What is the purpose of the millennium according to historic premillennialism

[sovereigngrace]

Yes, and no. Will be paradise restored.

(1) Who then are the billions of mortal fools that overrun "the blissful" Premil millennium (and new earth) "as the sand of the sea" after being subject to the glorious perfect rule of the risen Christ and then brazenly oppose Christ and the glorified saints?

(2) Where do they come from?

(3) Despite the alleged paradise-like conditions, the glorious and victorious unchallenged rule of Christ with a “rod of iron” and the so-called submissiveness of the nations that Premils attribute to their millennial kingdom, surely we are looking at the biggest and most-amazing religious turn-around in history in the Premil scenario? After all, at the first sight of Satan, the nations turn en-mass against Christ to Satan as “the sand of the sea”? Is this not the grossest sin imaginable?

 

[sovereigngrace]

The Messianic Age as foretold by OT Prophets should not be fully spiritualized in understanding future events.

You are avoiding the questions.

Luke 20:27-33 records: “Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him, Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children. And the second took her to wife, and he died childless. And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died. Last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.”

Christ replies in Luke 20:34-36: “The children of this world (or aion or age) marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world (or aion or age), and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.”

It is impossible to miss the constant comparison between “this world” and “that world” or “this age” and “that age.” Those who live in this current evil age are described as “the children of this age” but those who are depicted as being “worthy to obtain that age” to come are described exclusively as “the children of God, being the children of the resurrection” and as being “equal unto the angels.” One must be suitably qualified in order inherit the new world to come. Those that are worthy to obtain that age are not mortals and not sinners; they are rather glorified saints – who incidentally never marry or die.

Let us pause for a moment and consider what is being said here: people marry right up until the second coming but in the age to come they don’t marry because it relates to the glorified eternal state. What is more: people die right up until the second coming but in the age to come they don’t die. Why? Because sin, sinners and the wicked are not welcome on the new glorified perfected earth that Christ introduces at the second coming. This is not the case with the Premillennial age to come; marriage, divorce, funerals and mourning continues unabated. This passage forbids the Premil theory.

The contrast here moves from: ‘marriage’ to ‘no marriage’, ‘death’ to ‘no death’. Marriage disappears! Death disappears! The turning point is the glorious coming of Christ and the resurrection that accompanies it. If words carry any meaning in Scripture then the whole Premillennial scheme falls apart with such a passage. After all, in their paradigm, sin, corruption, death and rebellion continues on unabated on the Premil new earth.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Have you read The Blessed Hope By GE Ladd, as he helped to shape my current view.

I have to admit that I haven't. Just the portion he wrote in the four views book. And his rebuttal to the other views in the book.

I have read some of A. W. Pink on the topic. This was the passage that convinced him.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

He was Premil who became Amil.
Have you read Hoekema's book? The Bible and the Future

As I noted above the topic of the binding of Satan was one thing that convinced me. There are plain scriptures that speak directly to that topic in the New Testament outside of the book of Revelation. I also recognized how time in most prophetic scriptures was symbolic and not literal. The Genre of scripture is different and to read typically different. A week is not a week, a day is not a literal day, etc. I was also convinced by how Revelation read in layers topically, not chronologically.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I read a booklet years ago that is very hard to find David. "The Gospel Millennium and Obedience to Scripture" But a lot of it is summarized here. You can also listen to the guy speak on the topic. It is a good listen. He is a Baptist. Probably dead now.
Robert L Whitelaw

He has a long list of Q&A things along with an audio on this page.
http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/prophecy/gospel-millennium/sermon.php

 

[RamistThomist]

I have to admit that I haven't. Just the portion he wrote in the four views book. And his rebuttal to the other views in the book.

Ladd is an amil who holds to a premil view of Revelation 20. He doesn't let premillennialism inform the rest of Scripture. Paul in this thread keeps saying (incorrectly) that premils only rely on Revelation 20. Neither David nor I (if I am in fact premil) do so. Very few do, actually. George Ladd is the only one who does.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Ladd is an amil who holds to a premil view of Revelation 20. He doesn't let premillennialism inform the rest of Scripture. Paul in this thread keeps saying (incorrectly) that premils only rely on Revelation 20. Neither David nor I (if I am in fact premil) do so. Very few do, actually. George Ladd is the only one who does.

