Postmillennialism: Christendom's Bright Cheerful View Of The Future Of The Human Race.

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, JAG** said:

For those interested in a personal study of Postmillennialism the following

may be helpful. Dr. Loraine Boettner was a dedicated servant of the Lord and

wrote several books that greatly helped Christendom. He was a good

Bible teacher and a strong Bible believing Christian servant of the Lord Jesus.

 

 

Says Dr. Loraine Boettner

Sounds to me like they are paving the way for the beast to rule.... welcome to the strong delusion mix it with a little "Kindom now" theology and the you have the strong delusion complete.

The Antichrist will not be some "beastly person" but rather a highly intelligent and manipulative one. He will come off as being righteous to some, and alongside him will be a false prophet giving him credence with false signs and wonders, even making fire come down from heaven as did the prophet Elijah. NOWHERE is there these sorts of events associated with Nero, nor any other world leader since then (Tyrant or Monarch) and this is yet to come.

Fire coming down from heaven is now, today a possibility with space based technologies, which was never a possibility in the past.

The connection between Daniel's prophecies and Paul's of the man of sin have been discerned by saints throughout the ages being led by and taught by the Holy Ghost, it is only recently that Post millennialism has reemerged as viable by doctoral studies using the intellect of man to decipher scripture as opposed to Holy Spirit filled guidance. It is this same hubris in human intellect that led to the Jewish people rejecting Jesus as their messiah and the same will be used by Satan to deceive those who love not the truth of the Holy Ghost and His teaching and instead construct these elaborate mental constructs for themselves. A.W. Tozer calls this the "file card mentality" It is what caused the Pharisees to reject John the Baptist, and it is what caused the nation of Israel to Kill the prophets sent to them by God because they countered the message of the false prophets. We shall soon see this play out in our world today.

At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. (Matt. 11:25) 

 

[dhchristian]

The Book of revelation was written in 90 ad well after the fall of Jerusalem and the rule of Nero which also puts a whole stumbling block in the post mill position. Why would the visions John gave speak of a past beastly ruler, as if this was future??? Just plain makes no sense no matter how you twist scripture to fit your eschatology.

[Last Daze]

8 minutes ago, dhchristian said:

Sounds to me like they are paving the way for the beast to rule.... welcome to the strong delusion mix it with a little "Kindom now" theology and the you have the strong delusion complete.

My suspicions exactly.  Trusting one's intellect is just as fallible as trusting one's emotions.  Both are qualities that all humans have, saved as well as unsaved.  It is the Holy Spirit who reveals truth and the things to come, who gives discernment.  Trust in God.  The wisdom of men is folly.

[ENOCH2010]

2 hours ago, ENOCH2010 said:

If we are living in the 1000 year reign today, why is Christ not ruling with a rod of iron? If I understand the scriptures concerning the 1000 year reign, it sounds like the ruling government will be a theocracy, today the world is a far cry from a theocracy with a king ruling with a rod of iron.

Waiting for an answer on this from the postmillennial crew. 

[Justin Adams]

7 minutes ago, ENOCH2010 said:

Waiting for an answer on this from the postmillennial crew. 

I am not of the 'crew' as you might think. However, here is a partial answer. See the bold area at the bottom.

Question: "Did John the Baptist lose his faith in Jesus as the Messiah (Matthew 11:3; Luke 7:19)?"

Answer: In John 1:29, John the Baptist declared of Jesus, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” John the Baptist also said of Jesus, “The strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie” (John 1:27), and, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” (Matthew 3:14). It is clear that John the Baptist recognized Jesus to be the Messiah and had faith in Him.

However, later, as recorded in Matthew 11:3 and Luke 7:19, John the Baptist sent messengers to Jesus to ask Him, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?” What happened? Why was John the Baptist doubting whether Jesus was the Messiah? There are two key points to remember. First, John the Baptist had been thrown in prison by Herod (Matthew 11:2; Luke 3:20). John had perhaps been in prison for over a year when he asked his question. He likely knew that he would eventually be executed, which he was shortly after he sent the message to Jesus (Matthew 14:1–12). Second, Jesus was not being received as the Messiah by the majority of Israelites. Jesus was being strongly rejected by the leaders of Israel: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Sanhedrin. Amid these circumstances, it is understandable that John the Baptist would have some doubts.

Jesus’ response is telling. He tells John’s messengers to inform John of the miracles being performed (Matthew 11:4–5). He then proceeds to praise John the Baptist: “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ houses. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’ Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist” (Matthew 11:7–11; Luke 7:21–27).
 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Justin Adams

[Justin Adams]

15 minutes ago, ENOCH2010 said:

why is Christ not ruling with a rod of iron?

The rods are to be used to “destroy” what they strike, to break like smashing pottery. The Lord will strike the nations with the rod, in meting out the fierceness and wrath of God to those that have it coming. The rod in most of verses is a rod of iron, not just any rod of wood like most would have been. Yeshua is not a harsh Lord. It is not meant for His sheep.

