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

[JAG**]

57 minutes ago, Josheb said:

 `

They apparently will not accept the truth of Luke 1:19.

`

 

Josheb, could you help me out with that one? Luke 1:19 says:

 "The angel said to him, "I am Gabriel. I stand in the

presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to

tell you this good news."

What is your point?

 

JAG

Edited July 11, 2020 by JAG**

[JAG**]

29 minutes ago, Josheb said:

LOL! Typo. That's supposed to read "Luke 10:19," as in we have authority over "all the power of the enemy." Thanks for the prompt. 

Y'welcome. I got it.

Least you know I'm reading your posts carefully /Big Grin

JAG

[JAG**]

37 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Perhaps but it is neither a condition that should be boundary-less, nor one with

which I (or anyone else) need collaborate. I'm not the sheriff of Worthy. I can't

tell others what to do but I can inform others about my preferences and practices

and they'll either be accommodated or not. 

_________________

 

Gentry is a Reconstructionist. So are Bahnsen, Chilton, Demar, North, and Wilson.

Demar's scathing evisceration of Dispensational Premillennial eschatology in

"Last Days Madness" is something everyone interested in eschatology should

read, even if they don't agree with him. He could have been more respectful but

don't reject the message because the messenger is impolite. Sproul was not a

Recon and I don't think Mathison is, either. Prior to the 1960s (when Rushdoony

was writing) Reconstructionsim was unheard of so there may have been some

who thought like him in principle, but he's really the guy who birthed that position.

Folks they draw from (like Van Til or the Princeton Three) probably would not have

embraced Reconstructionism. 

Rusdoony's "Institutes..." is a good if laborious read. Gary North's "The Dominion

Covenant" and its companion "Tools of Dominion" are remarkable reads but also

quite laborious. I took me three or four years to get through the latter. Their

 examination of the case laws' relevance is amazing, imo. I simply disagree with

much of their application and the fundamental premise a Christian state must be

established before Christ's return. A more fundamental approach is more rational

to me: If the US Senate was populated by 50 Christians it would look much different

than it currently does. If it was comprised of 75 Christians it would look much

differently than 50%. Any group of Christian leaders should look much different

and lead much more effectively, morally, and establish better legal and social

policy if they legislate based on a common and veracious understanding of God's

precepts. 

However imperfectly that may be manifested and however much trial an error it

takes to get it correct. 

This gets confused with theocracy but it is not. The application of God's case laws

by precept (not the letter of the law) is called theonomy. Many Christians have

never heard the term and the minute the Law of Moses is mentioned they run in

horror to Romans 3, Ephesians , and Galatians 3. The Law is annulled! Yep. As a

means of righteousness and justification the Law is definitely annulled. That truth

did not change the fact Jesus and every single NT writer applied the OT precepts to

the NT-era Christian, both Jew and Gentile. 

And I know that's gonna cause some controversy and runs the risk of derailing the

op so I'll say no more. 

The Recons, imo, are heavy-handed, even if the principle is valid. Every single one

of us understands the disdained poles of our existence: hypocrisy and legalism.

We're all trying to find that healthy place between the two poles; polarized living

is rarely healthy. This is clearly seen in Jesus' repeated confrontation of the Jewish

leaders in which they were repeatedly admonished for one or the other. 

Precept over letter. This is why Gentry and Bahnsen are better sources than Rushdoony

or North (or Chilton) but if you're looking for a DETAILED! exegesis of the case laws

those are the guys to read. A good introduction is the Zondervan Counterpoint Series

book, "Five Views on Law and Gospel," edited by Stan Gundry. The Theonomic

Reformed view and the non-Theonomic Reformed view are presented, along with

the Holiness, Dispensational, and Lutheran views. Kaiser and Moo also do very good jobs.

Many Postmils are Recons. All Recons are Postmils, but not all Postmils are Recons

(or Dominionists, or Theonomists). Like Dispensationalism and Amillennialism,

Postmillennialism is not monolithic.

``

 

 

 

Got it.

Many thanks. I really enjoyed reading that.

Gotta go. Bedtime for me here.

Back later , , ,

PS

That small blue digital ink plus that wide-wide posting block kills my eyes.

I can't stand it. So I shorten the block and black  the ink and increase the font.

They got a name for  that; They call it "aging." , ,  LOL, ,  ,

I'll read that again tomorrow -- your post.

JAG

 

 

 

[Alive]

14 hours ago, Josheb said:

Would you prefer I said, "The effort to disprove what Psalm 110:1 actually states was very poor"? I will gladly amend the post accordingly. 

LOL

I think you get the idea, here.

