1. (see post #9) Justin Martyr is typical of the 1st two centuries of the church. No matter where they come from they take these passages literally and connect the Revelation 20 verses with the Isaiah passages about the Lord reigning out of Jerusalem on the earth. It is a commentary on scripture; it is not scripture itself.
(a) This is the earliest commentary on Rev 20 that is in existence. It represents the earliest church understanding of these passages. Because of that it is highly significant.
(b) I notice that you have not refuted the quote, but have instead simply said that you don't accept its analysis of scripture. I have said all along that that is your right and that we shouldn't make ones eschatology a matter of salvation. Your response was that the pre-mil position is garbage (or whatever word it was you used.) I have just demonstrated that it was the belief of the earliest church. That makes it much more significant than just garbage.
(c) Your amil understanding doesn't show up really until Augustine. It arises primarily because Christians are becoming impatient with waiting for the coming of the Lord and are looking for some other explanation. Therefore, they leave the classical pre-mil position for something else.
2. Revelation 19 & 20: These 2 chapters are descriptions of the return of Christ and aftermath. There are various settings intended. Let's go through them. The scene switches from heaven to the war on earth. The saints then reign from SOMEWHERE with Christ. Where are they at when Satan attacks again? ON EARTH which is quite clear from 20: 7-9.
19:11: in heaven
19:12: in heaven
19:13: in heaven
19:14: in heaven
19:15: in heaven with action intended for earth
19:16: in heaven
19:17: fowls = midheaven = earth
19:18: dead flesh = earth
19:19: war = on earth
19:20: beast seized on earth + beast thrown into hell
19:21: dead = on earth
20: 1: coming down from heaven = earth;
20: 2: abyss
20: 3: abyss
20: 4: earth (reigned with Christ); cf 20:7-9 - "came up on the broad plain OF THE EARTH and surrounded the CAMP OF THE SAINTS AND THE BELOVED CITY and fire CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN and devoured them."
(where were they? ON EARTH. IN THE BELOVED CITY.)
It is extremely EASY to see from the above where Justin Martyr and the early church came up with their beliefs on this subject. Also, why they would connect them with the Isaiah passages.
It's simply argumentative to say that they had no case at all and that their opinions were garbage.
So are the Gnostics. Your point? (I hope it isn't: "He lived closer, thus he must be better".)
"1. (see post #9) Justin Martyr is typical of the 1st two centuries of the church. No matter where they come from they take these passages literally and connect the Revelation 20 verses with the Isaiah passages about the Lord reigning out of Jerusalem on the earth. It is a commentary on scripture; it is not scripture itself"
While Martyr's view was indeed common, it was not the ~only~ view of the early church (arguably, it wasn't even the 'majority' opinion -but that is irrelevant). You have failed to acknowledge my point that the earliest church creed -the Apostles Creed- is unashamedly amillenial. The Apostles Creed, up until recently, has been thought to be contemporary with the Apostles. If not, then certainly it came shortly after.
"(a) This is the earliest commentary on Rev 20 that is in existence. It represents the earliest church understanding of these passages. Because of that it is highly significant."
Again, I'm asking for Scripture which you have failed to give me. Since Martyr's comments are not scripture, they may be interesting, but not relevant to the Scriptural proof for Pre-Millenialism in light of the FACT that not one of the NT writers mentions this TEMPORARY Earthly reign of Christ in Jerusalem before the New Heavens and New Earth are ushered in.
"(b) I notice that you have not refuted the quote, but have instead simply said that you don't accept its analysis of scripture. I have said all along that that is your right and that we shouldn't make ones eschatology a matter of salvation."
Why should I refute the quote, it's not scripture. I'm looking for Scripture, you have yet to show me.
"Your response was that the pre-mil position is garbage (or whatever word it was you used.) I have just demonstrated that it was the belief of the earliest church. That makes it much more significant than just garbage."
My earlier quote (you should be more careful to quote accurately) is that Historical Pre-Millenialism (Non-Dispensational) is confusing. I also noted that Pre-Tribulational (and including its Dispensational relatives) Pre-Millenialism is bonkers. That has more to do with the fact that there are a myriad of versions of this doctrine ~and~ it was a wholesale fabrication less than 200 years ago. Dispensationalism ~never~ existed in the church until the 1800's.
"(c) Your amil understanding doesn't show up really until Augustine. It arises primarily because Christians are becoming impatient with waiting for the coming of the Lord and are looking for some other explanation. Therefore, they leave the classical pre-mil position for something else."
Not true at all, amillenialism was also present in the early church. Interestingly, ~ALL~ the early church creeds were Amillenial. The Apostles Creed, The Nicene Creed, and The Athanasian Creed are all clearly Amillenial. The Apostles Creed, as I have mentioned before was believed by the Early Church to be either of Apostolic origin or Contemporaneous with the Apostles. While that view has been abandoned, it is still widely believed that the Apostles Creed is 2nd Century, if not contemporaneous.
Now, just as Augustine 'popularized' what we today call Amillenialism, the council of Nicea 'declared' what books the official Chirstian Canon contains. According to your thinking, we should dismiss the council of Nicea's delcaration (since it is 4th century), and go with the books the early church used (which were varied).
The reality of the situation is that ~most~ churches used ~only~ the books the Council of Nicea recognized. Nonetheless, there was not 'official' statement on the matter until the 4th century. There was no 'official' statement on the matter because there ~really~ wasn't much of a controversy. It only became necessary to make a 'formal' declaration of the Canon when more and more 'churches' began to insist that many heretical books were 'inspired'. Likewise, amillenialism was present (this ~can~ be demonstrated) in the ante-nicene church. The fact that it became more dominant with Augustine does not remotely imply it was non-existant until Augustine.
"20: 1: coming down from heaven = earth;"
No, it means coming down from heaven. You are reading 'earth' into it. The point is to note that an angel came down from heaven (left the heavenly realm) to bind Satan. No where does this verse say "earth".
"20: 2: abyss
20: 3: abyss
20: 4: earth (reigned with Christ); cf 20:7-9 - "came up on the broad plain OF THE EARTH and surrounded the CAMP OF THE SAINTS AND THE BELOVED CITY and fire CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN and devoured them." "
"reigned with Christ" is not equivalent with "earth". Notice, John mentions he saw 'souls'! In this temporary 1000 year kingdom in Jerusalem, is Jesus going to reign with a bunch of souls? Or are we going in bodies?
Regarding 20:7-10, according to Amillenial theology, this does take place on earth. Notice vs. 7 says: "And when the thousand years are expired (literally 'accomplished'), Satan shall be loosed out of his prison" What takes place here is ~after~ the 1000 years. This is culminated in Christ's condemnation and removal of Satan in vs 10 which is accomplished at the 2nd Coming -judgement day.
"It is extremely EASY to see from the above where Justin Martyr and the early church came up with their beliefs on this subject. Also, why they would connect them with the Isaiah passages."
When one cannot demonstrate from Scripture their beliefs, it is very common for them to use terms such as: 'Easy', 'Clear', 'Simple'... That you use those terms is contradicted by the inability for you to cite from Scripture specifically where this 1000 year temporary reign on earth ~after~ the 2nd Coming and ~before~ the Judgement and ushering in of the New Heavens and the New Earth.
Jean