Kingdom Rule

[Iconoclast]

HMMMM............can't QUITE do it....Even though I am in 95% agreement with them. They speak a lot about this being only the result of the personal result of God being the one who individually governs the lives of a regenerate person....but, from what I read....they seem to speak a little too much about "creedalism" for the church, and it frightens me. My own father-in-Law knows Rushdoony quite well as he was a major witness in some court-cases in Nebraska about Church-Schooling and what-not...
My father-in-law was the associate pastor of the Baptist Church the State shut-down..........
But, I am thinking I have to break just a tad from them here....and I REALLY only mean a "TAD".

For one....this is obviously a "Reformed-Only" kind of group....
and Second: They speak a little too much of creedalism to me

Except for that...I agree with them completely...
Somehow or another, this is also a "Dispensationalist vs. Pre-terist" thread....which I have no interest in discussing....except that it seems that the "Pre-terist" or at least "A-Millenial" side of the equation has a view about this which is inextricably related....

Truth is...your "Theonomy and reconstruction guys"......would get a ton more traction if they weren't (seemingly) so indebted to their eschatology. I otherwise agree with them...that, and their tendency towards "creedalism"....Good questions though. :thumbs: :type: What do you say????

Hos,

I found Sam Waldrons article helpful. I also have sadly mixed feelings about these men. I like alot of what they write and discuss....but they always seem to go two steps further than I would go, and they do have some clear error and wrong thinking.
So what is the result?
Most read a little bit from them ,or listen to their ideas and reject them wholesale, rather than take the time to chew the meat and spit out the bones.
As far as eschatology....I have said many times that I am in between post-mill and amill....in my understanding.{ whatever calendar on endtimes is the right one is alright with me}
The last few years ...I find that I am drawn to the postmill side, in that they constantly speak about holiness of life , and trying to bring the gospel to the unsaved, in every sphere of life.
Some of the other views I believe to be guilty of WORLD FLIGHT which as I see it is exceedingly sinful.


Another unfortunate side effect is that very view will take the time to read and sift through some of the ideas offered and offer biblical correction.
I give you credit for at least being well read in many areas of theology and life.[ case in point, the other day you referenced from ezekiel...those who have a whore's forehead and yet were not ashamed!..good verse, many do not even know the verse much less the content, or how you used it:thumbs:]

I think the church in general is not well read, and consequently falls short of raising the bar on how we in our day attempt to live the christian life.

40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

When I posted this thread it was not a trick, or to "bait"people. I think this is a crucial area of life for each of us to consider.Much of my time spent meditaing as I drive is on these issues so I was looking forward to some biblical feedback. We clash sometimes but I know you are capable of coming up with some solid ideas and posts.
When I quote a solid contemporary writer like Pastor Gentry......even if someone does not hold his view on endtimes...if the truth be known...he would slice and dice many ill equipped persons who are shallow in their outlook-[he is a gifted and graceful person, so he would not demean anyone that way, but would try and point them back to scripture.]

But what I am getting at is...if you read his writing,and the solid verses offered, you are pressed to consider what he offers, and if you do not agree, give a biblically well reasoned response.

I was originally taught the dispy premill teaching and used to offer up the classic position to try and defend what I was told was -the truth!
I have no desire to attack any who hold that view unless they do so with an ignorant ,unscriptural approach yet think they have it all.

I am not worried about confessions, and some who become hyper- confessional. That can be a danger for some. I value the word of scripture so far above the tools that we use, that it is not a danger to me.
I like all the "tools' and those who start there, because they for the most part desire to remain immersed in scripture. Sometimes I have observed that they go hyper-confessional if in the flesh they are trying to impress other men with their staunch confessional stance.Do you see what i am saying.

Except for that...I agree with them completely...
Somehow or another, this is also a "Dispensationalist vs. Pre-terist" thread....which I have no interest in discussing

well again...I am looking more for how do we occupy until he comes? whatever view a person has, how does it influence them ...day by day, when they speak to others, when they work, when they meet strangers, when they fellowship?

What are your thoughts on world flight???

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Hos,

I found Sam Waldrons article helpful. I also have sadly mixed feelings about these men. I like alot of what they write and discuss....but they always seem to go two steps further than I would go, and they do have some clear error and wrong thinking.
So what is the result?
Most read a little bit from them ,or listen to their ideas and reject them wholesale, rather than take the time to chew the meat and spit out the bones.