[Alive]

22 hours ago, dhchristian said:

CONGRATULATIONS! You win the duck dodgers award.... "Thththat's all folks"

@dhchristian This is a personal attack. Please stay on topic. This feud between you and Josheb needs to stop. Please debate the topic.

The same goes for @Roar

Please treat those you disagree with with the same respect that you desire and stay on topic.

Y'all have been asked a number of times, now.

Rather than post huge amounts of typing, I suggest you zero in on a specific point made and ask a question. Nobody wants to wade through those massive posts with various size and styles of fonts and highlighting.

If an individual doesn't want to answer a question--or answer it in the way you want--then leave it be. Each one here has the same rights.

I repeat--this is only eschatology and there are many views among the brethren.

Avoid being a Crusader.

[dhchristian]

1 hour ago, Alive said:

@dhchristian This is a personal attack. Please stay on topic. This feud between you and Josheb needs to stop. Please debate the topic.

The same goes for @Roar

Please treat those you disagree with with the same respect that you desire and stay on topic.

Y'all have been asked a number of times, now.

Rather than post huge amounts of typing, I suggest you zero in on a specific point made and ask a question. Nobody wants to wade through those massive posts with various size and styles of fonts and highlighting.

If an individual doesn't want to answer a question--or answer it in the way you want--then leave it be. Each one here has the same rights.

I repeat--this is only eschatology and there are many views among the brethren.

Avoid being a Crusader.

Congratulations, as you too have fallen victim to the manipulations of "cancel culture" and the Maoist means of silencing truth... You make a valid point, a real criticism of their theory, they cannot respond and cry "victim" report the post has a "hatecrime", then you as a moderator attack the ones who are posting the truth rather than the ones posting the lies, thus silencing truth, and promoting the false teaching. 

If You do not figure this out now, this site like so many will fall victim to this same mentality

People have said a lot of "bad things" about me on this site, How many reports have you mods gotten from me? Answer is only one and that was for a post of mine that was derailed by two others fighting on that post. That is because I do not wish to use these same MANIPULATIONS on people here.... It is these manipulations that you are falling under the spell of as well as the rest of the world.... This is a well thought out attack against free speech and the truth as I have told you in our PM's and until you see this, you will continue to be MANIPULATED AND USED TO FULFILL THEIR GOALS OF SILENCING TRUTH and the battlefield of ideas. 

I have now asked him to answer the questions posed twice, he has refused and ducked the questions, hence the "duck dodgers" award. You cannot let them get away with this and continue to promote their lies. I Even showed you before all this began how they always come in pairs, Jannes and Jambres, Hymeneus and Philetus etc... well here we have the pair. they weave a web and you are being ensnared by this.

BTW I am making this comment public not to belittle you in the least, but to show others how this works, as there are many here who could fall victim to this manipulation. This is a Spiritual battle, not a carnal one, and we are dealing with principalities here.

[Don19]

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

Luke 10:18-20
“I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.  Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.  Nevertheless, do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”

We are not those 70 disciples but by extension we have the same authority and power. Many here in Worthy disagree. There is a currently open op asking folks about Satan's defeatedness and many (a minority, praise God!) are arguing he remains a threat to Christians. They apparently will not accept the truth of Luke 1o:19. I doubt any in that minority are Postmils. I would further venture to say all of them are Dispensationalists, although that may be unfair to our dispy siblings in Christ because I suspect many in the majority are Dispensationalists and not Postmil. 

 

The "truth of Luke 10:19" is put in perspective by the truth of Luke 10:20 - Jesus plainly tells the 70 not the rejoice in the authority they were given, but the rejoice because their names are written in heaven.

So Luke 10:18-20 rather undermines dominion theology. Satan is a defeated foe because he has no ability to undo verse 20 - he has no ability to pluck us out of Jesus's hands or the Father's hands (John 10:27-29). However, he is still the "god of this world" (2 Cor 4:4) and seeks whom he may devour, including believers (1 Pet 5:8). So he can still cause us to stumble, but in this life only.

Genesis 1:28 is demonstrably not a commandment for Christians today, as both Jesus and Paul recommend celibacy, but only for those who are able to be content with it (Mat 19:12, 1 Cor 7:7-9).

[Don19]

On 7/4/2020 at 12:06 PM, JAG** said:

Large swaths of the Christian Church today are awash in
Gloom and Doom and in Defeatism passed off as being
spiritual, when in fact the Bible teaches that the Christian
Church will be victorious. I will build my Church, said the
Lord Jesus, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.
Go and make disciples of all the nations, said the Lord
Jesus, because I have now been given all authority both
in Heaven and on Earth.
 