Can you please address the issue of this thread: what is the purpose for a future millennium after the second coming?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Ladd is an amil who holds to a premil view of Revelation 20. He doesn't let premillennialism inform the rest of Scripture. Paul in this thread keeps saying (incorrectly) that premils only rely on Revelation 20. Neither David nor I (if I am in fact premil) do so. Very few do, actually. George Ladd is the only one who does.

OK then, the first principle of evidence is: "he alleges must prove!" Where is your biblical support for the premillennial theory? Let's start with the binding of Satan: What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent, then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroy them?

 

[Dachaser]

(1) Who then are the billions of mortal fools that overrun "the blissful" Premil millennium (and new earth) "as the sand of the sea" after being subject to the glorious perfect rule of the risen Christ and then brazenly oppose Christ and the glorified saints?

(2) Where do they come from?

(3) Despite the alleged paradise-like conditions, the glorious and victorious unchallenged rule of Christ with a “rod of iron” and the so-called submissiveness of the nations that Premils attribute to their millennial kingdom, surely we are looking at the biggest and most-amazing religious turn-around in history in the Premil scenario? After all, at the first sight of Satan, the nations turn en-mass against Christ to Satan as “the sand of the sea”? Is this not the grossest sin imaginable?

They would be those who submitted to rule of Jesus outwardly, but we're not making Him Lord in their hearts! Final proof that even in Paradise, hearts of lost deceitfully wicked.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Paul in this thread keeps saying (incorrectly) that premils only rely on Revelation 20. Neither David nor I (if I am in fact premil) do so. Very few do, actually.

I understand that Jacob. I was surrounded by guys who were Premil who thought they were interpreting Revelation 20 in light of other books in the bible as well. At the same time you have to admit that the term is only used in Revelation 20. I guess we could all look at it as a different dispensation or different economy that is being looked into and defined by our understanding of what that dispensation or economy may look like.

I just think that the Postmil or Amil positions do a better job. They can be used synonymously as Amil is a rather new term comparatively. Some Post Toasty's believe in a literal 1K golden age. Not all. There are various views of that persuasion also. So defining all Premils under one camp is not a good idea either. Chilism is not the same thing as what Premil is today either.

I just don't see it. Like I noted, the binding of Satan was a beginning point for me.

And I agree that Origen can be very strange also. It has been a long time since I even looked into the Origen stuff or read anything by him. It wasn't worth my time.

 

[Dachaser]

I have to admit that I haven't. Just the portion he wrote in the four views book. And his rebuttal to the other views in the book.

I have read some of A. W. Pink on the topic. This was the passage that convinced him.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

He was Premil who became Amil.
Have you read Hoekema's book? The Bible and the Future

As I noted above the topic of the binding of Satan was one thing that convinced me. There are plain scriptures that speak directly to that topic in the New Testament outside of the book of Revelation. I also recognized how time in most prophetic scriptures was symbolic and not literal. The Genre of scripture is different and to read typically different. A week is not a week, a day is not a literal day, etc. I was also convinced by how Revelation read in layers topically, not chronologically.

Suggest Ladd and Robert Mounce.

 

[Dachaser]

I understand that Jacob. I was surrounded by guys who were Premil who thought they were interpreting Revelation 20 in light of other books in the bible as well. At the same time you have to admit that the term is only used in Revelation 20. I guess we could all look at it as a different dispensation or different economy that is being looked into and defined by our understanding of what that dispensation or economy may look like.

I just think that the Postmil or Amil positions do a better job. They can be used synonymously as Amil is a rather new term comparatively. Some Post Toasty's believe in a literal 1K golden age. Not all. There are various views of that persuasion also. So defining all Premils under one camp is not a good idea either. Chilism is not the same thing as what Premil is today either.

I just don't see it. Like I noted, the binding of Satan was a beginning point for me.

And I agree that Origen can be very strange also. It has been a long time since I even looked into the Origen stuff or read anything by him. It wasn't worth my time.

The question is does Bible only support AMil at all position?

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Suggest Ladd and Robert Mounce.

Thank You David. I do wish you would interact more with what is being put your way. One or two lines of comment are not real interaction with a post. It is kind of obfuscating the points being brought up. You are not interacting. That has to stop. You have been warned enough.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

The question is does Bible only support AMil at all position?

David, If you don't start interacting with posts correctly and intelligently by actually answering a post you will have problems. Please. No More one or two liners. I think you can read by the post you quote here what my answer is.

 

[sovereigngrace]

They would be those who submitted to rule of Jesus outwardly, but we're not making Him Lord in their hearts! Final proof that even in Paradise, hearts of lost deceitfully wicked.