I like a lot of what they write and also have "mixed-feelings"...I didn't read all of the Sam Waldron article...but I read all of the other one.....I would like to know what "wrong-thinking" and "error" you are saying that was there....I suppose I will read the whole article first....and then I will know what you mean to say!!!!

As far as eschatology....I have said many times that I am in between post-mill and amill....in my understanding.{ whatever calendar on endtimes is the right one is alright with me}

As far as eschatology...I am "between" neither one!!!!! I like this discussion on it's own merits....but if the debate broke down to a particular eschatological view...I guess I can't speak to it, as I remain a "pre-mil" dispy....
I would HOPE that many of their ideas can be bantered without respect to that particular view, but maybe they are interrelated and nothing can be done about it.....if so...then, unfortunately, you and I will have lost our area of agreement.

The last few years ...I find that I am drawn to the postmill side, in that they constantly speak about holiness of life , and trying to bring the gospel to the unsaved, in every sphere of life.
Some of the other views I believe to be guilty of WORLD FLIGHT which as I see it is exceedingly sinful.

I think that I know what you mean with the term "WORLD FLIGHT"...and I would also agree that it is wrong...but, don't be guilty of an "argument from consequences"...which is to say, that...even if certain persons abuse a certain point of view....don't reject their point of view whole-sale merely because it is subject to mis-use...But, I appreciate your sentiment here.

When I posted this thread it was not a trick, or to "bait"people. I think this is a crucial area of life for each of us to consider.Much of my time spent meditaing as I drive is on these issues so I was looking forward to some biblical feedback. We clash sometimes but I know you are capable of coming up with some solid ideas and posts.

I am responding to you...NOW...for this reason...I DON'T want your thread closed...I am truly curious about much you are offering here, and I have insufficient knowledge to "respond"...(in the sense of offering constructive disagreement)....I am absorbing a lot of what you are posting and linking to here...I have never even read a signifigant amount from Gentry...So, I have "catching-up" to do, I suppose...but I don't want your thread to sort of dissolve due to lack of response!!!!

But what I am getting at is...if you read his writing,and the solid verses offered, you are pressed to consider what he offers, and if you do not agree, give a biblically well reasoned response.
I was originally taught the dispy premill teaching and used to offer up the classic position to try and defend what I was told was -the truth!

You and I are at cross-roads...in that...I still hold to it, but I do not debate it much....I think that the Scriptures, (as I have learned them) teach this...but I do not consider myself sufficiently equipped to debate it.....I suppose I would be interested in debating the "Kingdom Now" ideas you posted in your OP....with respect to Politics and Faith and their respective place in society...but, as I explained before...

IF...this is strictly a Post-Mil or A-Mil topic...I really can't speak to it...I could only give a perspective on what they are saying from a Pre-Mil perspective for now...

I am not worried about confessions, and some who become hyper- confessional. That can be a danger for some. I value the word of scripture so far above the tools that we use, that it is not a danger to me.
I like all the "tools' and those who start there, because they for the most part desire to remain immersed in scripture. Sometimes I have observed that they go hyper-confessional if in the flesh they are trying to impress other men with their staunch confessional stance.Do you see what i am saying.

I am with you....but, you and I have had some run-ins before wherein I thought you were a little too "confessional" for my taste...This doesn't make either of us "wrong" or "right" (you obviously remember when I called you things like a Catholic Inquisitor and what-not right) <-----:smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin:
Maybe the difference is as subtle as the difference between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton??? They can be quite subtle...

well again...I am looking more for how do we occupy until he comes? whatever view a person has, how does it influence them ...day by day, when they speak to others, when they work, when they meet strangers, when they fellowship?What are your thoughts on world flight???

I have never heard the term "World-Flight"...I am deducing what I think you mean, by assuming that you have such a lack of appreciation for pre-millenialism that you tend to assume that every "pre-millenialist" has a sort-of:

"Screw-this place...I'm outa here...and what do I give a rat's patooty about what happens, and the worse it gets the better....and we merely await the arrival of the fifth Imam or something..."

That isn't how most of us really think...Logically, though, it wouldn't prove us wrong actually...I would like to engage this with the ability to approach it without regard to eschatological viewpoint...but, if the idea is so very interrelated (and that is ok actually.....it just means the likes of HoS aren't really invited).....than that is ok....

