Defining Postmillennialism & Why Christians Oppose It | with Dr. James White
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 чер 2024
- Dr. James White defines Postmillennialism and explains why so many Christians wrongly oppose it. @AominOrg
Register for our Fall 2023 Conference, "The Household And The War For The Cosmos." www.tickettailor.com/events/r...
Register for our Spring 2024 Conference, "Blueprints For Christendom 2.0: Seven Doctrines For Ruling The World." www.tickettailor.com/events/r...
Also to purchase Joel’s book they can find it on Amazon or directly from our website at:
rightresponseministries.com/f...
Subscribe to our Theology Applied podcast below:
Apple podcast: bit.ly/theologyapplied
Spotify podcast: bit.ly/theologyappliedspotify
Google Play podcast: bit.ly/theologyappliedgooglep...
*If you live in the Austin area, Pastor Joel just started planting a brand new church called Covenant Bible Church in Hutto, Texas. He would love for you to come visit on a Sunday. Check out the church’s website for details: covenantbible.org/
#theonomy #postmil #christian
Dr White ministers to me every time I hear him speak. Regardless of the topic. He introduced me to Reformed Theology ten years ago. Thank you James R White !
Ditto.
Good for you
I came in with Boice😊
RC Sprouls’s book ‘Chosen by God’ back in ‘99…
@@andrewbrowne5557 Amen brother, I sure do miss RC !
❤
I was a firm Premil until I began witnessing to Jehovahs Witnesses and watched a Jrff Durbin video where he confronted them on their end times views and presented a Post mil view which I had never heard of. So I looked into it out of curiosity, and it made so much sense, and he had so much scripture to align with history. I was hooked and I've never loved discussing eschatology more .
I won't be judgemental... but I disagree! Please... hear me out...
Postmil believers are preterists. They believe Matthew 24 and the book of Revelation are behind us. The implications of that belief, is that God now "ignores" our little girls growing beards, and our little boys cutting off their genitalia.
The truth... our world is the spitting image of "the days of noah", or "the days of lot!" The world isn't getting better, and it was prophecied to get worse.
Only in a "spoiled-brat" Western Christian environment can people believe that things are getting better.
When the next great persecution begins, the preterists (postmil) will quickly ask God to intervene, and they will forget this nonsense
As an amillennial leaning post, I would LOVE this to be the next debate between Dr. White and Dr. Brown!!
That would be fun!!!
Amen. may God bless this man and make his ministry
More fruitful!
Love him! So grateful for men like him. Which aren’t many. Haha but thankful!! God is so great to gift us with faithful men like Dr. James White
Those who hold to postmillennialism believe that this world will become better and better (even though it certainly doesn't look like it is) with the entire world eventually becoming “Christianized.” After this happens, Christ will return. However, this is not the view of the world in the end times that Scripture presents. From the book of Revelation, it is easy to see that the world will be a terrible place during that future time. Also, in 2nd Timothy 3:1-5 it says, “There will be terrible times in the LAST days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God." IF Christians and thereby Christ were reigning, do we really think we would have over a billion Muslims, who view Jesus as a prophet right below Mohamad, a billion Buddhists, who believe Jesus was an enlightened person, a billion Hindus, who believe Jesus studied yoga and became a guru to the Jews, a billion Catholics who are entrusting their souls to Mary at the hour of their death, a billion atheists, the LGBTQ running rampant, TV shows and movies, that continually blaspheme God and His Christ, drinking, drugs, and colleges that have become propaganda mills that promote Godless, Big-bang theology and Darwinian Evolution, human trafficking, and a host of other sinful deeds that will be eliminated during the reign of Jesus Christ, our Holy God. This is a good example of eisegesis; reading pre-conceived ideas into the text, rather than simply reading what the text is clearly stating.
Wow... BEAUTIFULLY SAID. Greatly appreciate being able to see/hear this and send this video to others...salute!
So enjoying this, second time around.
It would have been awesome if Dr. White gave many Scripture expositions.
Love James White, and appreciate his attitude behind this, but would have loved to actually see a definition of postmillennialism and an evaluation of the critiques. This was mainly a story about how he was influenced by Wilson and Durbin, and how he understood Ps 2.
Kenneth Gentry's He Shall Have Dominion and Chilton's Paradise Restored are two great books on postmillennialism
@@kevinevans8892 Agreed, when I read both of those books I was happy they were trying to defend their position from Scripture. They did a good job writing with clarity and using Scripture (although I ultimately disagree with their hermeneutics and presuppositions).
James White is much better in a debate format. This one just did not do it for me.
Thanks for a message of hope and encouragement.
Those who hold to postmillennialism believe that this world will become better and better (even though it certainly doesn't look like it is) with the entire world eventually becoming “Christianized.” After this happens, Christ will return. However, this is not the view of the world in the end times that Scripture presents. From the book of Revelation, it is easy to see that the world will be a terrible place during that future time. Also, in 2nd Timothy 3:1-5 it says, “There will be terrible times in the LAST days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God." IF Christians and thereby Christ were reigning, do we really think we would have over a billion Muslims, who view Jesus as a prophet right below Mohamad, a billion Buddhists, who believe Jesus was an enlightened person, a billion Hindus, who believe Jesus studied yoga and became a guru to the Jews, a billion Catholics who are entrusting their souls to Mary at the hour of their death, a billion atheists, the LGBTQ running rampant, TV shows and movies, that continually blaspheme God and His Christ, drinking, drugs, and colleges that have become propaganda mills that promote Godless, Big-bang theology and Darwinian Evolution, human trafficking, and a host of other sinful deeds that will be eliminated during the reign of Jesus Christ, our Holy God. This is a good example of eisegesis; reading pre-conceived ideas into the text, rather than simply reading what the text is clearly stating.
It is not a message of hope and encouragement if it is not true - and I think sadly will leave those who believe this very unprepared to go weather the deception and falling away and the revelation of the antiChrist as Paul outlines in 2 Thess 2:1-12. verse 9: The coming of the lawless one [ie the antiChrist] is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,
You need to love the truth to be saved: verses 10 and following “and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
@@ruthmayforth5933 Dr. White loves the truth and is saved.
