Skip to comments.Amillennialism vs Premillennialism
Posted on 06/19/2012 1:55:20 PM PDT by wmfights
click here to read article
Symbols in the Bible always stand for something. God doesn't put symbols in the Bible just for kicks and giggles. The symbols always stand for something. For example, when Jesus says in Revelation 1:12 that:
Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands
And in Revelation 1:16
In His right hand He held seven stars
He explains what the symbols stand for in Revelation 1:20:
As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.
So when Christ told the apostle John to write that He will make His literal second coming to earth bringing with Him His bride, and that statement is symbolic, where in Scripture can we find what the symbols mean? Scripture interprets itself and we already see where Jesus interpreted the symbols of the seven lampstands and the seven stars - where is the interpretation of the symbol of Christ returning to earth with His Bride?
I'm really going to need to see where in the text Jesus indicates to us that we are to take that statement as anything other than literal.
Exactly. There is the current kingdom of God, which is spiritual, and the future, one-thousand year, literal, earthly kingdom of Jesus Christ where He rules the nations from Jerusalem.
Exactly. There is the current kingdom of God, which is spiritual, and the future, one-thousand year, literal, earthly kingdom of Jesus Christ where He rules the nations from Jerusalem. (GiovannaNicoletta)
Ummm, well, KOH is temporal and mediatorial and exists now. It is those "churches" which say their allegiance is to The Lord Jesus Christ, but do not do accordingly. That is called Christendom and enfolds both regenerated believer-disciples and unregenerated believer-apostates. The Christendom will still be remaining on earth during the Great Tribulation after regenerated souls have been raptured away to join with The Christ as His Bride, according to the paradigm that I understand arises from a literal-historical-grammatical (dispensational) hermeneutic.
Is that also your understanding?
I was differentiating between the current spiritual kingdom and the future, literal, earthly one-thousand year kingdom with Jesus Christ ruling the nations from Jerusalem.
Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, "The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor will they say, 'See here!' or 'See there!' For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you. (Luke 17: 20-21)
The Greek word for "within" is entos, which is accurately translated in the midst of. It really should be understood as Jesus saying the Kingdom of God is within your midst, or among you. In other words, wherever Jesus is, it accompanies him. What it does NOT mean is that it resides in everyone.
There is no current earthly kingdom of Christ but there will be in the future. What we have now is a "spiritual" kingdom, which certainly does not include everyone who calls himself "Christian", which will cease to exist at the Rapture. There are many who, for various reasons having nothing to do with a genuine salvation experience, consider themselves "Christian", and will be stunned at finding themselves launched into the Tribulation.
I'm in agreement with you.
I'm glad you found it worth reading. I had the same thought.
The historical summary is a good point of departure for further study, because the fundamental error of Christendom has been of choosing the wrong methods for translation and interpretation, leading to confusion in matters which the Koine Greek made crystal clear to the thoughts of those who employed it as a matter of daily life, and only needed a discipler (didaskalos) trained to explain the articles common to The Faith of The Christ.
Here is a point of departure for us. It seems pretty clear to me that as a hierarchical system began to dominate and the the church-state model emerged that those who embraced these changes were the ones who abandoned literal interpretation. I doubt these would be the churches to trust on interpretation.
I agree that the RCC fell into this error, but what we often overlook is the other churches that came out of the church-state model did the same thing to a lesser extent. The churches that embrace the 5 solas don't apply Sola Scriptura to eschatology, or their modified sacramental system. Among these two groups the RC's and the Reformed we hear the same condemnation of Premillenialism as a recent fad, but the truth is there if they really want to see it.
I think there is a lot of room for discussion about when the Rapture occurs, but to deny a millennial reign of Jesus Christ on Earth (amillenialism) is denying the beliefs of the Apostolic Era Christians and the generations that immediately followed.
Actually, I didn't. I was calling attention to a political movement in the past that many here don't want revivified. Where you got the idea that Prof. Rothbard was trying to discredit Scripture, I don't know. He wasn't.
Oh. I glanced at both to make sure I wasn't confusing them, but evidently I did. Thanks.