You have posed some wonderful ideas on your thread.....What I would actually like to see is for you to post what YOU think, a little more than quote what others think....tell us what Hebrews 2 says to YOU!!!!!:thumbs:

 

[Iconoclast]

HeirofSalvation

Hos,Thanks for your response. If and when i post a link....save it to favorites or save it on flash-drive ...until you can take some time with it.
i try not to post things that would waste someones time. Sam Waldron is a really gifted teacher...you can hear him on sermonaudio...same with Pastor Gentry.
remember... i was premill for a number of years...so I would not ridicule anyone who holds that or any other endtime position, as long as they agree we win In Christ, and Jesus returns.

I like a lot of what they write and also have "mixed-feelings"...I didn't read all of the Sam Waldron article...but I read all of the other one.....I would like to know what "wrong-thinking" and "error" you are saying that was there....I suppose I will read the whole article first....and then I will know what you mean to say!!!!

You will see it right away,lol...some, not all want to re-implement the OT theocratic laws....stoning people to death ,etc.

As far as eschatology...I am "between" neither one!!!!! I like this discussion on it's own merits....but if the debate broke down to a particular eschatological view...I guess I can't speak to it, as I remain a "pre-mil" dispy.

...

Let me put it this way......the issues and questions raised are vital....no matter which end time view you hold. Everyone has to answer these questions...or at least should. You would be at a dis-advantage as I was when I first looked at these other positions because what I found out was, they seemed to offer a very strong biblical case for their view.

I tell everyone.....learn each position..Accurately.....Hold what you hold to until the time comes when you are scripturally convinced.

Hos...I could go in a premill bible study and teach the position in a way that I could get amens from revmac, thomas 15, greg perrySR.:laugh:

and I have said many times if that is what the Lord had for us, I would be fine with it! I just do not think it is the most biblical now...

I can teach the amill, and postmill to some extent, but sometimes the views criss-cross and have common elements which I still at times have to unravel.lol

I would HOPE that many of their ideas can be bantered without respect to that particular view, but maybe they are interrelated and nothing can be done about it.....if so...then, unfortunately, you and I will have lost our area of agreement.

Some of the ideas can be extracted ...in general,however some of the main ideas of necessity...seperate because they are either .....or's

I think that I know what you mean with the term "WORLD FLIGHT".

Hos...the term as I have heard it used is when christians are accused of separating...so much.. from the world, they they stop being salt and light.
They never engage the culture in a meaningful way.They cluster together in home and church, but avoid all contact with the unsaved, or government, etc......the idea, why polish the brass on a sinking ship?

I am responding to you...NOW...for this reason...I DON'T want your thread closed...I am truly curious about much you are offering here, and I have insufficient knowledge to "respond"...(in the sense of offering constructive disagreement)....I am absorbing a lot of what you are posting and linking to here...I have never even read a signifigant amount from Gentry...So, I have "catching-up" to do, I suppose...but I don't want your thread to sort of dissolve due to lack of response!!!!

Thanks. I think this is well worth the time no matter what view someone holds to. let me say again.....even if lets say postmill is not correct....
I like that they more than the others seem to give detailed reasons why we are to fully engage the culture and occupy until Jesus comes. I feel very often challenged and it exposes areas where I am sinfully negligent at times, failing to do all I can for the Kingdom. Until i read some of these guys and took time to look up the verses I tried to dismiss them.
The verses they offer are too good and more than solid...I cannot just ignore them.

here is a book in pdf format...save it and glance at it as time permits....see what he offers and why before you kind of resist, or defend against it.
http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/pdf/1992_gentry_dominion.pdf

You and I are at cross-roads...in that...I still hold to it, but I do not debate it much....I think that the Scriptures, (as I have learned them) teach this...but I do not consider myself sufficiently equipped to debate it...

..

That is okay.....I am still trying to better understand these writings, I am not interested in any "gotcha" scenerioes. Most premill are taught that it and it alone is the truth...at least I was, and it took some extensive reading to be able to re-think some of these things. Many canot comment on this thread because they do not understand the other position being offered.

I suppose I would be interested in debating the "Kingdom Now" ideas you posted in your OP....with respect to Politics and Faith and their respective place in society...but, as I explained before...

IF...this is strictly a Post-Mil or A-Mil topic...I really can't speak to it...I could only give a perspective on what they are saying from a Pre-Mil perspective for now...

I am with you....but, you and I have had some run-ins before wherein I thought you were a little too "confessional" for my taste...This doesn't make either of us "wrong" or "right" (you obviously remember when I called you things like a Catholic Inquisitor and what-not right) <-----:smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin:
Maybe the difference is as subtle as the difference between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton??? They can be quite subtle...