This is awesome!
Those who hold to postmillennialism believe that this world will become better and better (even though it certainly doesn't look like it is) with the entire world eventually becoming “Christianized.” After this happens, Christ will return. However, this is not the view of the world in the end times that Scripture presents. From the book of Revelation, it is easy to see that the world will be a terrible place during that future time. Also, in 2nd Timothy 3:1-5 it says, “There will be terrible times in the LAST days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God." IF Christians and thereby Christ were reigning, do we really think we would have over a billion Muslims, who view Jesus as a prophet right below Mohamad, a billion Buddhists, who believe Jesus was an enlightened person, a billion Hindus, who believe Jesus studied yoga and became a guru to the Jews, a billion Catholics who are entrusting their souls to Mary at the hour of their death, a billion atheists, the LGBTQ running rampant, TV shows and movies, that continually blaspheme God and His Christ, drinking, drugs, and colleges that have become propaganda mills that promote Godless, Big-bang theology and Darwinian Evolution, human trafficking, and a host of other sinful deeds that will be eliminated during the reign of Jesus Christ, our Holy God. This is a good example of eisegesis; reading pre-conceived ideas into the text, rather than simply reading what the text is clearly stating.
Really enjoyable presentation.
This is very very good!
He did a great job with Psalm 2
What an intensely important passage.
Really really good thnx so very much... I'm rewinding this one and re-listening.... to let it sink in extra good in case i missed anything
Things he talked about in this talk, 'Defining Postmillennialism & Why Christians Oppose It':
- mountains
- the dewpoint in arizona
- bugs in texas
- taco time
- his grandkids
- his age
- riding his bike
- his daughter's podcast
- his trip to germany
- the rv park
- the bubonic plague
- debunking global warming
- vineyards in northern europe
- when you marry someone, it's someone different from yourself
- when you have kids, you have to take care of them
- when you become a grandparent, you feel old
- psalm 2
- balding
- his friend debated a homosexual
Things he didn't talk about in this talk, 'Defining Postmillennialism & Why Christians Oppose It':
- the definition of postmillennialism
- why Christians oppose it
I can't imagine this guy did any prep work for this talk. The entire thing makes a lot more sense when you imagine he was asked to give the talk 5 minutes before he got on stage. Maybe his friend was supposed to give the talk but bailed out in the last minute to debate a homosexual again. I was amazed there were still people in the audience at the end. I was even more amazed that they were nodding and paying attention. Don't watch if you're trying to learn anything about postmillennialism. If you want tips on prattling from a master and have an hour to waste, this is the one for you.
You nailed it bro.
You did a fantastic job of defining why this wasn't a talk on post mill and why people reject it.
Yeah, was getting progressively more frustrated as the talk went on. Waiting for the exegesis to begin. Then it was over!
Are all post-mil guys such wind bags?
taco time is the essence of post mil
@38:00 I so appreciate this point about getting out of our echo chambers. Until we start consistently engaging with Christians we disagree with, we will never learn to dwell in a one accord (greek = harmony) before the Lord, and we will never bring those falsehoods into the light by staying in our own camp and attacking from afar.
This is not about ecumenicalism, but about learning how to reach the world with the beautiful sound of the gospel of Christ with all of its nuances, just like the natural God glorifying music we make.
God bless
In my observation, it's those who dwell in echo chambers that tend to be the ones who engage in falsehoods.
So what does postmillennialism mean?? I still don't know
those who see chapter 20 of revelation as Christ coming back to earth after 1,000 years of basically peace and prosperity for Christianity, this is to begin some time in the future.. hope this helps!
Postmillennialism teaches that at Jesus' glorious ascension to heaven to sit at God's right hand, He fulfilled Psalm 110:1, Psalm 2, Daniel 7:13-14 and other Messianic predictions about the advent of His Kingdom, which has been in existence now for 2 thousand years. They see this as coinciding with Revelation 20 and the millennium. Satan has been severely constricted in his activities, unlike in OT times when he had significantly more latitude in deceiving the Gentile nations (Moab - Chemosh; Philistines - Dagon; Eqgpt - Ra, ect). With the Kingdom, the Gentile nations have the gospel and, as a matter of fact, comprises the largest number of Christians (New Testament Israelites, so to speak) than physical Israel. I hope that helps
@@kevinevans8892as another commenter posted, sounds just like pre mill but just change Israel to earn the church and take away a literal 1000 year reign of Christ
I respect James White and am very open to his view but all he basically said in this whole video was "I used to believe this, now I believe that". I was hoping for a more in depth biblical study on the topic which he usually does very well. Respectfully, I don't see what the point of any of this was.
This was addressed to a room of people who were already largely postmillenialists. He wasn’t trying to persuade them to be postmil. He was trying to teach them to temper their eschatology with grace and hope.
Thank you Dr White
Dr White is so so so good at speaking God's word
My problem with the post-millennial view is it doesn't fit with the coming of Christ described in Revelation 19-20. You would have to assume that Christ's second coming happened in secret and nobody noticed, and that the beast and the mark of the beast already happened, and that Satan was bound and not deceiving the world for a significant chunk of the last 2000 years, and that there are people walking around that are 1000 years old, and those just don't seem like reasonable assumptions. If it's true that the second coming of Christ will be seen by everyone, and it's true that the millennial reign of Christ happens AFTER the second coming (which is what Revelation 19-20 seems to suggest), then it doesn't seem likely that the post-millennial position is true. I prefer a classic pre-millennial view on eschatology, but I'm open to the idea that I might be wrong. I'm just tired of convoluted arguments built on assumptions, stacked on top of more assumptions, and have decided to just take what the Bible says at face value as far as one reasonably could. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
47:30 "If we as individuals do not recognize our absolute debtorship to God's grace, not only in saving us but in opening our eyes to His greater purposes and seeing the interconnectedness of the Divine Decree of God and the work of the Trinity and all of these things if we don't recognize and source ourselves fully in Grace, it can become something that's ugly."