[JAG**]

5 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Forgive me because I know this isn't what you mean but there clearly is some form of a

compelling argument because millions of Darbyites have been persuaded based on what

they perceive is a "compelling argument." 

Sound exegesis would not sustain such futurism but that's a different story. 

I have read the various attempts to identify the man of sin and the antichirst and this

bad guy and that but I am not persuaded all those various mentions in the Bible are the

same single person. Furthermore, while I do find Nero a very possible candidate I am

inclined to first look to the Zealot leaders. "Lawless" implies some connection to the

Law and Romans wouldn't qualify if the implication is to the Mosaic Code. That would

have to be a Jew. And since Josephus has provided an account of the Zealots making

mockery of the laws of God and the Jewish religious institutions they well qualify.

Similarly, although Rome does sit upon seven hills or mounts, so does Jerusalem. 

The guessing game of who and what is digressive to the exegesis. If scripture says

it happened near the time of the first century generation then what we do is examine

all else in that light, not question it or try to reinterpret it 

because of secular after-the-fact events. 

Scripture first.

Josheb,

Thanks for your comments.  I appreciate you taking the time.

One of my posts back there was on Dr. Gentry's observations on the difficulty of even

giving 2 Thess. 2 any kind of interpretation at all. I posted Dr. Gentry's  recording

of what outstanding commentators had said about the  impossibility of

interpreting 2 Thess. 2 ---its just a very obscure passage and it defies any

certain interpretation -- and reduces to pure speculation. Nero Caesar is a good

candidate, but nobody knows for certain.  What we CAN know is that nowhere 

in John's epistles that mention antichrist, is there any mention of the "man of sin"

or the "little horn" and no mention of any prospective candidate as the future

antichrist. There is zero mention in John's epistles of any FAR OFF FUTURE antichrist --

rather John's mention of antichrist was in John's NEAR FUTURE that is of the 1st century

when John lived. "even now there are many antichrists" --- "they went out from us" etc

Those 4 verses in John's epistles are clearly about antichrists that lived in the 1st century 

and NOT about some speculation of a FAR OFF FUTURE antichrist. By the way, if the 

doctrine of a "future antichrist" fails to be established as certainly true, then Premillennialism

also fails. How so? Because the doctrine of a  "FAR OFF FUTURE ANTICHRIST" is essential to

Premillennialism.  John's antichrist was in the future but it was John's NEAR  FUTURE and NOT

John's FAR OFF FUTURE. In other words, John's antichrists were 1st century Christian apostates,

John says "they went out from us, but they were not really of us" -- and THAT is  1st century 

"Christian" apostates .

 

JAG

 

 

``

[Justin Adams]

Yes, brother. I have read all that stuff. and so many have spun it this way and that.

1000 is hardly ever literal. 1001?? Does that work?? 999?? Does that work??

It just means 'time' and then again it is figuratively talking. It is not exact. Cannot be exact. No more exact than 144,000. 

1000 is 10 x 10 x 10 and has figurative completion in its meaning. So much stuff has been made into such a mountain of supposition about Millenium this and that and the other. Yeshua, nor the apostles mention it at all.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Justin Adams

[Justin Adams]

6 minutes ago, Roar said:

I have and read books on many differing views including non-canonized books. The more you know, the more you can compare against The Word of God. I lean on no man's understanding but my own as men are fallible and God is not. I will consider their merits and I may modify my views somewhat (I am learning more with each day) but the Standard is always God's Word.

Was the LXX God's word? If so, why was it abridged? Is the Rabbinic Masoretic rewrite God's word? Or was it the original Hebrew??

Which did Calvin and the reformed guys take as 'gospel'??

Edited July 7, 2020 by Justin Adams

[JAG**]

1 hour ago, Josheb said:

 the antichirst

 

 .

Regarding the proposition: There Is No Compelling Argument For  A Future Antichrist:

Josheb,

I was reading in Dr. Gentry's "He Shall Have Dominion" {page 377} and I came across this:

The great Christian theologian Benjamin B. Warfield made 3 observations about John's antichrist.

 

{1} John takes his antichrists out of the far off future and puts them in the present of the 1st century.

1 John 4:3 the antichrist "is now already in the world."

____________

 

{2} John expands him from an individual to a multitude

1 John 2:18 "even now MANY antichrists have come."

 

___________

 

{3} John reduces his antichrists from being only 1st Century  persons to being a  1st Century heresy.

John points out that the antichrists is a heretical movement rather than a single person.

1 John 2:18 "even now many antichrists have come"

1 John 4:3 "every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus in not from God."

I John 4:3 "This is the spirit of the antichrist which you have heard is coming and even NOW IS ALREADY in the world." {of the 1st Century}

So?

So there is no future antichrist. John's antichrists were 1st century Christians apostates AND a heretical 1st c. movement that

did not acknowledge that the Lord Jesus was from God. 1 John 4:3

JAG

 

``

 

Edited July 7, 2020 by JAG**