I have never heard the term "World-Flight"...I am deducing what I think you mean, by assuming that you have such a lack of appreciation for pre-millenialism that you tend to assume that every "pre-millenialist" has a sort-of:

"Screw-this place...I'm outa here...and what do I give a rat's patooty about what happens, and the worse it gets the better....and we merely await the arrival of the fifth Imam or something..."

That isn't how most of us really think...Logically, though, it wouldn't prove us wrong actually...I would like to engage this with the ability to approach it without regard to eschatological viewpoint...but, if the idea is so very interrelated (and that is ok actually.....it just means the likes of HoS aren't really invited).....than that is ok....

You have posed some wonderful ideas on your thread.....What I would actually like to see is for you to post what YOU think, a little more than quote what others think....tell us what Hebrews 2 says to YOU!!!!!:thumbs:[/QUOTE]

Hos,

I speak much faster than i type, so it is easier for me to cut and paste something then type at length. I try and post those that speak for me.

If we meet some time we can talk with open bibles and sort things out,and solve all manner of theological difficulties.

I can go on and on about hebrews 2-
2;1-4...warning...do not drift past the safe harbor of the apostolic word,

4-8, the creation mandate re affirmed.....man was to have dominion, the fall did not rescind the creation mandate, be fruitful, multiply, subdue the earth......not flee from it. In Jesus the last Adam some believe we are to not fail as Ot Israel did, but we are to be used by God to turn this world around...one soul at a time.....urging them to press into the kingdom

9-17....Jesus our Great high priest dying a covenant death for the people who are given to Him by the Father..the seed of Abraham.

 

[thomas15]

..... Hos...I could go in a premill bible study and teach the position in a way that I could get amens from revmac, thomas 15, greg perrySR.:laugh:

.......

Can't speak for revmac or greg perry SR (although I suspect that I do) but I can speak for thomas15 and can say without fear of being proven incorrect that I could make the same claim in a room full of catholics and reformed a-mils, presbyterians and preterists. Big deal.

I acknowledge your superior knowledge, academic firepower and cut and paste skills which is nice but it does not hold up scripturally speaking. You think, incorrectly I might add that only your camp is educated and that the only thing holding back the poor dispies from seeing the light is a lack of diligent study.

As I mention often, the core is the doctrine of reformed covenant theology, the covenants of grace, redemption and works you cannot prove exist from a study of the scriptures. Sola Scriptura would appear to mean the Bible alone but it really means the Bible and the ECFs, the Roman Church theologians, the writings of the reformers and a horde of modern clear thinkers such as a few Anglican Bishops and Gary (the pipsqueek) DeMar.

 

[thomas15]

.... If we meet some time we can talk with open bibles and sort things out,and solve all manner of theological difficulties.
.....

Thursday open mic night at the Bloomsbury Flying-J. Reformed theology with a side of preterism, New England Clam Chowder and a cup of joe to wash it all down.

 

[OldRegular]

No, it doesn't answer the question.



.....work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure. Phil 2:12,13

Regeneration, i.e. the birth from above, is a 'one time event'. Salvation is an on going affair throughout the believer's life.

Used to hear this expression from Southern Baptists: I am saved, I am being saved, I will be saved!

 

[thomas15]

Used to hear this expression from Southern Baptists: I am saved, I am being saved, I will be saved!

Don't know much about that but I do know that my sister and her catholic friends use this verse to insist on their works based salvation.

 

[Iconoclast]

thomas15

Can't speak for revmac or greg perry SR (although I suspect that I do) but I can speak for thomas15 and can say without fear of being proven incorrect that I could make the same claim in a room full of catholics and reformed a-mils, presbyterians and preterists.

That is good Thomas:thumbs:

Big deal.

I do not know why you would offer this.Scriptural truth affects how we live.
It should be very important to every christian.

I acknowledge your superior knowledge, academic firepower and cut and paste skills which is nice but it does not hold up scripturally speaking.

Thomas....I am open to any scriptural correction so feel free to respond biblically at anytime.We should be about truth...not just an emotional reaction to what teaching is offered.

It would be better all the way around to take a portion of the article, or book....and show why you do not see it as truth,and why.

You think, incorrectly I might add that only your camp is educated and that the only thing holding back the poor dispies from seeing the light is a lack of diligent study

.