Dispensational Truth by Clarence Larkin is the most eye opening book on eschatology in existence.
This was great! And absolutely not what I expected to hear from the title! But can I ask… in conclusion, why are Christian’s so hostile to postmil?! Perhaps I missed it, but I didn’t see it laid out blatantly
These folks are dear brothers who labor well in the word but their media arm can't resist a clickbait title. MANY of their videos don't match up well to the title
@@alsteiner7602 That may be the case… usually Joel does better with titles, maybe it was part of the newly hired “staff” that did this one?
@@jaquirox6579 to answer your question, because the majority report among evangelical Christians in North America and Great Britain is the Dispey premil framework. Any other eschatology is viewed with jaundiced eyes from individuals who are not aware of any other alternatives. And when they do hear them, they immediately think that you're teaching heresy
When we read scripture, the return of Jesus is nowhere described as a peaceful event where Jesus is welcomed back to Earth to conduct the Final Judgment and usher in the eternal state by a mostly "Christianized" world. We instead read of the return of Jesus as a violent and bloody event where the Son of God goes to war against His enemies and includes the rescue of the remnant of believing national Israel (Zech 12-14, Rev 19).
Which is exactly what happened.
@@ghosttube6525 How so ??
@@Tractorman-xj4gt Look into the events leading up to the destruction of the 2nd Temple in 70 A.D.
Fits His 2nd coming to a T.
@@ghosttube6525 no... It did not happen yet.
Postmil eschatology students always enter the debate from a wrong position.
The main problem with posmil arguing based on things getting better slowly are basic premises:
1. Only God is good
2. Man is unable and unwilling to turn to God, enemies of God, completely evil all the time
Therefore, only good can come from God... In other words monergism.
Man does not play a huge role in the change of society, if at all. The church does not need to learn. God can change the hearts of man swiftly just as he did with Pharaoh. God's plan is not dependent on a creation that has a vessel with a nature to sin.
Actually, God's Kingdom being delivered, doesnt require any action by man at all. Does God not elect us? Call us? Regenerate us? Give us a soft heart to turn to him? Does He not teach, lead and direct us? What of any of that is triggered by us?
Our premises show us that the only one at all, who change is dependent on, is God. The rocks could cry out in worship if man does not. Praise God that He did choose us over the rocks.
The Kingdom on earth depends on only one factor:
1. How many elect are planned at any given time
Since man can come to Christ only if the Father elects him and the Spirit regenerates him, everything hinges on God Himself. God made some for destruction and others for worship. Who says that there will be an extended time when there are only elect? Could it not be that God's elect are scattered throughout the generations and He is reaping them as time goes? Were Moses and Abraham not men? We're they also not totally depraved at one time as you or I once were? Then Moses and Abraham were also only significant because they too were elected into sainthood just as you or I. If God would spread His elect out even through the old testament, then why not through the new? In fact we know this is true.
God is the only one who controls when something happens. It doesn't need to be linear or even have a trend. What difference is there with a volatile upward trend or a downward trend that goes up at the very last moment? We see this in the stock market. Do you not collect the same gain on something either way?
We could get worse and worse through history, only to have God finish all at once. Is that not what happens in some wars? Have we not seen wars end with a single battle? A drop of a bomb? The idea by students of post mil, that there must be a positive trend, this is a false assumption and not logically sound. I believe the idea is not even worth including in an argument.
Furthermore, I hear people talk about Christ "winning" all the time. They make hasty generalizations and wrap a complex thing up into something too simple. Then they put a spin on it so as to trap the other person. Of course Christ wins, has he not already? Has he not defeated death? We're our sins not nailed to the cross? Do demons not tremble in fear? But is "winning" what the argument is really about?
God being at war... This has always seemed almost blasphemous to me. God is not in a position to even be at war with anyone. Who can stand against him? God has many more inconsieveable dimensions than anything of creation. Time is not even the same for Him. God holds all power, even Satan himself bows. If God chooses to make all things right with one spoken word at the very end, is he not allowed to do so? Did he not make creation with spoken words?
If God created the world in 6 days from nothing, can he not do it again? I say yes, yes He can. This is why we are not to be concerned. We can not predict God, nor can we control Him. When He does something is completely out of our hands.
What the shall we do? Fear Him. Stand by the gates with our lamps full and wait. Keep a tidy house and multiply the investment He untrusted with us.
James White clearly read “THE GREAT MORTALITY: An Intimate History of the Black Death, the Most Devastating Plague of All Time” by John Kelly.
A fascinating book! James White makes a lot of the same claims and arguments that you can find in John Kelly’s book.
Amen.
He, the Son did ask for the nations for His inheritance, and He is ruling and reigning over all, today and forever more.
ua-cam.com/users/shortsA0bw4Pw3xHM?feature=share
We are not in the millenium. It is to come in the future, after His return to earth.
Amen!
In America the natural progression seems to most often be in this order:
1. Dispensational Premillennialism (because it's the most popular and has the most so-called 'experts' in pulpit, radio, TV, books, and Hollywood movies.
2. Other forms of Premillennialism.
3. Amillenialism.
4. Postmillennialism.
5. Full/consistent Preterism.
I've been through the list. Keep studying.
TacoTime is amazing. An Idaho favorite. I would always have nothing but good fellowship on the topic with Postmillennials, especially if they like TacoTime.
As a new Christian years ago I was 'born' into Dispensational Premillennialism. Once I realized that view couldn't be proved true by using God's word alone, I was on my way out of it to look for the truth. I'm not exaggerating when I say that it took me five years of my own Bible study to unlearn all the nonsense taught by those so-called 'experts', that is, before all of that mess was washed out of my mind.
New paradigms are difficult to adopt. Cognitive Dissonance is a real phenomenon. Eventually I came to sit on the fence for a while between Postmillennialism and full preterism, but eventually concluded that Covenant Eschatology is the only logically-consistent eschatological view. Now I'm in the most-hated group again. Oh, well. :)
Haha thats how you know its real you didnt do it for human approval or glory😅
Is "Covenant Eschatology" the same thing as "Amillennialism"? Thank You.
