

A wise believer does not chase after “every wind of doctrine” (Ephesians 4:14).

Not everyone is whom they claim to be, even on the B.B.

 

[prophecy70]

Here is an excellent scholarly article in the Journal of Evangelical Theological Society (JETS) postulating the Apostle John as the originator of premilennialism:
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/31/31-4/31-4-pp411-427_JETS.pdf

Trypho: I remarked to you sir, that you are very anxious to be safe in all respects, since you cling to the Scriptures. But tell me, do you really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the menof our nation, and other proselytes who joined them before your Christ came? Or have you given way, and admitted this in order to have the appearance of worsting us in the controversies?

Justin: I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.


Trypho: What is this you say? That none of us shall inherit anything on the holy mountain of God?

Justin: I do not say so; but those who have persecuted and do persecute Christ, if they do not repent, shall not inherit anything on the holy mountain. But the Gentiles, who have believed on Him, and have repented of the sins which they have committed, they shall receive the inheritance along with the patriarchs and the prophets, and the just men who are descended from Jacob, even although they neither keep the Sabbath, nor are circumcised, nor observe the feasts. Assuredly they shall receive the holy inheritance of God.

CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue with Trypho (Justin Martyr) I know its a catholic website, It was just the easiest to copy and paste the writings.

Justin also Seems to have replacement theology as well. Do you agree with him there?

 

[John of Japan]

So there is no truth in any of this?
After Dr. Maitland came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). In 1850, Newman wrote his “Letter on Anglican Difficulties,” revealing that one of the goals in the Oxford Movement was to finally absorb “the various English denominations and parties” back into the Church of Rome. After publishing a pamphlet endorsing Todd’s futurism about a one-man Antichrist, Newman soon became a full Roman Catholic, and later even a highly honored Cardinal. Through the influence of Maitland, Todd, Newman, and others, a definite “Romeward movement was already arising, destined to sweep away the old Protestant landmarks, as with a flood.”10

Then came the much-respected Scottish Presbyterian minister, Edward Irving (1792-1834), the acknowledged forerunner of both the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Irving pastored the large Chalcedonian Chapel in London with over 1,000 members. When Irving turned to the prophecies, he eventually accepted the one-man Antichrist idea of Todd, Maitland, Bellarmine, and Ribera, yet he went a step further. Somewhere around 1830, Edward Irving began to teach the unique idea of a two-phase return of Christ, the first phase being a secret rapture prior to the rise of the Antichrist. Where he got this idea is a matter of much dispute. Journalist Dave MacPherson believes Irving accepted it is a result of a prophetic revelation given to a young Scottish girl named Margaret McDonald.11


Left Behind by the Jesuits - Scriptures Prove Secret Pre-tribulation Rapture is Anti-biblical

Wow, you sure can pick the heretics. Are you aware that this author, Steve Wohlberg, is a member of the Seventh Day Adventist cult?

 

[John of Japan]

Trypho: I remarked to you sir, that you are very anxious to be safe in all respects, since you cling to the Scriptures. But tell me, do you really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the menof our nation, and other proselytes who joined them before your Christ came? Or have you given way, and admitted this in order to have the appearance of worsting us in the controversies?

Justin: I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.


Trypho: What is this you say? That none of us shall inherit anything on the holy mountain of God?

Justin: I do not say so; but those who have persecuted and do persecute Christ, if they do not repent, shall not inherit anything on the holy mountain. But the Gentiles, who have believed on Him, and have repented of the sins which they have committed, they shall receive the inheritance along with the patriarchs and the prophets, and the just men who are descended from Jacob, even although they neither keep the Sabbath, nor are circumcised, nor observe the feasts. Assuredly they shall receive the holy inheritance of God.

CHURCH FATHERS: Dialogue with Trypho (Justin Martyr) I know its a catholic website, It was just the easiest to copy and paste the writings.

Justin also Seems to have replacement theology as well. Do you agree with him there?

Sorry, I don't find replacement theology in what you posted. But if by some chance Justin did hold to it, I disagree with that teaching.

 

[prophecy70]

Wow, you sure can pick the heretics. Are you aware that this author, Steve Wohlberg, is a member of the Seventh Day Adventist cult?