You are totally all over the place.

I asked: "Are there any mortals that survive the second coming and which populate your millennial earth? If so, do they sin, get sick and/or die?"

You replied: "Yes, and no. Will be paradise restored."

I responded: "Who then are the billions of mortal fools that overrun "the blissful" Premil millennium (and new earth) "as the sand of the sea" after being subject to the glorious perfect rule of the risen Christ and then brazenly oppose Christ and the glorified saints?"

You replied: "They would be those who submitted to rule of Jesus outwardly, but we're not making Him Lord in their hearts! Final proof that even in Paradise, hearts of lost deceitfully wicked."

Well, there you have it - sin, rebellion, and wickedness in your perfect blissful millennium!!!

 

[Dachaser]

You are totally all over the place.

I asked: "Are there any mortals that survive the second coming and which populate your millennial earth? If so, do they sin, get sick and/or die?"

You replied: "Yes, and no. Will be paradise restored."

I responded: "Who then are the billions of mortal fools that overrun "the blissful" Premil millennium (and new earth) "as the sand of the sea" after being subject to the glorious perfect rule of the risen Christ and then brazenly oppose Christ and the glorified saints?"

You replied: "They would be those who submitted to rule of Jesus outwardly, but we're not making Him Lord in their hearts! Final proof that even in Paradise, hearts of lost deceitfully wicked."

Well, there you have it - sin, rebellion, and wickedness in your perfect blissful millennium!!!

The reigning of Jesus shall be the full fulfillment of Messiah in His Kingdom as seen by the OT Prophets, and there will not be what you described until end time

Thank You David. I do wish you would interact more with what is being put your way. One or two lines of comment are not real interaction with a post. It is kind of obfuscating the points being brought up. You are not interacting. That has to stop. You have been warned enough.

I understand, but when someone else posts entire book summaries at times hard to follow.

 

[Dachaser]

David, If you don't start interacting with posts correctly and intelligently by actually answering a post you will have problems. Please. No More one or two liners. I think you can read by the post you quote here what my answer is.

My concern is that someone discussing this seems to hold to only A mil is to be seen as the official position, and think that Premil, Postmil, and AMil positions have been held by others throughout history.

 

[RamistThomist]

And I agree that Origen can be very strange also.

meaning borderline heretical. Universal salvation, necessary creation; pre-existence of souls.

At the same time you have to admit that the term is only used in Revelation 20

Which doesn't phase me one bit. To reduce it to merely terms is to commit the word = concept fallacy. That's precisely what Paul has done in this entire thread (and why I don't really bother anymore).

 

[RamistThomist]

I understand, but when someone else posts entire book summaries at times hard to follow.

You are exactly right. Next time that happens, just type "tl;dr"

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I understand, but when someone else posts entire book summaries at times hard to follow.

You are exactly right. Next time that happens, just type "tl;dr"

No, do not do that. Just ask him to simplify and take things topic by topic.

David has not interacted with me very well and I have not plowed him under with a lot of paragraphs. His two line scattered thought posts have not interacted well here or in many past threads. It has been a problem before. He has been overly warned.

 

[sovereigngrace]

The reigning of Jesus shall be the full fulfillment of Messiah in His Kingdom as seen by the OT Prophets, and there will not be what you described until end time

I understand, but when someone else posts entire book summaries at times hard to follow.

But you just totally contradicted your previous posts. This is the whole problem with Premil: it doesn't add up. 2+2=4, not 22. In Premil:

• Glorified saints and mortal rebels inherit the same new incorruptible earth.
• The Premil age of Aquarius sees the majestic unchallenged righteous rule of Christ on earth end in a debacle – with a mass global rebellion by the millennial inhabitants.
• We have the biggest religious turn-around in history: from a millennial kingdom where the nations wholesale submit to Christ in righteousness to a mass revival of Satanism as "the sand of the sea." The Premillennial millennium culminates in the greatest global uprising in history from the four corners of the earth as “the sand of the sea” against the “camp of the saints.”
• You have the removal of the curse and corruption at the Second Coming and yet sin, death and decay continues and expands.
• This undesirable mongrel earth is equally filled with glorified saints and mortal rebels, righteousness and unrighteousness, sin and sinlessness, immortality and mortality, peace and harmony and war and terror. This concept is totally unknown to Scripture.
• You have the Jewish temple rebuilt even though the eternal temple “not made with hands” is standing on the new earth in all His “power and glory.” You have the eliminated priesthood revived to rival Christ. You have animal sacrifices resurrected after Christ abolished them forever.
• You have Christ deceived by these phony religious devotees travelling to Jerusalem every yr to act out their forced worship or else you have Him willingly presiding over a prolonged sham.
• You have the lion and lamb enjoying millennial bliss until the slaughter truck pulls up to drag the lambs, goats and bullocks to the temple in Jerusalem for sacrifice in the presence of Jesus. Amazingly, for the first time in history they have no fear of their traditional predators, just supposedly righteous millennial God-ordained priests coming for them with sharp knives.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Which doesn't phase me one bit. To reduce it to merely terms is to commit the word = concept fallacy. That's precisely what Paul has done in this entire thread (and why I don't really bother anymore).