So many of us were born into Dispensationalism, sadly. I was listening to a pastor in Montana who had taught Dispensationalism for over 30 years when the Lord finally opened his eyes to how wrong it is. He said it took him 7 years to work his way out! Ultimately he became Amill but the is an expert at shredding the lies of Dispensationalism, which he calls Christian Zionism. His name is Chuck Baldwin if you care to listen to him, especially on Israel.
James White's profound intellect gets in the way of child like faith, this man does not understand the simplicity in Christ
Yikes. Thats an awful thing to say and patently false. You should check yourself.
@@davidliu7967 you need to check his teaching, calvinism is a pride filled heresy
Is he referring to Covenant Seminary in St. Louis County? (around minute 13?) Is there a need for revival in study of the Word?
Christians might oppose ANY eschatological view for these reasons. There is really only ONE good reason to oppose ANY eschatological view: EXEGESIS. The rest is fluff. Text on a screen can seem awfully cold and disagreement without the benefit of personal interaction can come across as aggressive. I don't mean any of that. I say these things with a high regard for the topic and the speaker.
ALL eschatological views can legitimately be called "eschatology of hope." Further, a person holding ANY eschatological view can say that every other view is NOT an "eschatology of hope" IF they work toward that conclusion intentionally. You can choose to characterize your own view or anyone else's any way you want depending on your selective acknowledgement of various aspects of the view under discussion. This has nothing do with EXEGESIS, though. It's a persuasive rhetorical method at best, or a form of argumentation that assumes a conclusion at worst. Discussion along these lines is actually quite irrelevant to the main topic, unless it's happening while grilling ribeyes and smoking a cigar.
Our placement on the timeline is equally irrelevant. Since we don't KNOW when Christ will return, it is presumption to assume either way. We criticize dispensationalists for always working on a short timeline, but the same criticism works the other direction, too. The POSSIBILITY that we could be "in the early church" literally adds nothing to the relevant facts, which again, come down to EXEGESIS.
The discussion on timelines goes even further. Newspaper eschatology is not any more or less an error than history-book eschatology. Postmils just like older newspapers. At least in Dispensationalism you can watch the Van Impe's. From what I can tell you cannot be a skilled postmil if you are not a TEDIOUS student of history, beginning with ancient history, requiring a HIGH degree of speculation as you traverse through the ages, and once again, fitting the pieces together to construct a predetermined historical narrative. A commentary on Revelation like Doug Wilson's is woefully insufficient for the cause, but pack a lunch if you pick up Kenneth Gentry. There's not enough text to support the eschatological view from a high-level discussion, and waaaaay too much data of varying reliability outside the text to organize as corresponding extra-biblical evidence. However you feel about it, at the end of the day, none of it is EXEGESIS.
The discussion on children is in my view one of the bigger disappointments in this whole discussion. It comes out in every one of these discussions. It's not because our kids don't matter. Quite the opposite. Holding loved ones up as an argument for a particular eschatological view takes us all right back to the 80's and The Late Great Planet Earth, and "I Wish We'd all Been Ready", and that old movie where they tortured those who were left behind and all the rest of that emotional manipulation we all got tired of hearing from Dispensationalists. I think we can all agree that we love our kids and we hope they have wonderful lives. I mean that, you mean that, even unbelievers mean that most of the time. But what does the TEXT say?
At the 30-minute mark, we finally get to something substantial to the topic. I find Dr. White interesting and I wish I knew him personally, but we really don't get down to real business on this deal until 30 minutes. I'm 100% on board with the discussion on making the "puzzle pieces fit." There's a couple minutes there where I wish that is the kind of discussion we heard more often; the "discomfort" and the uneasy work of chaining together proof-texts. THAT is the kind of discussion we need to be having A LOT more of.
When we get to "starting at the top" around 32 minutes, this is in my view the real meat of the discussion. But this is also the point where I make a sharp turn the other direction from where the discussion goes. Right when we get to the juicy part, we fall right back into the one of the MANY postmil statements that has no basis in reality, the text, or logic: ONLY postmils TRULY believe that God can conduct mass conversions. This to me, sadly, indicates an utterly UN-objective presentation on the topic.
"Starting a the top" (as far as I can tell) means BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. Dr. White immediately appeals to systematics at this point (doctrine of God specifically). All orthodox Christians agree on this. What we are talking about with reference to eschatology is the REVELATION of God over time, not systematics. Now I have seen biblical theologies extracted from the doctrine of the Trinity before, but once again at this point we don't really follow that trail. We go into PROOF-TEXTING, which is the EXACT difficulty we were discussing just a few minutes prior when we were talking about "getting in the weeds" and putting together puzzles.
I have heard Doug Wilson do this not only with Psalm 2 but also Matthew 28:18-20. But neither of these texts will lead you to postmillennialism ON THEIR OWN. They require an interpretive framework; a BIBLICAL THEOLOGY.
So let's consider the merits of that approach for a minute. Are we really going to get where we need to be if we consider the texts that most directly address the topic at hand "arcane"? If these texts are truly open to various interpretations, should we not accept God's will as it has been revealed to us in scripture? Are we really doing better to reach out to texts that DON'T directly address the topic at hand, and then stretching those out in such a way that we can read back in a bright future for our kids, is that REALLY how we want to handle these texts? Understanding the unclear in light of the clear does not mean we have the right to ignore difficult texts. ("I learned it from watching YOU!" Dr. White).
The way I see it, the only two scripturally justifiable eschatological frameworks on the table are historic premillennialism (that's me) and amillennialism. One is more heavily constrained by exegesis than the other (premillennialism) while the other is more heavily driven by biblical theology (amillennialism). One is certainly simpler than the other (amillennialism) and frankly, I would not surprise myself if I became amillennial. But at this point, the argument from the text in support of postmillenialism is quite weak in my view. It's more historical than dispensationalism, and orthodox, but still a distant third as far as being able to justify it from the text.
