new book on Covenant Theology

[thomas15]

The Bible is a book of covenants: Adamic Covenant; Noahic Covenant; Abrahamic Covenant; Mosaic Covenant; Davidic Covenant; and the New Covenant. Adam operated under a covenant of works, inasmuch as his first nature allowed him to stand justified in front of God. Once Adam sinned God instituted the covenant of grace (also called the covenant of redemption). This covenant was rough hewn during the Old Covenant, but came to full maturity under the New Covenant. Covenant Theology attempts to understand these covenants as God's method of interacting with mankind.

Actually MorseOp, It is more accurate to say that the Bible contains a number of covenants. Anyway, I'm trying to find where Jehovah cut a covenant with Adam based on works. Terms and conditions. Parties of the covenant. That sort of thing.

 

[MorseOp]

Actually MorseOp, It is more accurate to say that the Bible contains a number of covenants. Anyway, I'm trying to find where Jehovah cut a covenant with Adam based on works. Terms and conditions. Parties of the covenant. That sort of thing.

Thomas, that is whole other discussion (covenant of works). Suffice to say I was just trying to make the point that covenants have biblical precedent. Covenant Theology believes covenants were/are God's means of administration for human interaction.

 

[thomas15]

As far as I'm concerned anything related to dispensationalism is 'false junk'.

One man's trash is another man's treasure!

 

[thomas15]

They also went to great length and pains to demonstrate that the Baptism of infants was Scriptural and the theology of the early church....thus, any "appeal to authority" http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html is useless in these discussions unless one is able to justify the particular claims about Soteriology, and yet to refute those particular authorities on the subject of infant Baptism...Thus, ANYONE, on a uniquely BAPTIST forum, must justify their contentions without this. If unable, there are Presbyterian sites and the Puritan Board which suffice just fine.

Very well put. I'm sort of reading a book Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ (New American Commentary Studies in Bible & Theology Thomas R. Schrieiner, ed Shawn Wright.

There is a chapter essay by Stephen Wellum who argues believers baptism within a reformed covenant theology. It is somewhat tortured reading because of the simple fact that on an academic level it is difficult to have believers Baptism replace circumcision as the sign of the covenant.

Wellum, who is a very good writer by the way, solves this problem by claiming to be neither covenant or dispensational, which reminds me of Walter C. Kaiser Jr... Somehow this allows him to discount infant baptism for the Baptist model of believer’s baptism. In the process though he makes a good argument for infant baptism. Then right when you think he is going to say infant baptism is the covenantal position he says it's wrong.

I also keep thinking that finally someone is going to address the fact that Jewish circumcision can only be performed on boys while baptism is administered to boys and girls, but alas he disappoints in this area, not a word. Another area he avoids is the how/why Paul has Timothy circumcised after he is baptized and apparently for no good theological reason. This point could taken a step further, A Jew living in Israel a the time of Christ who was circumcised at 8 days of age, baptized by John the Baptist and yet again post resurrection would have no less than 3 ceremonies to show the sign of the covenant.

In my mind though all this hand wringing can be avoided by taking a dispensational position on the matter.

But these are just the ramblings of a simple Welshman

 

[Van]

Lets see, how many times have we kicked this topic around without getting any closer to the truth?

We use terms like Covenant Theology and discuss it in generalizations, and likewise with Dispensational Theology.

How many here think God's promise to have Jesus sit on the David's throne for 1000 years is literal? Ok, you guys that believe in what the Bibles says are the Dispy folks. Calvinists might believe the millennial kingdom is a figure of speech, that the actual kingdom of the Son exists now in heaven and will be concluded when Jesus returns. So it is an end times controversy, and a distraction from our job as ambassadors of Christ to help win souls for the kingdom.

 

[MorseOp]

So it is an end times controversy, and a distraction from our job as ambassadors of Christ to help win souls for the kingdom.

You could not be more wrong. Eschatology is certainly part of both systems, but it also effects soteriology. That is the whole point of the Covenant of Redemption!