You can take what I posted as either a false alarm or as a more elliptical warning about theocracy. I had thought that premills were the ones who saw themselves as having a duty to make society more holy so as to deserve the return of Christ.
Anyways, there is nothing in either that enjoins the use of government. Both visions can be implemented through preaching, repentance and other voluntary means.
Others disagree about that and I can understand why...
From G1722; inside (adverb or noun): - within.
The Kingdom of Heaven is the physical Kingdom where Jesus will reign on earth (as it is in Heaven)...
The Kingdom of God is the spiritual Kingdom...And while the Kingdom is in our midst, the Kingdom certainly is in each and every Christian...'I in Christ and Christ in me'...
Actually I look forward to a theocracy/monarchy with Jesus as King. It will come. I lived many years as a hippy type and then many years as an objectivist, now I’m with the Lord.
I was basing my response on the fact that it was pointed out that "Christendom" included those who are not true believers in Christ. When Christ told the Pharisees, who did not believe that He was Who He said He was, that the kingdom of God was "within (them)", He certainly did not mean at that moment that the kingdom of God was "within" them like it is with those who truly know Christ as Savior.
At that point in time, because Christ was among them, the kingdom of God was, indeed, among them, but not within them.
It is absolutely true that the current kingdom of God, which is spiritual, exists within those who truly know Christ as Savior.
DRAT!!! I just got out here tonight on the 21st!!!
Well, there is the controversy between the Donatists and Augustine re the composition of the "church" -- this led to the rift maintained ever since.
Am I making it clear that the visible kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God coexist now, but the Kingdom of Heaven will continue on the earth up to, through, and a thousand years (plus a little) beyond the Great tribulation, containing those who have survived that trial?
Yes, the Devil will be kept away; but the constituents will still have a sinful nature, but will be governed by Christ and those saints reigning with Him? At least, that is the perception that I have of the progress of revelation.
Dr. Thomas Strouse mentioned that "To the Donatists, the true church was the assembly of immersed believers in a particular locale, maintaining their purity through strong preaching and church discipline." It seems to me that this may be something of the conduct of worldlings in that thousand-year reign, and to which their inner chafing will eventually rise to open rebellion when the devil is released briefly at the end of that period? (A speculation) - Hmmm.
(I believe I understand the Kingdom of The God is "in the midst of you-all" when it refers to those of His Body, individuals of whom He will never leave nor forsake.)
That is a briefly stated concept of what did happen, as the article indicated. The problem was that many of the politically adept leaders repressed the distinctive NT truths that to the unregenerate believers were indigestible, so these hangers-on could be kept in the circle, especially governors and kings who wanted a shared, governable religion to unify an empire. God's plan for His goverment of His people under the New Covenant was by independent local assemblies of immersed believer-disciples whose leaders grew into their roles through spiritual maturation, taught under a literal historicity and grammatical grasp of known, unchangeable Scriptural principles handed down through discipleship by teachers whose own training traced back to the original Apostles.
But clever "social engineers" grasped the tiller and gained ascendency by intellectual and political nimbleness, thus steering the "Christianized" Platonic philosophy to operate parallel to the ship of state, creating its own clerical class to rule the commoners in their religion, while the civil magistrates exercised their rule over the economy. This resulted in what is called a "sacral society" -- a state religion, entered into by all citizens (by baptism at birth), an episcopacy of priests, and persecuting all opposition. For that to happen, a literal interpretation of Scripture had to fall and be supplanted by an allegorized interpretation not interfering with the empire. Happy for Constantine at Nicea, eh? At least, that's what it seems like --
Your opinion, sir; no-one has the right to take it from you. Actually, I'm glad you twitted me earlier: I learned a lot about the difference between premillenialism and postmillenialism. As it turns out, premils are truly blameless with respect to freedom. The worst damage has been done by heretical postmils. In fact, Christian communism comes from a twisted variety of postmillenialism that tends to go hand in hand with the heresy of antinomianism.
[For those who don't know, the heresy of antinominanism claims that an Elect is eternally saved, so they are incapable of sinning no matter what they do. Unsurprisingly, when that lot gets power, they act a lot like atheistic Communists.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.