So why does it matter? For many of the same reasons outlined at the beginning of the talk. Postmillennialism is rapidly becoming the new Dispensationalism. The same combative language is being used agains those who don't agree. The stakes are being set up once again to burn the heretics. It's "All of Christ for all of Life" aka "You better become a postmil theonomist" or else, it's to the stake with you. It's theological bullying. It's is continuing to make a third-order issue primary above all things. It is distracting from the Gospel.
In the meantime, western evangelicalism can still be fairly characterized by snake-oil salesmen, Pelagians, mystics and every other kind of heretic you can imagine. We are continuing to be dominated by a reactionary mindset. We are worldly. We are making ourselves easily divided. We just can't stay on mission, and I put myself right there in the middle of that. I cussed a co-worker today.
But ya'll ain't soft-handed compromising big-Eva poster boys. We get good meat from you guys. I suppose I am a bit disagreeable but this whole postmil discussion is just not up to the expectations I'm used to getting from you guys. How are confessional Reformed Baptists suddenly becoming postmil theonomists??? How would you express a coherent Biblical theology that supports this framework? How is it any more exegetically consistent than anyone else's? What exactly are you asking us all TO DO? What change are you anticipating from this discussion? There's really a lot of questions along these lines that I simply do not see addressed; this is more like a propaganda campaign than a biblical-theological explanation of God's revelation to man.
Is it possible that we could advance this discussion to something a bit less hyperbolic and bit more into scripture? Is there a Biblical theology we can trace through the scriptures that (a) does not lead to presbyterianism, and (b) includes analysis of scripture that can account for Psalm 2 AND ALSO the book of Daniel?
Long comment but worth the read!
Well spoken! Thank you! You asked valid questions and gave sound suggestions on how this subject needs to be better addressed, otherwise and you are right, it's propaganda. God help us!
A few questions always come to mind when this topic comes up that have helped me to provide a bit more clarity on my eachalatogical beliefs if I can share them as a way of hopefully challenging others to examine the Scriptures and work out their faith on this seemingly "controversial" topic. What is your understanding of the people group referred to in scripture as Israel? What does God mean in his promise to Abraham that "Through your Seed, all the nations of the Earth will be blessed?" What does Daniel mean when he says he saw "one like a Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven?" what does Christ mean when he tells the Disciples in Matthew 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 that the temple will be destroyed and no stone left standing on another, and that "this generation will not pass away until all these things are fulfilled" what does he mean by generation? Who/What does Christ mean by the "Abomination of desolation" found in those same chapters quoted in again in daniel? When was Revelation written and to whom originally and for what purpose? (This one is maybe the most disputed but there is strong evidences surrounding it to examine and also this should be approached carefully as much of the evidences deal with extra-biblical sources so there is a strong temptation to eisegete into the text itself and I personally would recommend tackling this question last) What does Paul mean in 1 Corinthians 15 when he claims "we will not all see death" and "when the trumpet sounds?" Which, if any, of the promises of God in the OT to the Patriarchs and Prophets made to Israel have not been fulfilled? (Touches on the issue of Preterism and Futurism and can only really be answered once you answer the question of Who Israel is referring to) I think these are good starting points and personally helped me to work out my faith on the subject of eschatology which, if I can share a bit of personal experience, I, like most believers probably, had compartmentalized and put aside for much of my young life and decided that it was not a "central issue" like the gospel message, snd that it may even be unknowable for certain and therefore not as "relevant" as other parts of scripture or Theology, but since I resolved to study it with the humble intention of actually trying to understand it I have found more and more that what you believe eachalatogically impacts what you believe about just about every other doctrine of Christ and will only serve to enhance your love and appreciation for who he is, and what he has done for His people (I pray that includes anyone taking the time to read this) for your ultimate good, and his ultimate glory. Truly Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords forever. TLDR Don't neglect your study of Eschatology but pray for understanding, recognizing that all revelation and inspiration comes from God alone, through his Holy Spirit.
@@Slippard101 I appreciate your comment. If you are postmil, that would make you the FIRST postmil I have interacted with that did not strike me as having much zeal and little knowledge....and that is putting it kindly. The growing mob of postmil theonomists actually make me miss dispensationalism.
All the questions you ask are indeed some of the most relevant questions to study on this topic. I am a historic premil, but I don't know that all my answers to your questions would be straight-down-the-middle "official" historic premillennialism. For example, I heavily lean toward the partial preterist view of MUCH of Matthew 24-25. But I do see a "near/far" interpretation. The disciples asked one question but didn't seem to realize they asked TWO questions, and Jesus answers them in that context, providing answers to BOTH questions. Where we draw the lines in that discourse is a bit tricky. I would say the "Abomination of Desolation" occurred after the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70, with the defilement and destruction of the temple. Obviously (I would say) the sheep and goats passage is referring to the final judgement. Parsing out some of the material in the middle there is the tricky part.
I would say my attitude toward eschatology was exactly like yours for most of my life. It has also been my impression that the same could be said about James White. In fact, for many years, he would occasionally echo my exact feelings on the subject. But the events of the last five years changed that. And it is clear the same thing happened to James White.
As you mention (and Doug Wilson and James White also mention from time to time) one's perspective on the END clearly has a determinative influence on how you apply your interpretive framework to the rest of the book working backwards. This was one area where my agreement with Wilson, White, etc. persisted, until fairly recently.
A thorough study of Revelation required me to do thorough study in the OT, particularly Ezekiel, Isaish, Daniel, Zechariah, and one more I don't recall at the moment. It's bed time for me haha. Anyhow, going through that process and then studying Revelation caused me to realize that the difference in the most common views (Historicist, Idealist, Futurist, Preterist) really had to do with Biblical Theology. And that is my current view as well. It is one's interpretive approach that determines which of these most common views is in play. And we see that in the current postmil movement. Their eschatology is DETERMINATIVE; it is read BACKWARDS into the text from the conclusions they reach in Revelation.