 

[Van]

You could not be more wrong. Eschatology is certainly part of both systems, but it also effects soteriology. That is the whole point of the Covenant of Redemption!

Just another generalization, devoid of any specific content. End times debate does not have Christ at its center, and therefore while not as bad as debate over angels, it still misses our mark.

 

[Yeshua1]

I am not convinced that is the case.

Dispensationalism is a very young theological construct, the only way it has ever being dated prior to 1830 is to so modify the definition that it becomes meaningless.

However men like Calvin, and the first generation puritans who really systemised covenant theology went to great lenght and pains to demonstrate that this was no new theology, but rather a return to the theology of the early church.

Thing though is that while calvin and others 'got it right" concerning say Sotierology, they messed up with saying Church as now isreal, so got baptism of infants, and missed seeing that the church was always in plan of god, as he knew isreal would bypass messiah first time here, but that God used thatto bring Gospel to gentiles, and once that is completed, will return to isreal proper..

failed to see only a temp/partial hardeningof the jews to yeshua by God!

Also, early church was proment pre mil, not A mil as most cals hold too!

 

[Yeshua1]

Actually MorseOp, It is more accurate to say that the Bible contains a number of covenants. Anyway, I'm trying to find where Jehovah cut a covenant with Adam based on works. Terms and conditions. Parties of the covenant. That sort of thing.

or the Covenant from eternity between members of the GodHead?

 

[MorseOp]

Just another generalization, devoid of any specific content. End times debate does not have Christ at its center, and therefore while not as bad as debate over angels, it still misses our mark.

What is the cosmos are you talking about?

 

[MorseOp]

The Covenant of Redemption explains God's salvific plan for His elect from the Garden until the eternal state. Even though Christ was not revealed until His incarnation, prior to that God obliquely revealed salvation through progressive steps. He first revealed it by animal blood atonement for Adam and Eve (Gen. 3:21). It was further revealed through the ceremonial Law. We see the C.o.R. in the Abrahamic Covenant and the Davidic Covenant. God was constantly dispensing grace and a glimpse of what was to come. Sure, the C.o.R. is eschatological in nature because it points to both a present and future redemption, but it is that very redemption that makes it more than just eschatological.

 

[thomas15]

or the Covenant from eternity between members of the GodHead?

There is Zero information in the Bible on this.

Brother Kim Riddlebarger says in his highly acclaimed best seller Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times pg 31 "Amillennialism was not recognized as a distinct position until around the turn of the twentieth century."

It could be said that Augistine held the position but then pre-mils would counter that their position has held by the very early church.

 

[reformed_baptist]

The covenant of grace

There is Zero information in the Bible on this.

Zero information on what? The covenant of grace existing prior to creation?

Titus 1:2 in hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began, (Tit 1:2 NKJ)

Before time began, or before there were any people (in eternity past) God made a promise of eternal life to people who did not yet exist to recieve that promise - see also;

2 Timothy 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ1 by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, (2Ti 1:1 NKJ)

And

2 Timothy 1:9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,

Is this not the covenant of grace?

The age of Amillennialism

Brother Kim Riddlebarger says in his highly acclaimed best seller Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times pg 31 "Amillennialism was not recognized as a distinct position until around the turn of the twentieth century."

It is amazing how misleading a short quote can come across, what he says is

"Amillenialism was not recognised as a distinct position until the turn of the twentifieth century. Until then, amillenarians called themselves postmillenial because the believed Christ would come back after the millenial age, but they were different from traditional postmillenarians in that they did not believe in an earthly millenial age yet to dawn."

It could be said that Augistine held the position.....

Riddlebarger says in the very next paragraph that amillennialism has been the predominant view of Christainity since the days of Augustine.

Berkof Writes:

“But it is not correct to say, as premillenarians do, that it was generally accepted in the first three centuries. The truth of the matter is that the adherents of this doctrine were a rather limited number. There is no trace of it in Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Tatian, Athenogoras, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dionysius, and other important church fathers.” [Louis Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrines, Revell, 1978 p. 262].

............but then pre-mils would counter that their position has held by the very early church.