Let me ask you a question here.Can you honestly say that in any premill church you have been in.....what percentage of people even know there are other positions? I am not speaking about you,, but the average person who hears sermons about the approaching time of jacobs trouble, or the little horn from Daniel,or the mark of the beast?
Some perhaps have heard of these other positions, but are told very quickly that they"spiritualize" the passages away. They mostly never look at it.
My point is if you have truth it will stand up to the test.

As I mention often, the core is the doctrine of reformed covenant theology,

There is a correlation...yes agreed.The question is....is it biblical?

the covenants of grace, redemption and works you cannot prove exist from a study of the scriptures.

We disagree on this very clearly.I have to believe you are playing semantics with these terms.

Sola Scriptura would appear to mean the Bible alone but it really means the Bible and the ECFs, the Roman Church theologians, the writings of the reformers and a horde of modern clear thinkers such as a few Anglican Bishops

This is another large topic. We do not live in isolation from history. I have discussed a bit with Michael Wrenn that history is a mix of truth and error, that we have to sort out...it is not simple and there are parts of it that are not comforting.

and Gary (the pipsqueek) DeMar.

Gary Demar is a solid brother and I think this kind of base comment should not take place. Can you show why you have such disdain for a christian teacher. I know you do not agree with his beliefs, but again can you show why??? scripturally???

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=4220684831

Thursday open mic night at the Bloomsbury Flying-J. Reformed theology with a side of preterism, New England Clam Chowder and a cup of joe to wash it all down.

I am on my way to california right now...westbound in Iowa...will be in san
fransisco and oakland thurs and friday.

Do you mean the flying j at the 215 exit? on 80....or the one down at exit 10 frystown....which one is closer to you? If I can meet sometime I will depends if my return load goes back to Ny, or I have to deliver it.

 

[Iconoclast]

Hos, here is some more from postmill made easy, By pastor Gentry;

Psalm 2
This psalm provides us with another inspired, optimistic outlook on
history. It envisions the cosmic turmoil among the nations, ending with
God’s kingdom winning the victory. Thus, it follows the two-fold pattern
of the protoevangelium (Gen 3:15): temporal struggle followed by historical
victory.
This psalm opens with the nations raging “against the Lord and
against His Anointed One “ (Psa 2:1–3) . The term “Anointed One” is the
Hebrew word “messiah,” which designates the Deliverer whom the Jews
long expected (see: John 1:20, 24–25, 41, 49; cp. Mark 15:32; Luke 24:
19–21). As the New Testament teaches, he is none other than the Lord
Jesus Christ (Mark 8:29-30; 14:61–62). But in the psalm we see the nations
sinfully plotting to free themselves from the reign of the Lord and
his Anointed: “Let us tear their fetters apart, / And cast away their cords
from us!” (Psa 2:3). Ultimately though, the psalmist notes that their rage
is not only evil but futile. For the Lord sits serenely enthroned in t


tranCh.
3: The Prophets and the Postmillennial Hope 17
scendent majesty above: “He who sits in the heavens laughs, / The Lord
scoffs at them” (Psa 2:4).