Now that isn't really an accusation (at this point). It is just a point that should be analyzed, especially since it rarely is and certainly none of the current "big names" in postmillennialism do this. They have already made up their mind, and postmillennialism has won the game. Even though the game never actually started. If you love Jesus, you'll be postmil, PERIOD. Every other view is worthy of disparagement. That is the theological approach taken by guys I've been listening to for years, more than one of whom actually warned against that EXACT attitude when it came to eschatology. James White was right......six or seven years ago....people who become obsessed with this stuff go off mission FAST, and begin to exhibit all kinds of un-Christlike qualities. But I digress on this point.
So where I have been for the last 2 years is in the study of Biblical Theology. The problem we all run into is that Systematics is an OUTPUT. It is, in a sense, the "application arm" of theology. Proof-texting is a necessity we all have to deal with, but on it's own it simply is not sufficient. Exegesis does not eliminate the need to harmonize and synthesize texts. It is at THAT level where most of the relevant disagreement in orthodox Christianity takes place. It is how we deploy Biblical Theology in our interpretive processes that is the real meat of this thing. It is the "glue" that binds it all together.
With that in mind, my view on two elements in interpretation has changed: background (or history, or historical criticism) and literary considerations. In my view, literary aspects of the text are the "more sure" element here. Historical data are often the most exploited (and hence, most damaging) element in the interpretive process. It is often the doorway for runaway critical methods that lead us in the la-la land of "how many authors contributed to Isaiah" and "Paul didn't write many of the letters ascribed to him" etc. But the FORM of the text....canon, genre, typology, etc. ASSUME a full and orthodox understanding of the nature of scripture. All of that is worth saying to say this: developing a "Bible-wide" interpretive framework by working BACKWARDS from eschatology, is simply not submitting to the final form of the text.
You don't read a book by skipping to the last chapter and seeing how it ends, and then say "I now have what I need to understand the rest of the book." No, what you've just done is called CHEATING in literature class.
Think of the one million things you would get wrong if your approach to literature or movies or music were characterized this way.
So it really is NOT the case that what I hear presented by James White, Doug Wilson, etc. is convincing to me. Particularly in James White's case, he went from amil to postmil in the blink of an eye, and provided NO explanation for this, other than he loves his kids and grand kids, and apparently extracted a Bible-wide interpretive framework out of Psalm 2.
Eschatology is a "final exam" of sorts, and understanding the great need for wisdom and knowledge in order to understand it has never been more clear to me than it has in the last few years. Skipping to the end of the book and making a rash, in-the-moment decision on where to stand on these things is NOT the way to go about this. It is tedious work, and much of it requires us to question how we interpret scripture. And really, we just don't like to do that. But that is where the heart of this conversation is, in my view. It is a question of Biblical Theology.
And thank God for that, because frankly I never had much interest in Biblical Theology. I never quite understood how to do it. I'm not claiming I have a great grasp on it right now. But it has sent me back to two things: original languages, and Biblical theology. I haven't really touch systematics in quite a long time now.
But you won't get any discussion on these issues from postmil theonomists. And in case you can't tell, that greatly irritates me.
However, it is imporant to me that you understand your comment here was a great encouragement to me, and I appreciate the interaction very much. I kind of hope you ARE postmil, because that movement is becoming more and more irrational all the time, and it is a great concern to me.
@edodt4220 Personally I have found that I do not necessarily neatly fall into any of the Particular "Camps" perfectly as they have been categorized and defined by many of the People you mentioned and others I have heard preach on this issue, obviously I am doing my best to remain humble about it all and of course be open to the Holy Spirit continuing to shape my perspective on these things but I certainly can agree with most if not all of what you just said, I find that this issue of Pre/Post/ and "Amill" to be a bit of the same kind of division as people claiming they are of Paul or of Apollos or of Cephas, when the reality is that for the true believer there is only one "Title" given and that is "Of Christ" and I feel we do need to approach this kind of issue in the same way which is why I will usually avoid the "Categories" or Self-Labels when talking with other believers, even though they can be a useful frame of reference and a helpful starting point in a conversation, it should not be the focus point of the conversation if that makes any sense. I generally will take the approach of just asking what someone means when they say something like "I am a dispensational Pre-Mileniallist..." or insert whatever Category there because even though I know what the terms mean, I want to make sure that we have the same understanding of what those terms are because specificity is critical if you are going to try and understand where someone is coming from it is most helpful not to use broad categories and assume that their idea of what that term means is the same as your understanding of it. But if I was pressed I would probably currently identify as somewhere between Amil and Postmil and a partial preterist (though I fully believe God is not done fulfilling his promises to "Israel" so not a full preterist) but also I don't think that the "Israel" of scripture is even remotely the same thing as the geopolitical nation-state that exists today full of "non-Jews" who are in fact a synagogue of Satan so this is where I might differ from most dispensationalists.
I don't know if you remembered the book of the OT you were thinking of but for my own examination of Revelation it drove me to re-read much of Isiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Habbakuk, Jeremiah, Exodus, and strangley enough 1-2 Kings and Samuel as well as there were a lot of references and imagery I missed the first couple of times around such as the connections to the 10 Plagues, the Throne of David, The Construction of the Temple, The judgment of the exile periods and subsequent salvation/restoration periods, etc. I will fully agree that Biblical Theology should be foremost above Systematic Theology but will admit I am very much still a fan of Systematic Theology as a useful tool, though with the recognition that is is just a process and a framework.
To be a little more personal, I am a data scientist/program developer by trade and a closeted History enthusiast by passion (Dad was a History Major/Very Wise Believer) and the way in which systems and processes can be used to order and interpret information in an intelligible and coherent and complimentary fashion has always amazed me and given me a greater appreciation for God being a God "of Order and not of confusion" so I don't know that I would go so far as to throw the baby out with the bathwater on that issue, BUT, as you say it has its limitations and dangers as well. Sometimes when working with a difficult data set it becomes easier to overly "transform" the information and information can be easily lost, and/or modified to the point where it does not accurately characterize the underlying source.