They might counter it, but can they prove it? Works and authors that are 'post-mill' (see explanation above) from the eraly church fathers include;

Clement of Rome (30-100AD), The didache (early 2nd cent), Ignatius (30-107AD), Barnadus (100AD), the Apostle’s creed (100-600AD), Tatian (170AD), Theophilus (AD 115-180), Athenogoras (177AD), Clement of Alexandrai (AD 162) though his works also hints at preterism as well, Origen (185-254AD), Thaumaturgus (3rd centAD) Caius (early 3rd cent) and Hippolytus (170-236AD)

The ante-Nicene fathers

The first two volumes of this work that deals with the early period of the church, contain 950 pages of ECF writings the index lists two references to the word millennium – one by Justin and one by Papias. Niether of whom held an eschatology that can be equated to a dispensational position, at a stretch one might identify them rudimentary historic pre-mills. So it seems to me that pre-mills who state that the eraly church held a pre-mill position have a weak case to present, with not much material to draw on.

to be continued.....

 

[reformed_baptist]

....continued

The ECF usually appealed to

Here I intend to examine as best I am able what those EFC who are often appealed to as being premill actually taught.

Justin Martyr

Martyr taught that the church is Israel now, so he cannot possibly be described as holding a dispensational eschatology.

Martyr wrote

"Then I said again, "Would you suppose, sirs, that we could ever have understood these matters in the Scriptures, if we had not received grace to discern by the will of Him whose pleasure it was? in order that the saying of Moses might come to pass, 'They provoked me with strange [gods], they provoked me to anger with their abominations. They sacrificed to demons whom they knew not; new gods that came newly up, whom their fathers knew not. Thou hast forsaken God that begat thee, and forgotten God that brought thee up. And the Lord saw, and was jealous, and was provoked to anger by reason of the rage of His sons and daughters: and He said, I will turn My face away from them, and I will show what shall come on them at the last; for it is a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith. They have moved Me to jealousy with that which is not God, they have provoked Me to anger with their idols; and I will move them to jealousy with that which is not a nation, I will provoke them to anger with a foolish people. For a fire is kindled from Mine anger, and it shall burn to Hades. It shall consume the earth and her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains; I will heap mischief on them.' And after that Righteous One was put to death, we flourished as another people, and shot forth as new and prosperous corn; as the prophets said, 'And many nations shall betake themselves to the Lord in that day for a people: and they shall dwell in the midst of all the earth.' But we are not only a people, but also a holy people, as we have shown already. 'And they shall call them the holy people, redeemed by the Lord.' Therefore we are not a people to be despised, nor a barbarous race, nor such as the Carian and Phrygian nations; but God has even chosen us and He has become manifest to those who asked not after Him. 'Behold, I am God,' He says, 'to the nation which called not on My name.' For this is that nation which God of old promised to Abraham, when He declared that He would make him a father of many nations; not meaning, however, the Arabians, or Egyptians, or Idumaeans, since Ishmael became the father of a mighty nation, and so did Esau; and there is now a great multitude of Ammonites. Noah, moreover, was the father of Abraham, and in fact of all men; and others were the progenitors of others. What larger measure of grace, then, did Christ bestow on Abraham? This, namely, that He called him with His voice by the like calling, telling him to quit the land wherein he dwelt. And He has called all of us by that voice, and we have left already the way of living in which we used to spend our days, passing our time in evil after the fashions of the other inhabitants of the earth; and along with Abraham we shall inherit the holy land, when we shall receive the inheritance for an endless eternity, being children of Abraham through the like faith. For as he believed the voice of God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, in like manner we having believed God's voice spoken by the apostles of Christ, and promulgated to us by the prophets, have renounced even to death all the things of the world. Accordingly, He promises to him a nation of similar faith, God-fearing, righteous, and delighting the Father; but it is not you, 'in whom is no faith.'” [Dialogue with Trypho, CHAPTER CXIX -- CHRISTIANS ARE THE HOLY PEOPLE PROMISED TO ABRAHAM. THEY HAVE BEEN CALLED LIKE ABRAHAM.]