Note only does the New Testament interpret this psalm messianically,
but associates the rage of the nations with the first century crucifixion of
Jesus:
The Holy Spirit, through the mouth of our father David Thy servant, didst
say, / Why did the Gentiles rage, / And the peoples devise futile things?
/ The kings of the earth took their stand, / And the rulers were gathered
together / Against the Lord, and against His Christ. For truly in this city
there were gathered together against Thy holy servant Jesus, whom
Thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles
and the peoples of Israel. (Acts 4:25–27)
In verse five God’s long-suffering confidence finally gives way to his
righteous indignation: “Then He will speak to them in His anger / And
terrify them in His fury” (Psa 2:5). Significantly, commentators note that
Psalm 2 borrows from Exodus 15, where Moses’ song of celebration recounts
God’s defeat of Egypt at the Exodus and anticipates the future
terror of Israel’s enemies, the Canaanites. Christ will conquer the raging
nations of the world just as surely as God conquers Israel’s Old Testament
foes. We must recognize, of course, that the wheel of providence turns
slowly, for “with the Lord . . . a thousand years are like a day” (2 Pet 3:8;
cp. Psa 90:4).
In contrast to the nations’s raging futility, God sovereignly declares:
“But as for me [emphatic personal pronoun in the Hebrew], I have installed
My King / Upon Zion, My holy mountain” (Psa 2:6). God does not
speak of this installed one as “a king” or “the king,” but as “My King.”
Verse 7 expands on this installation, as the Messiah himself speaks: “I will
surely tell of the decree of the Lord: / He said to me, ‘Thou art My Son; /
Today I have begotten Thee.” The “decree” is a pledge of adoption by
God: “Thou art My Son; / Today I have begotten Thee.” It serves as a holy
coronation rite establishing this King’s legitimacy (see: 2 Sam 7:13–14;
Psa 89:26–27).
The word “today” suggests a moment at which the title is associated
with the new ruler. And this is important to the postmillennial argument.
Rather than this installation occurring at Christ’s Second Advent, as many
Christians assume, the New Testament relates it once again to the first
century: at the exaltation of Christ which begins with his resurrection.
“God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus,
as it is also written in the second Psalm, ‘Thou art My Son; today I have
18 Postmillennialism Made Easy
begotten Thee’‘” (Acts 13:33). Since his resurrection and ascension Christ
has been installed as the King (Rom 1:4), ruling from God’s right hand
(Rom 14:9–11; Eph 1:20ff; Col 1:18; 1 Pet 3:22; Rev 17:14; 19:16). Later I
will note that the Great Commission speaks of Christ’s being “given” all
authority at this point in time (Matt 28:18; cp. the aorist [past] tense in
Phil 2:9).
But what does the Psalm mean when it speak of this installation “on
Zion”? Zion is an historical site: it is the Jebusite fortress David captures
and renames the “City of David” (2 Sam 5:6–9). Since David’s bringing the
Ark to Zion, the hill becomes sacred (2 Sam 6:10–12). Because of its
significance in old covenant history, the name “Zion” gradually applies
beyond the historical site to include Mount Moriah where Solomon builds
the Temple (Isa 8:18; Joel 3:17; Mic 4:7). Eventually it covers all of Jerusalem
(2 Kgs 19:21; Psa 48:2, 11–13; 69:35; Isa 1:8), even representing the
whole Jewish nation (Isa 40:9; Zech 9:13).
Because of this, Zion becomes an image of God’s rule in the world.
In the New Testament the images of Zion and Jerusalem transcend Old
Testament realities, reaching to heaven itself (Gal 4:25–26; Heb 12:22;
Rev 14:1). Thus, the New Testament sees the center of divine rule being
transferred to heaven, where Christ currently rules over his kingdom
(John 18:36; Rev 1:5).
Now all that the enthroned Messiah need do is: “Ask of me, and I will
surely give the nations as Thine inheritance, / And the very ends of the
earth as Thy possession” (Psa 2:8). Remarkably, this securing of “the nations”
is the very task he assigns to his followers in the Great Commission:
“Go and make disciples of all nations” (Matt 28:19a; see discussion
in Ch. 3 below). He will rule over them with his rod and dash in pieces
those who refuse to submit (Psa 2:9). This he does by his mighty word
under his controlling providence (Heb 1:3, 8–13; e.g., Matt 21:43–44).
Because of this ultimate hope, the psalmist issues a warning to the
nations:
Now therefore, O kings, show discernment; / Take warning, O judges of
the earth. / Worship the Lord with reverence, / And rejoice with trembling.
/ Do homage to the Son, lest He become angry, and you perish in
the way, / For His wrath may soon be kindled. / How blessed are all who
take refuge in Him! (Psa 2:10–12)
Thus, we see that this great psalm continues developing the twin
redemptive-historical themes of struggle and victory which begin with
the redemptive promise to Adam. It throbs with historical optimism and

Isaiah 2:2-4
One of Isaiah’s earliest prophecies breathes hope for God’s victory in
the world — just as does the protoevangelium, the Abrahamic Covenant,
and the messianic psalms. This passage reads:
Now it will come about that
In the last days, / The mountain of the house of the Lord / Will be established
as the chief of the mountains, / And will be raised above the hills; / And all the
nations will stream to it. / And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let
us go up to the mountain of the Lord, / To the house of the God of Jacob; /
That He may teach us concerning His ways, / And that we may walk in His
paths.” / For the law will go forth from Zion, / And the word of the Lord from
Jerusalem. / And He will judge between the nations, / And will render
decisions for many peoples; / And they will hammer their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks. / Nation will not lift up sword
against nation, / And never again will they learn war.
Here in Isaiah 2 (Micah repeats this prophecy in Mic 4:1–3) we learn
that the “last days” shall witness the universally successful influence of
the gospel. As a consequence of the spread of the gospel, history will
experience widespread faith in God, righteousness on the personal and
social levels, and international peace and prosperity on the cultural and
political levels. Significantly, we note once again that this is to transpire
before the Consummation. Isaiah indicates the “last days” will be the era
witnessing these things — not some era after the last days. “In the last
days” (Isa 2:2) means “during.”