I usually liken this kind of thing to the "Christian" version of the secular over reliance on "Science" or when people will look to the Scientific method as a way to explain everything, when the reality is that the Scientific method, while great, is just a process to help those who use it make sense of what they observe, and is in and of itself quite limited in purpose and applicable scope, Science cannot deal with the question of Origin, or Epistomology, or History, or Language and Logic in any meaningful way, and to try and rely on it to provide answers in those areas is just a categorical error. Likewise a Christian who relies on a particular Systematic theology while reading the Bible will tend to make many of the same category errors IMHO. So what the text says, and really what it means by what it says, need to be the paramount issue.
It is actually funny that you mention both the literary style and form and the historical context as the hermeneutic principles you have been using because I was just thinking about that the other day while reading through revelation and other places and one thing I have found increasingly fascinating the past couple of years is that many times in Scripture, God actually seems to blend together what we might categorize (and many people do this with the bible) as "Historical Narrative" or "Poetry" or "Proverb" or "Future Prophecy" (which is always just a matter of God being faithful to his promises) because there are so many passages in Scripture that have BOTH a physical/historical/"literal" (I use this term loosely) meaning, but then also have a Metaphysical or "Spiritual" meaning as well, and I used to fully believe the mantra that any given Scriptural text "has only ONE meaning, but can have multiple applications" but as I've studied more I've realized that that might be entirely accurate, Scripture and History as we know it is chalked full of things that you can point to that are both historically physical and through symbolism spiritually true.
To give a couple of examples of what I mean, 2 Samuel 7, when God is telling David that once he is gone he will raise up his Descendant and that that person will build him a "house" to dwell in amongst his people, and that he will establish his throne and be a father to him, well obviously this is a promise that Solomon fulfills and the Israelites of that era might have pointed to Solomon as the "fulfillment" of that Prophecy and they wouldn't have been necessarily wrong, but also that passage points to THE Descendant of David, Christ, who is the TRUE King that rules forever and establishes the TRUE temple. Or when God tells Adam that "in the day that he eats of the fruit he will surely die" well he didn't physically die instantly (though his physical death sentence was pronounced in the same day so you might say he did physically in a manner of speaking) but he most certainly DID die instantly (that day) in a spiritual sense in that he became a sinner and immediately was cut off from the presence of God that he enjoyed in Eden. Or Ezekial 11 where God prophesies the destruction of the Temple. Just to name a few. And with that in mind I have been trying to read Revelation with the notion that he might not EXCLUSIVELY be speaking about historical things and that he might not EXCLUSIVELY be talking about future things, but that it may be that there are past historical events that point to future greater fulfillment and ultimately a very real (and much more truthful) Spiritual reality as well. And that if that is the case, then many of these debates of X vs. Y really just depend on the perspective or lense through which you choose to look and that many seemingly paradoxical and controversial statements may in fact be complimentary to each other upon some closer examination and ultimately, divine inspiration because wisdom, discernment, and understanding stem from the Lord himself. I do recognize the potential danger with this approach though, because one of the axioms of hermeneutics and a pre-requisite for exegesis is that Scripture be intelligible, so I am not going so far as to say that the "meaning" of the text is in any way relative, authorial intent matters, but I affirm always that God is much more of a master storyteller than Shakespeare or Tolkien or any of the great Literary masters, and much more linguistically gifted (being the source of all language) than even the wisest human linguists to ever exist, certainly much more rational than even the greatest preachers and theologians and even the Godly men he used to write Scripture and record his words originally. I often wonder about what Paul or Peter or John or any of the Prophets would have thought about some of the topics that seem to be recurring topics of debate among the church and if they themselves even fully understood perfectly what God was speaking through them because many times they knew what they were writing was in fact revelation from God (A.K.A Scripture) but I wonder if that means that they necessarily were able to comprehend the weight of it fully.
So anyway, I'm definitely not willing to commit to saying I'm entirely Post-Mil (sorry to disappoint) and I do see some pretty significant problems with several of those in that camp, the Theonomy issue being one, because obviously that is pretty much just the logical conclusion of a Post-mil position, but I think it misses the mark and ultimately still seems to come from a human desire to have some form of "Agency" over God's Kingdom and risk misunderstanding the full glory of "The hope that is yet to come"
I have nothing but respect for dr. White, wilson, and other postmills but as an amilliniest I do not agree with some inherit assumptions. Yes I do believe that opposition to the church will grow but that does not mean the church will decline. Christ is reigning and His plans for this world and His people are still unfolding I do believe He can come back right now or 10,000 years from now but opposition will still be present and the church will still be growing and Christ will still be reigning
In the 1980s James White taught Bible studies in my home. I recall his Alpha Omega ministry when it was based on Indian School on the west side of Phoenix. James began his debating career in Phoenix and I attended many of these events. He was edgy and typically snobbish toward his Christian brothers, many times condescending. James has grown much since those early times. I like these changes in him. He now seems to possess more elder-like qualities described in the Bible yet retained Iacomus Candidum Contra Mundum.
Post -millenialism is hope. We should talk of our great great grandchildren!
If James had a better understanding of passages like Genesis 11:1-9 (the connection to Acts 2), Deuteronomy 4:19-20, 32:8-9, and Psalm 82 (have to wonder if he still reads this the same flawed way), he would have a much better understanding about what Psalm 2 is talking about. He would also have a much deeper appreciation for the Gospel.
I don't see us learning from the past. All I see is us repeating the past over and over.
I appreciate James Whites heart and Testimony, andly what he says about alot of Premilenial teaching is right. However, I would say I dont start from the bottom up, in the weeds so to speak, but from the top down. And read passages like Psalms two with great enthusiasm, and expectency both in the sense of Gospel spread and Jesus reigning bodily on this earth.
At around the 40:15 mark he says he (we) take the words of Jesus literally. Does that mean he still keeps Torah?
There's a deeper issue that most don't want to address - identity.