Justin Martyr actually adopted a theory that a day is a thousand years and that the creation week was symbolic of history, ie the earth would last 6000 years then Christ would return and rule for a 1000 year Sabbath

Martyr Wrote:

‘For Isaiah spake thus concerning this space of a thousand years…… For as Adam was told that in the day he ate of the tree he would die, we know that he did not complete a thousand years. We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, 'The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,' is connected with this subject. And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, 'They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.'” [Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 81.]

However it is also important to note other things that he said, like;
Martyr Wrote:

‘ ‘I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise’ [Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 80]

Clearly then he recognised his view was not universal.

....to be continued

 

[reformed_baptist]

.....continued

Papias

Papias is actually the first ECF that we can disceran any sort of premillenialims in, whenever we look at Papias we must note that actually all we have of his works are quotes supplied by other church fathers, so actually it is impossible to verify his views from source material. Eusebius has this to say about Papias' views and their origins,

"The same person, moreover, has set down other things as coming to him from unwritten tradition, amongst these some strange parables and instructions of the Saviour, and some other things of a more fabulous nature. Amongst these he says that there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth.” (Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord - Fragment VI)."


Note that, for the Christian historian Eusebius Papais did not obtain his doctrine of the millennium from scripture, but from the tradition of man, most likely Eusebius is referring to apocryphical writings. Again the problem with citing Papias as a support for any distinct premill position is simply that we do not know enough about his views to put him into ant specific camp beyond generally premillenial in eschatology.

Irenaeus

Irenaeus if often present as a premillenialist however that is to misunderstand what he actually wrote. Irenaeus taught the ‘day is 1000 years’ theory of the history of the world. Hence he believed that the earth that would have a 6000 year history, after which there would be the seventh day, or the seventh thousand years. However he did equate this Sabbath with a millennial reign. He firmly believed the world would end after 6000 years.

“For in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall it be concluded. And for this reason the Scripture says: "Thus the heaven and the earth were finished, and all their adornment. And God brought to a conclusion upon the sixth day the works that He had made; and God rested upon the seventh day from all His works." This is an account of the things formerly created, as also it is a prophecy of what is to come. For the day of the Lord is as a thousand years; and in six days created things were completed: it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the sixth thousand year." (Against Heresies, 5:28:3)

Irenaeus has this to say about the second coming of Christ,

Has the Word come for the ruin and for the resurrection of many? For the ruin, certainly, of those who do not believe Him, to whom also He has threatened a greater damnation in the judgment-day than that of Sodom and Gomorrah; (Luke 10:12) but for the resurrection of believers, and those who do the will of His Father in heaven. If then the advent of the Son comes indeed alike to all, but is for the purpose of judging, and separating the believing from the unbelieving,” (Against Heresies 5:27:1)

So clearly he views that at the second coming the just and the unjust will be raised on the same day to face judgement or salvation. Modern millennial views of the resurrection are in my opinion alien to his theology.

Take for further example his views regarding Israel as expressed here;

“Therefore Abraham also, knowing the. Father through the Word, who made heaven and earth, confessed Him to be God; and having learned, by an announcement [made to him], that the Son of God would be a man among men, by whose advent his seed should be as the stars of heaven, he desired to see that day, so that he might himself also embrace Christ; and, seeing it through the spirit of prophecy, he rejoiced. Wherefore Simeon also, one of his descendants, carried fully out the rejoicing of the patriarch, and said: "Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace. For mine eyes have seen Thy salvation, which Thou hast prepared before the face of all people: a light for the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of the people Israel." And the angels, in like manner, announced tidings of great joy to the shepherds who were keeping watch by night. Moreover, Mary said, "My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my salvation;"--the rejoicing of Abraham descending upon those who sprang from him,--those, namely, who were watching, and who beheld Christ, and believed in Him; while, on the other hand, there was a reciprocal rejoicing which passed backwards from the children to Abraham, who did also desire to see the day of Christ's coming. Rightly, then, did our Lord bear witness to him, saying, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad."For not alone upon Abraham's account did He say these things, but also that He might point out how all who have known God from the beginning, and have foretold the advent of Christ, have received the revelation from the Son Himself; who also in the last times was made visible and passable, and spake with the human race, that He might from the stones raise up children unto Abraham, and fulfil the promise which God had given him, and that He might make his seed as the stars of heaven, as John the Baptist says: "For God is able from these stones to raise up children unto Abraham." Now, this Jesus did by drawing us off from the religion of stones, and bringing us over from hard and fruitless cogitations, and establishing in us a faith like to Abraham. As Paul does also testify, saying that we are children of Abraham because of the similarity of our faith, and the promise of inheritance." (Against Heresies, 4:7:1-2)