 

[Iconoclast]

According to the New Testament the “last days” begin in the first
century (1 Cor 10:11; Heb 9:26; 1 John 2:18; 1 Pet 1:20). In fact, the
Spirit’s outpouring at Pentecost formally initiates the “last days,” for
Peter explains: “This is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel:
‘And it shall be in the last days” (Acts 2:16–17a). Theologically-speaking,
then, history is divided between the former days (before Christ) and the
“last days” (after Christ): “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in
the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has
spoken to us in His Son” (Heb 1:1–2a). The “last days” cover the remaining
days of temporal history from the first century until the second
coming of Christ, which will be “the end” (1 Cor 15:24; cp. Matt 13:39–40,
49), when Christ resurrects and judges the dead (John 6:39, 44, 54; 11:24;

12:48). Hence, the days in which we have been living since the first
century are the last days — with none to follow (otherwise the would not
be “the last days”).
The reference to “Jerusalem” (Isa 2:3d) represents the whole people
of God, just as “Israel” and “Judah” do in Jeremiah 31:31. In Jeremiah the
“new covenant” with Israel and Judah specifically applies to the international
Church in the New Testament (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6;
Heb 8:8–13). The New Testament Christians come to “Jerusalem” as they
come to Christ (Gal 4:25–26; Heb 12:22).
The references to the “mountain,” the “house of the God of Jacob,”
and “Zion” refer to the Church. Historical Jerusalem is where Christ effects
redemption (Acts 10:39; Rom 9:33; 1 Pet 2:6) and where Christianity
begins (Luke 24:47, 52; Acts 1:8; 2:1ff). The historical “city of peace”
stands as a symbol of the trans-national, supra-historical city of God from
whence the peace of God ultimately flows. According to the New Testament
the Church is the focal point (not the totality) of Christ’s kingdom
(Matt 16:18–19); she becomes the temple and house of God (1 Cor 3:16;
6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:19–21; 1 Pet 2:5). She is the earthly manifestation
of the city of God (Gal 4:25–26; Heb 12:22; 1 Pet 2:6; Rev 21:2) and sits
on a hill to influence the world (Matt 5:14; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1; 21:10).
Isaiah says that Christ’s Church will be “established” (Heb., kun) in
“the top of the mountains” (Isa 2:2c), indicating she will be “permanently
fixed, rendered permanently visible.”2 After the introductory phrase “last
days,” Isaiah places the word “established” first for emphasis. In Old Testament
eschatological portrayals this house is gigantic (Eze 40:2); Jerusalem
expands her borders (Isa 54:1–5) and towers over a plain (Zech
14:10). Thus, the Church is so firmly established as to tower over the
world. She is a permanent, life-giving fixture in the earth: the “gates of
hell” cannot prevail against her (Matt 16:18), nor may she “be shaken”
(Heb 12:28). In both Isaiah 2:2 and Micah 4:1 the result “must be understood
of an enduring condition, and the same is implied in the representation
in vss. 3, 4 of Jehovah’s teaching function, of his judging between
nations and of the state of peace and security prevailing[/QUOTE]

This seems to me to be a somewhat substantial case being made scripturally.....if it is true, how does it change our worldview and how we conduct ourselves as individuals and as local churches?

 

[thomas15]

......Let me ask you a question here.Can you honestly say that in any premill church you have been in.....what percentage of people even know there are other positions? I am not speaking about you,, but the average person who hears sermons about the approaching time of jacobs trouble, or the little horn from Daniel,or the mark of the beast?
Some perhaps have heard of these other positions, but are told very quickly that they"spiritualize" the passages away. They mostly never look at it.
.....

I have been trying to decide on how best to answer this question. First, let me make two observations, the first is that Biblical truth doesn't stand or fall based on the understanding of opposing viewpoints of those who embrace it. Second, I detect a hint of elitism in your question in that it implys that non-reformed/covenant believers in Christ are not reformed due to their lack of study on the matter and that it is not based on an informed and Biblical approach to theology. Perhaps I'm be a little too sensative here but probably not because I see it, subtle as it is, over and over in your posts.

