Hello Pj
:wavey: thanks for keeping things civil, I enjoy our conversations.
Though I might not reply to everything you stated, I have read it and thought about it.
Iconoclast said:All postmill books I have looked at deny this quite emphatically.The know the outward reformation is not going to work.They all with one voice stress that new birth and the spread of the gospel is the only hope for mankind.
What has been interesting over the last fifty years is the remote places where postmillennialism has been growing (most often in either highly reformed or highly liberal schools of thought) has forced a reformulation of its perspectives.
If we look back more than 100 years ago, we see that postmillennial thought is more like I'm describing than how it is being suggested today.
In my PhD research I took a seminar on the book of Revelation and its interpretive matrix. Though the professor had a perspective different than mine, we were able to explore postmillennialism quite a bit. It is odd that it is making a come back now, though with the neo-reformed movement gaining so much momentum I'm not that surprised.
Iconoclast said:PJ....let's say that Jesus does not return for 37,000 yrs.Many things you are thinking about could be much different by then.
Well certainly, in 37,000 years we'll have thoroughly ruined this planet and be living elsewhere I imagine.
That said, this provides us with our larger perspective, which I appreciate, and that is, in 37,000 years the book of Revelation will still primarily interpreted through several key forms. Postmillennialism suffers hermeneutically from not being able to approach its own interpretive form with consistency.
I think if we focus on Scripture and how we see and understand the millennium, we see there is less evidence for the postmillennial perspective than the other two.
Iconoclast said:I have only read two of his books.....so I am not able to judge his body of work....but I have not seen anyone critique Days of Vengeance...effectively.
I haven't read Days of Vengeance fully enough to critique it at length and my current projects create no space for me to take up the text.
I will say that I know the writer and will stand by my critique of him. He's not a scholar and he's not reputable.
So, I guess my challenge remains: show me a reputable scholar in New Testament who has written a commentary on Revelation that advocate the postmillennial position.
I've read the entire field and don't know of one. The postmillennial position suffers in two areas:
1) A lack of critical scholarship that promotes it through reasoned commentary
2) A lack of consistent hermeneutical method in approaching Scripture
Iconoclast said:He was very through in matching OT texts to Nt historical fulfillments, and did suggest a framework for rev 1-19 that would show how most things were fulfilled ,even if he has not got everything right, he addressed tons more Ot scriptures than most other eschatological writers I have read.
I'm not a futurist when it comes to Revelation 2-18. I've stated that plenty of times around here.
However, you can't read the text of Revelation 4-18 and only apply a postmillennial scope. Things keep getting worse and worse. They aren't getting better.
Then you come to Revelation 20 and you have to make a massive decision: the text clearly portrays Jesus as returning before the millennium and the subsequent events align with a premillennial position far more coherently than with any other system.
When taken in light of the Olivet Discourse and the Pauline eschatological schema presented (most specifically) in the Thessalonian letters, you have to answer the interpretive issues. The postmillennial position lacks a sufficient hermeneutical approach to rationalize these passages.
Now you can make a move like Luke has attempted and say that Jesus return in AD 70...but that is highly problematic theologically.
Iconoclast said:Pj....I am leaning toward postmill, or optimistic Amill at this point in my studies....
Well I pray mercies and wisdom on your continued study.
Iconoclast said:Jesus ....did not physically return to earth in 70ad.....but he did "come in Judgement" upon apostate Israel......fulfilling Deut 28-33....in Mt 20-25.... and most all of MT 24 was fulfilled at that time....in that the theocracy was destroyed ,and the Christian Israel...[Jesus as head of His church....elect remnant of Israel ,elect gentiles grafted in}
I believe He physically ...returns, comes back,...ON THE LAST DAY ...as he said in JN 6..... The rapture is the last day, followed by the White Throne Judgement,and the eternal state....Jesus is reigning NOW....from heaven, in the MIDST of His enemies...He reigns until He delivers the Kingdom up to the Father..
Now this is a rather important issue.
Does Jesus come back once or twice?
Why would Jesus come back spiritually but not literally?
How does Jesus describe His return in the NT? It's always physically.
The only, the only interpretive option you have considering Jesus' return is physical.
Now we can make the move that Jesus returned "spiritually" but why is the Church still here? The coming in judgment is difficult because Israel disappears as a nation in the NT era. The only thing that is left is the Jewish peoples and they continued existing until today, so they haven't been judged.
Of course then you have to reconcile the dating of Revelation. Which simply can't be prior to AD 70. There's too much evidence internally and externally that prohibit such a dating.
Iconoclast said:No...the events of Revelation were given primarily to the 7 churches instructing them as to a few main ideas....
Yeah, you really can't make this move because it clearly isn't limited to the 7 churches of Asia Minor.
You have the circular letter to the 7 churches, and then a new scene appears in Revelation 4 which is marked by a repositioning of John and we find him "en pneumati" (in the Spirit) and it reminds us of the commission of Revelation 1 and expands it to all churches which is spoken of in Rev 4:1 with the expansion of the perspective "genesthai meta tauta." (after these things.)
Of course, then we're left with Revelation 19-22.
Are we really saying the New Jerusalem has arrived?
Iconoclast said:You are welcome:wavey: Pj....I am not an expert on this by any means.I have found these things out while at one time opposing them.....
It takes much time and study to even know what the issues are...that is why many only dip their toes in the water,and run back to the blanket, rather then jump into the waves:wavey:
Well, we're all students. Thanks for the reply and conversation.