Indeed the only aspect of Irenaeus’ theology that could be described as remotely resembling modern premillenialism is his futurist approach in relation to the antichrist. His theology aligns more closely with what we would today call Amillenialism.

.....continued (just one more )

 

[reformed_baptist]

....last one

Tertullian

Tertullian was associated with the Montanist movement. According to many historians he dissociated himself from the Church after the bishop of Rome rejected the ‘New Prophecy’ of the Montanist movement. However E Osborn notes ‘that he new nothing of the extravagances of the movement’ for example he remained Trinitarian. The New Prophecy’ of the Montanist movement can be summed up as teaching that the millennial reign of Christ was near, Maximilla (a leading Montanist prophetess said;

"After me there is no more prophecy, but only the end of the world."

For the Montanists there was to be a literal 1000 year reign, the new Jerusalem would descend upon the village of Pepuza in Phrygia. So again I would suggest that this does not equate with modern premillenilailsim that cloeley either. We should also note that the Montanist movement also included modalists and those who practised the charismatic gifts. This group has been described by J W Greir as ‘one of the wildest sects’ associated with Christianity.

Here then is what tertullian had to say, which I hope supports some of what I have said above,

“But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, “let down from heaven,” (Revelation 21:2) which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;” (Galatians 4:26) and, while declaring that our πολίτευμα, or citizenship, is in heaven, (Philippians 3:20) he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven. This both Ezekiel had knowledge of (Ezekiel 48:30-35) and the Apostle John beheld. (Revelation 21:10-23) And the word of the new prophecy which is a part of our belief, attests how it foretold that there would be for a sign a picture of this very city exhibited to view previous to its manifestation. This prophecy, indeed, has been very lately fulfilled in an expedition to the East.” (Against Marcion – Book III - Chap. XXIV. - Christ’s Millennial and Heavenly Glory in Company with His Saints)

This is Tertullian’s view of the antichrist;

There is also another and a greater necessity for our offering prayer in behalf of the emperors, nay, for the complete stability of the empire, and for Roman interests in general. For we know that a mighty shock impending 43 over the whole earth — in fact, the very end of all things threatening dreadful woes — is only retarded by the continued existence of the Roman empire. We have no desire, then, to be overtaken by these dire events; and in praying that their coming may be delayed, we are lending our aid to Rome’s duration.” (Apology, Chapter XXXII.)

and

“Remember ye not, that when I was with you, I used to tell you these things? And now ye know what detaineth, that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way.” (2 Thessalonians 2:1-7) What obstacle is there but the Roman State, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its own ruins)? “And then shall be revealed the wicked one, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming: even him whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish.” (2 Thessalonians 2:8-10) (Resurrection - Chap. XXIV. - Other Passages Quoted from St. Paul, Which Categorically Assert the Resurrection of the Flesh at the Final Judgment.)