According the prophecy, Satan and his kingdom did indeed prevail against and overcome the saints (Dan 7:21, Rev 13:7) - at least in a visible sense. It also seems from history that no "visible church" of Jesus Christ existed during the dominance of the papacy. Some Baptists believe in an unbroken line of churches dating back to the apostles, but this just cannot be proven from history. Rather, I believe we are to understand Jesus's words in Mat 16:18 that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His church, not in the visible sense but in the spiritual. That is, not one of Christ's sheep will be lost (John 10:27-29, 17:2). Thus, the gates of hell shall not prevail against the individual who has been saved, as Jesus Christ baptizes His elect with the Holy Ghost (John 1:33) and with full assurance (1 Thess 1:4-5). There is, after all, a general assembly of the church (Heb 12:23) - just as there is but one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all (Eph 4:4-5).

"Doom and gloom" is an unfair characterization of the premil and amil position. Most of us are waiting for the blessed hope which is the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus, Who will burn up this present evil world and take us to be with Him forever. That's not "doom and gloom"! Not for us! He has overcome this evil world, and with Him we too are overcomers. When Jesus returns, God's elect will be like a "brand plucked out of the fire" (Zechariah 3:1-2) - which shows the dismal and condemned state of the world, but the blessedness of the saints.

There is far too much concern about the things of this world in the postmil position, especially in dominionism, etc.

[dhchristian]

7 minutes ago, Don19 said:

"Doom and gloom" is an unfair characterization of the premil and amil position. Most of us are waiting for the blessed hope which is the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus, Who will burn up this present evil world and take us to be with Him forever. That's not "doom and gloom"! Not for us! He has overcome this evil world, and with Him we too are overcomers. When Jesus returns, God's elect will be like a "brand plucked out of the fire" (Zechariah 3:1-2) - which shows the dismal and condemned state of the world, but the blessedness of the saints.

There is far too much concern about the things of this world in the postmil position, especially in dominionism, etc.

Well said.... Vengence is the LORD'S not ours, He will judge the world and the wicked, not the church. Until then we will bear with the persecutions of the god of this world with rejoicing that we are counted worthy to suffer for the Name of The LORD. The Joy of the LORD is our strength!

[Don19]

8 minutes ago, Josheb said:

No, it is your reading of the text that you think undermines Postmillennialism. The text itself works fine within the Postmil pov. The claim "he has no ability to pluck us out of Jesus' hand" is not what the text says, either. Furthermore, if he has no such power than he is not the god of this world. See, once again, half of a verse is being proof-texted. When we consider Paul's statement in light of whole scripture we come away with a completely different understanding of Paul's comment because there is no God but God and Paul himself asked rhetorically, "What is an idol but nothing?" Reading 2 Cor. 4:4 and thinking satan is an actual god while also KNOWING there is no god but God is immensely inconsistent; it is a failure to reconcile seemingly disparate texts by not consulting the whole. I have covered all this in the recent op titled, "Is Satan a defeated foe?" found HERE. My op-reply is top of the second page, the 11th post. 

The fact is Jesus stated he had given his disciples authority over all the power of the enemy, not just authority of the power to wrest them from God's hand. That is a gross misreading of the text. Satan was a defeated every time the disciples physically healed someone. Satan was defeated every time they cast out a demon. Satan was defeated every time the gospel was received and the person converted from death to life. Their authority over satan's power was not limited to their names being written in heaven.  The mention of written names was about their rejoicing, not their authority. 

The text states what it states and what it states is Jesus gave his disciples authority over all satan's power AND their rejoicing should be over their names being written in heaven rather than their authority over satan's power. It is not one or the other. They are not mutually exclusive conditions. 

Satan is basically a stooge. He can do no more or less than God permits. Jesus corrected the 70 and told them to be joyful about their names being written in heaven, not their power over devils (we know based on other biblical revelation that having one's name written in heaven is eternal, not just from that verse alone). The magnitude of the difference in blessing here is hard to comprehend. But we're here in this world for a short time, such that the sufferings of this present world are not worthy to be compared to the glory which shall be revealed in us (Rom 8:14). It's like if I promised you a $1, and you were happy. But then I said, no wait, I'll give $100 million dollars. Would you ask: "okay great, but what about the $1"? Am I unfaithful if I give you exactly $100 million?

Furthermore, it can be demonstrated that the saints did not always have all power over the devil in this world. Paul told Timothy to drink a little wine and not water only for his stomach's sake and for his frequent infirmities (1 Tim 5:23). Paul prayed thrice that his thorn in the flesh, the "messenger of Satan," would be taken from him. And what did God say? "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness." (2 Cor 12:7-9) How true is that?! God's grace is sufficient for us. What more could we want, other than salvation through grace by faith in Jesus Christ?