I am not following you here Jacob. What I wrote had a context referring to an economy / dispensation and how interpretations are defined by our understanding of what that dispensation or economy may look like. We all read into that one word things we bring from others into that reading. Everyone does it. I just think there are clearer passages that speak about the things mentioned in that text that help us understand it. The clearer passages help us understand the more obscure passages, such as the binding of Satan.

 

[Dachaser]

But you just totally contradicted your previous posts. This is the whole problem with Premi: it doesn't add up. 2+2=4, not 22. In Premil:

· Glorified saints and mortal rebels inherit the same new incorruptible earth.
· The Premil age of Aquarius sees the majestic unchallenged righteous rule of Christ on earth end in a debacle – with a mass global rebellion by the millennial inhabitants.
· We have the biggest religious turn-around in history: from a millennial kingdom where the nations wholesale submit to Christ in righteousness to a mass revival of Satanism as "the sand of the sea." The Premillennial millennium culminates in the greatest global uprising in history from the four corners of the earth as “the sand of the sea” against the “camp of the saints.”
· You have the removal of the curse and corruption at the Second Coming and yet sin, death and decay continues and expands.
· This undesirable mongrel earth is equally filled with glorified saints and mortal rebels, righteousness and unrighteousness, sin and sinlessness, immortality and mortality, peace and harmony and war and terror. This concept is totally unknown to Scripture.
· You have the Jewish temple rebuilt even though the eternal temple “not made with hands” is standing on the new earth in all His “power and glory.” You have the eliminated priesthood revived to rival Christ. You have animal sacrifices resurrected after Christ abolished them forever.
· You have Christ deceived by these phony religious devotees travelling to Jerusalem every yr to act out their forced worship or else you have Him willingly presiding over a prolonged sham.
· You have the lion and lamb enjoying millennial bliss until the slaughter truck pulls up to drag the lambs, goats and bullocks to the temple in Jerusalem for sacrifice in the presence of Jesus. Amazingly, for the first time in history they have no fear of their traditional predators, just supposedly righteous millennial God-ordained priests coming for them with sharp knives.

The sacrifices of the Kingdom Age in Zesrth is not in the sense of being salvational elements, but as in ceremonial memorial of what Jesus has already done.
The main points of the Messianic Age will be to have Messiah Jesus reigning in order to show how God intended us to be ruled over in Paradise, and the final rebellion shows to us that what is the problem is not external but internal, as on sinners having wicked hearts
Jesus will not be faked out by what is happening, as He will be ruling over them with rod of iron.
Jesus is ruling from Heaven now, but in a permissive manner, as He allows for many things that will no longer be tolerated, as His reign shall be direct fashion, which will make sure He is worshipped and only He is the living and true God that all humans will dealing with in that time.

 

[RamistThomist]

I am not following you here Jacob. What I wrote had a context referring to an economy / dispensation and how interpretations are defined by our understanding of what that dispensation or economy may look like. We all read into that one word things we bring from others into that reading. Everyone does it. I just think there are clearer passages that speak about the things mentioned in that text that help us understand it. The clearer passages help us understand the more obscure passages, such as the binding of Satan.

word = concept fallacy means if the word "millennium" isn't elsewhere used, then the concept isn't either. That is a textbook exegetical fallacy.

Sure, clearer interprets more obscure, but that just begs the question. I think passage x is clearer than y. You think y is clearer than x. Mexican standoff.

In any case, when I was premil I *never* started (or even went to) Revelation 20.

 

[Dachaser]

No, do not do that. Just ask him to simplify and take things topic by topic.