Below are some quotes from Tertullian that relating to Daniel and the Olivet discourse are pertinent to establishing how closely he aligned to modern day premillenialism;

In such wise, therefore, did Daniel predict concerning Him, as to show both when and in what time He was to set the nations free; and how, after the passion of the Christ, that city had to be exterminated. For he says thus: “In the first year under Darius, son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, who reigned over the kingdom of the Chaldees, I Daniel understood in the books the number of the years.…And while I was yet speaking in my prayer, behold, the man Gabriel, whom I saw in the vision in the beginning, flying; and he touched me, as it were, at the hour of the evening sacrifice, and made me understand, and spake with me, and said, Daniel I am now come out to imbue thee with understanding; in the beginning of thy supplication went out a word. And I am come to announce to thee, because thou art a man of desires; and ponder thou on the word, and understand in the vision. Seventy hebdomads have been abridged upon thy commonalty, and upon the holy city, until delinquency be made inveterate, and sins sealed, and righteousness obtained by entreaty, and righteousness eternal introduced; and in order that vision and prophet may be sealed, and an holy one of holy ones anointed. And thou shalt know, and thoroughly see, and understand, from the going forth of a word for restoring and rebuilding Jerusalem unto the Christ, the Leader, hebdomads (seven and an half, and) 70 and an half: and it shall convert, and shall be built into height and entrenchment, and the times shall be renewed: and after these 70 hebdomads shall the anointing be exterminated, and shall not be; and the city and the holy place shall he exterminate together with the Leader, who is making His advent; and they shall be cut short as in a deluge, until (the) end of a war, which shall be cut short unto ruin. And he shall confirm a testament in many. In one hebdomad and the half of the hebdomad shall be taken away my sacrifice and libation, and in the holy place the execration of devastation, (and) until the end of (the) time consummation shall be given with regard to this devastation.” (An Answer To The Jews - Chap. VIII. - Of the Times of Christ’s Birth and Passion, and of Jerusalem’s Destruction)

He considered Daniel’s Seventy Week prophecy to have seen it’s fulfilment in the First Advent of Christ and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem. You see, we have to bear in mind that is eschatology is influenced by the presupposition at the fall of the Roman empire heralds the ends of all things, he took Daniel 2 to be a prophecy about the second coming of Christ destroying the Roman empire;

Now these signs of degradation quite suit His first coming, just as the tokens of His majesty do His second advent, when He shall no longer remain “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence,” but after His rejection become “the chief corner-stone,” accepted and elevated to the top place of the temple, even His church, being that very stone in Daniel, cut out of the mountain, which was to smite and crush the image of the secular kingdom. (Daniel 2:34) Of this advent the same prophet says: “Behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days; and they brought Him before Him, and there was given Him dominion and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away; and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” (see Daniel 7:13-14) (Against Marcion, Book III - Chap. VII. - Prophecy Sets Forth Two Different Conditions of Christ, One Lowly, the Other Majestic. This Fact Points to Two Advents of Christ.)

In relation to Tertullian’s view of Israel, well we really have to say that we cannot draw any conclusions either way, he did write a work that objected to the Jewish treatment of their messiah but is actually position remains unclear.

Conclusion

Whilst try to avoid anachronism it is hard to find anything in the early church that eqautes to modern pre-mill views in my opinion, so whilst some pre-mill may try to make the claim that the early church was pre-mill the onus of proof rest with them to demonstrate that to be the case

 

[Luke2427]

just curious why Covenant theology baptists are OK, good to read, while Dispy ones like myself have others say its "false/junk?"

Because it's false/junk!:thumbs::laugh:

 

[kyredneck]

....last one....

Good stuff r_b, thanks.

 

[kyredneck]

....it is hard to find anything in the early church that eqautes to modern pre-mill views in my opinion, so whilst some pre-mill may try to make the claim that the early church was pre-mill the onus of proof rest with them to demonstrate that to be the case

Yea, good stuff; historic pre-mil most definitely is NOT the same as the dispensational heresy of today.

 

[Van]

End times debate does not have Christ at its center, and therefore while not as bad as debate over angels, it still misses our mark.

What is the cosmos are you talking about?

I do not see cosmos anywhere in my post. Why are you putting words in my mouth, then asking non-germane questions?

I believe Jesus will sit on David's throne for 1000 years. But that is because I understand the Bible to mean what it says, with no need to rewrite it.

Let me close with this, the Covenant of Love is mentioned in the Bible, whereas your CofR is a name change.