I find the history of futurism to say that all over, but you say I can't use wikipedia, I can't use that website. I can't not find one view of a future antichrist and 7 year tribulation anywhere before that. Just give me one paragraph of someone saying there will be a future antichrist and 7 year tribulation in a third temple pre 1585. Thats all I simply ask for. And then I will stop with the Jesuit origin. No well he could of been, and if its any explanation like polycarp, I dont see Premill in his statement.

 

[prophecy70]

Sorry, I don't find replacement theology in what you posted. But if by some chance Justin did hold to it, I disagree with that teaching.

Wow an honest, kind refute....you are growing

Yeah I didn't see it much either, I suppose, almost like Polycarp being premillennialist.


So all of israel will be saved? or just 1/3 of them?

 

[Yeshua1]

Wow an honest, kind refute....you are growing

Yeah I didn't see it much either, I suppose, almost like Polycarp being premillennialist.


So all of israel will be saved? or just 1/3 of them?

How about taking on historic premil proper then?

 

[John of Japan]

I find the history of futurism to say that all over, but you say I can't use wikipedia, I can't use that website. I can't not find one view of a future antichrist and 7 year tribulation anywhere before that. Just give me one paragraph of someone saying there will be a future antichrist and 7 year tribulation in a third temple pre 1585. Thats all I simply ask for. And then I will stop with the Jesuit origin. No well he could of been, and if its any explanation like polycarp, I dont see Premill in his statement.

I find the pre-trib position in the Bible, though I'm not as strong on it as on the premil position. Grammatical-historical interpretation always comes out with a pre-mil position. It was so in the first three centuries of Christianity until Origen (the first Christian to advocate allegorical interpretation), and it was so with my grandfather and college pres as I have related, and it was so with me. I did not read any books to come to the premil position except for the Bible. (I do admit my Dad's preaching helped me.) So I have no real need to prove a pre-1585 origin to the doctrine.

I don't suppose you paid any attention in one PM I wrote you about the nature of doctrinal progress. You see, beginning with the first Nicean Council and its dealing with Arianism, God the Holy Spirit has always lead theologians to help the churches through false doctrine at just the right times. Most recently, the doctrine of verbal inspiration was developed by men like Machen and Gaussen to counter liberalism. So I have no brief to find the antichrist and all of that before 1585. It simply doesn't matter to me. God lead my theological ancestors to premillenialism.

As for the Jesuit origin of futurism, I had never heard of it before you came on the BB, and I teach this stuff in college and seminary. So it's an extreme minority view. It's a non-issue to me, more so now that I find the primary advocate is a cultist. You can continue to believe the cultist if you want, or not--makes no difference to me. It's irrelevant to my beliefs.

 

[Yeshua1]

I find the pre-trib position in the Bible, though I'm not as strong on it as on the premil position. Grammatical-historical interpretation always comes out with a pre-mil position. It was so in the first three centuries of Christianity until Origen (the first Christian to advocate allegorical interpretation), and it was so with my grandfather and college pres as I have related, and it was so with me. I did not read any books to come to the premil position except for the Bible. (I do admit my Dad's preaching helped me.) So I have no real need to prove a pre-1585 origin to the doctrine.

I don't suppose you paid any attention in one PM I wrote you about the nature of doctrinal progress. You see, beginning with the first Nicean Council and its dealing with Arianism, God the Holy Spirit has always lead theologians to help the churches through false doctrine. Most recently, the doctrine of verbal inspiration was developed by men like Machen and Gaussen to counter liberalism. So I have no brief to find the antichrist and all of that before 1585. It simply doesn't matter to me. God lead my theological ancestors to premillenialism.

As for the Jesuit origin of futurism, I had never heard of it before you came on the BB, and I teach this stuff in college and seminary. So it's an extreme minority view. It's a non-issue to me, more so now that I find the primary advocate is a cultist. You can continue to believe the cultist if you want, or not--makes no difference to me. It's irrelevant to my beliefs.

There can be no doubt that the consistent view held by most within the Church, and among the Ecf, was the Historical PreMil view. That view ceased being the dominant position mainly thru efforts of the theologians Oregin/Augustine made popular allegorical and spiritualizing the prophetic elements of the bible