David has not interacted with me very well and I have not plowed him under with a lot of paragraphs. His two line scattered thought posts have not interacted well here or in many past threads. It has been a problem before. He has been overly warned.

There has to be a medium here, as while I at times have been too short and to the point, other times some have entered into the discussion not in a mode of interaction, but almost as if pushing for their their PhD dissertation.

 

[RamistThomist]

No, do not do that. Just ask him to simplify and take things topic by topic.

David has not interacted with me very well and I have not plowed him under with a lot of paragraphs. His two line scattered thought posts have not interacted well here or in many past threads. It has been a problem before. He has been overly warned.

I've certainly disagreed with David int he past, but Paul writers chapter length posts and some of them just fire off questions.

 

[Dachaser]

word = concept fallacy means if the word "millennium" isn't elsewhere used, then the concept isn't either. That is a textbook exegetical fallacy.

Sure, clearer interprets more obscure, but that just begs the question. I think passage x is clearer than y. You think y is clearer than x. Mexican standoff.

In any case, when I was premil I *never* started (or even went to) Revelation 20.

Interesting that many liked to say that a premil position died on the Chapter 20 misunderstanding, and get many holding to premil do not really even use that Chspter to reason from the scriptures.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

There has to be a medium here, as while I at times have been too short and to the point, other times some have entered into the discussion not in a mode of interaction, but almost as if pushing for their their PhD dissertation.

At that point David ask them to do what I asked you to do in a prior post.

No, do not do that. Just ask him to simplify and take things topic by topic.

I have to deal with bits also. I like to read big portions of things so I understand context but I understand it is hard to address whole chapters. Then deal with the individual topics slowly. If you feel overwhelmed just slow things down. Ask them to slow down and ask them to help you understand what they are getting at as simple as they can. I have to do that. I am rooten for you bud.

 

[sovereigngrace]

The sacrifices of the Kingdom Age in Zesrth is not in the sense of being salvational elements, but as in ceremonial memorial of what Jesus has already done.
The main points of the Messianic Age will be to have Messiah Jesus reigning in order to show how God intended us to be ruled over in Paradise, and the final rebellion shows to us that what is the problem is not external but internal, as on sinners having wicked hearts
Jesus will not be faked out by what is happening, as He will be ruling over them with rod of iron.

Could you show me any Scripture that proves animal sacrifices will be re-introduced as ceremonial memorial sacrifices on the new earth?

Where does it teach in the New Testament that we should (or can) sacrifice animals to commemorate Christ's death?

Are Christ’s hands and feet not a satisfactory enough reminder of the cross for the inhabitants of the new earth?

Does Hebrews 10:1 not make clear that the Jewish ceremonial law was “a shadow of good things to come” not ‘good things that have been’? The ceremonial law is never depicted as looking back but always forward.

Jesus is ruling from Heaven now, but in a permissive manner, as He allows for many things that will no longer be tolerated, as His reign shall be direct fashion, which will make sure Heslone is worshipped and only Hebis the living and true God that amsnkind will deal with in that time

What are you talking about?

 

[Dachaser]

Could you show me any Scripture that proves animal sacrifices will be re-introduced as ceremonial memorial sacrifices on the new earth?

Where does it teach in the New Testament that we should (or can) sacrifice animals to commemorate Christ's death?

Are Christ’s hands and feet not a satisfactory enough reminder of the cross for the inhabitants of the new earth?

Does Hebrews 10:1 not make clear that the Jewish ceremonial law was “a shadow of good things to come” not ‘good things that have been’? The ceremonial law is never depicted as looking back but always forward.



What are you talking about?

I was saying that right now God permits sin and evil acts to occur, but under His direct rule here there shall no longer be allowed any open acts of sinning against God.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I was saying that right now God permits sin and evil acts to occur, but under His direct rule here there shall no longer be allowed any open acts of sinning against God.

David, you are replying to the below quote but you didn't interact with any of it. This is a problem. Then you only state the above which doesn't interact with any of his post. David, Start Interacting With The Posts. Warning.

Could you show me any Scripture that proves animal sacrifices will be re-introduced as ceremonial memorial sacrifices on the new earth?

Where does it teach in the New Testament that we should (or can) sacrifice animals to commemorate Christ's death?

Are Christ’s hands and feet not a satisfactory enough reminder of the cross for the inhabitants of the new earth?

Does Hebrews 10:1 not make clear that the Jewish ceremonial law was “a shadow of good things to come” not ‘good things that have been’? The ceremonial law is never depicted as looking back but always forward.