My response to your question would be that my personal experience in both dispensational and reformed churches would lead me to say that those in the dispensational churches are more informed on matters of the Bible and theology in general but I cannot say that one or the other camp has the opposing viewpoint under control. Thats my honest opinion on the matter.

I find it interesting and have mentioned it many times on this board that on observing the "advice" that posters of the reformed camp give to reformed believers seeking information on dispensational theology usually, almost always is given in the form of consulting a reformed work critical of dispensationalism such as Cox, Riddlebarger, Robertson or Hoekema, not dispensationalist themselves; Scofield, Ryrie or Bock. The situation gets worse when the question is asked on the PB board, where even the professional reformed thinkers stumble when asked to prove covenant theology from the Bible but without hestitation urge those interested in understanding dispensationalism to study it from the reformed understanding. These are the people who say that if you want to understand Calvin, read Institutes but if you want to understand Chafer, read Poythress.

So I could make the same charge against your camp, although I don't really see the advantage of such a move, but how many reformed really fairly know and articulate the doctrines of dispensationalism? When I read dispensationalism according to Cox, Riddlebarger, Vos and so forth I find a dispensationalism differing in detail to that of which I read from "crazed fundies" such as Ryrie.

I speak for no one other than thomas15, rest assured that I have the source material on reformed theology, I know it and I'm not getting my data on reformed theology from dispensationalists.

 

[Iconoclast]

thomas15

Good post, good thoughts.:thumbsup:

I have been trying to decide on how best to answer this question. First, let me make two observations, the first is that Biblical truth doesn't stand or fall based on the understanding of opposing viewpoints of those who embrace it.

Correct and agreed:wavey:

Second, I detect a hint of elitism in your question in that it implys that non-reformed/covenant believers in Christ are not reformed due to their lack of study on the matter and that it is not based on an informed and Biblical approach to theology. Perhaps I'm be a little too sensitive here but probably not because I see it, subtle as it is, over and over in your posts.

It might come across that way,but it is not as it seems.There is an abundance of good study material in the covenant camp.Those into the teaching feed and build on it growing all the time.
There is a danger built into this that is more of a danger to the covenant theologian. The is a confidence in the finished work of Jesus that gives a confidence or boldness when offering this teaching.
That it stands against what you hold alot, makes you get keyed up and look at it as an enemy rather than a friend.
I do not think that many in an average baptist church enough study goes on anyway.....and in some reformed baptist churches also....this is a common problem
Thomas...in this thread...there are many good verses offered but you are one of the few who will read and offer comments. I think many cannot enter in because they are not sure how to go about it.

My response to your question would be that my personal experience in both dispensational and reformed churches would lead me to say that those in the dispensational churches are more informed on matters of the Bible and theology in general but I cannot say that one or the other camp has the opposing viewpoint under control. Thats my honest opinion on the matter.

The ones I have been in are mostly fundy types,and not so knowledgeable.

I find it interesting and have mentioned it many times on this board that on observing the "advice" that posters of the reformed camp give to reformed believers seeking information on dispensational theology usually, almost always is given in the form of consulting a reformed work critical of dispensationalism such as Cox, Riddlebarger, Robertson or Hoekema, not dispensationalist themselves; Scofield, Ryrie or Bock. The situation gets worse when the question is asked on the PB board, where even the professional reformed thinkers stumble when asked to prove covenant theology from the Bible but without hestitation urge those interested in understanding dispensationalism to study it from the reformed understanding. These are the people who say that if you want to understand Calvin, read Institutes but if you want to understand Chafer, read Poythress.

Most of us have been taught premill to begin with. I do not know of anyone who went from amill or post...to premill.

So I could make the same charge against your camp, although I don't really see the advantage of such a move, but how many reformed really fairly know and articulate the doctrines of dispensationalism? When I read dispensationalism according to Cox, Riddlebarger, Vos and so forth I find a dispensationalism differing in detail to that of which I read from "crazed fundies" such as Ryrie.

I would have to look into that...it has not been what I have seen in person

I speak for no one other than thomas15, rest assured that I have the source material on reformed theology, I know it and I'm not getting my data on reformed theology from dispensationalists.

Feel free to challenge Gentrys teaching with whatever source you want to use....turn it loose...[before the rapture]:laugh: If you don't I might be left behind and have to become a tribulation saint.