Because theologians for the past 200 years have been hyper focused on the "2 ways to salvation" theory, i.e. jew and gentile -
Yea, that'll cause some confusion lol
18:39 vinyard northern england
21:08 bookmark
Why is it that brothers and sisters in Christ have some sense that an apology is expected by some for our open friendship with each other - especially when that friendship crosses denominational and sectarian lines?
When I hear "postmillennial" in Dr. White's description of believing all of the Word, I can with integrity, adhering to the entire Word, simply change it to "premillennial" and come to the same conclusions. Why? Because in time Jesus will rule in Person exactly as prophesied during the millennium with a rod of iron over all the nations. Jesus reigns now, and calls us to proclaim His rule over all the earth, everything in, on, and under this world, and that this will be fulfilled when He physically returns. Kiss the Son - His wrath is soon coming. He will come in wrath and establish His kingdom rule. All opposition will experience it. It is now His law over our hearts; it will then be over the nations in law over all the magistrates of all people everywhere.
Might I be wrong? Certainly. Might Dr. White whom I love, support, and take what he says seriously? Of course. Perhaps he will salute, as he said, those who got it right if the Lord returns in time and conditions that premillennials see in Scripture. In the meantime, I don't oppose my brothers who see it his way, for we are looking for a great revival together; or even many such revivals until the end of human dominated history.
No. Their is only 1 Israel.
@@iacoponefurio1915 You just proved his point. 😂
@@iacoponefurio1915 There is only one spiritual Israel, and the national promises are yet to be fulfilled. I do understand we do not agree on this. Thanks!
Many Christians oppose it simply because of Rev 20.
30 minutes in. No bible verses. No solid arguments yet. Just perspective and personal narrative. This needs a different title so that some of us can hear the systematic case for post-mill…
Premillennial, pretribulation rapture person here. I have the highest view of Holy Scripture. It is God breathed. 😀
And is the most accurate to what the Bible says. Amen brother
I wonder how the post millers explain Zechariah 14
Part 1/2 Sadly, James' first mistake was assuming a "generation" was 40 years ( I know many others did incorrectly) when in Scripture it specifically says "Pass away" or die off.
Matthew 24: 32 “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that He is near-at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place."
So sadly, like many Eschatology students, we presuppose a definition or understanding and when we make an error in 1 part we throw the whole out.
If James had a framework of 1 lifespan where the people born in 1948 will not all pass away before Jesus returns, he would have had a 100+ year view. Not 500 or 1000 but 100 years.
We are currently in year 75 so what should we expect? That people born in 1948 are still alive.
Then let's look at the signs. First sign. Matthew 24:4-5
4 Jesus told them, “Don’t let anyone mislead you, 5 for many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah.’ They will deceive many.
Any evidence for this?
www.israeltoday.co.il/read/israeli-rabbi-says-hes-already-holding-meetings-with-messiah/
John 5:43 I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.
israel365news.com/339505/israeli-rabbi-reveals-date-of-messiahs-arrival-according-to-kabbalah/
Now this rabbi got the dates wrong but that's because the year of Jubilee seems to be 2025 and 2075. Every 50 years.
Second sign.
And you will hear of wars and threats of wars, but don’t panic. Yes, these things must take place, but the end won’t follow immediately. 7 Nation will go to war against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
Now Christians misquote this passage all the time. The key here is "kingdom against kingdom" In the OT especially Daniel 2, 7, etc. Kingdom refers to "world empires"
Daniel 2: 36 “This is the dream. Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king. 37 You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory; 38 and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all-you are this head of gold. 39 But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth. 40 And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others.
So Jesus is saying that in this time there would be more than 1 world empire and they will war against each other. Right now we have the US, China, Russia, NATO, BRICS, etc. as world empires.
Are any of these threatening to go to war with each other? Absolutely. Which we call WW3, which there hasn't been a world war of empires since BEFORE 1948. Funny how Jesus called this 2000 years ago. It also means there will be a WW3. Jesus goes on.
"There will be famines and earthquakes in many parts of the world. 8 But all this is only the first of the birth pains, with more to come."
So WW3 will not be the end but the beginning of the end. Yet people will panic and think the world is going to end. We are not to be afraid because all this has been told to us in advance.
9 “Then you will be arrested, persecuted, and killed. You will be hated all over the world because you are my followers.
10 And many will turn away from me and betray and hate each other.
11 And many false prophets will appear and will deceive many people. 12 Sin will be rampant everywhere, and the love of many will grow cold.
...14 And the Good News about the Kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, so that all nations will hear it; and then the end will come.
now many Christians think this is about us preaching the Gospel to the world. That's not the biblical narrative, it says we are a mess, 1 Timothy 4:1-5 adopting false doctrines and teachings and we are. Revelation 14: 6 Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth-to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people- 7 saying with a loud voice, “Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.”
I'm sure the LORD will use social media and the internet of this event to bring the Gospel message but it won't be via us, the Church.
The problem with many Christians today is that they don't have a biblical framework. There are a few distinct biblical themes that point to this time in history.
I would argue that Premillennialism dates back to Moses 3000 years ago based on Genesis 1 and 2. This isn't a new framework. It's extremely old. But doubt and questions and simply a lack of resources that weren't available until our time has blinded us.
We are told work 6 days and rest for 1 the Sabbath why? Jesus is the LORD of the Sabbath. Matthew 12: 8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
The Israelites were told to work the Land the LORD gave them for 6 years and rest the land for 1 year. Why? Because He is the LORD of that land.
Leviticus 25: And the Lord spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, saying, 2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘When you come into the land which I give you, then the land shall keep a sabbath to the Lord. 3 Six years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your vineyard, and gather its fruit; 4 but in the seventh year there shall be a sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a sabbath to the Lord.
The Jews and early Christians believed that our time of dominion from Adam to the Messiah (2nd Coming) is 6000 years + 1000 years of Sabbath; rest in His Kingdom.
Because He is the LORD of time from beginning to end.
Early Christians:
Barnabas, AD First Century
“Therefore, children, in six days, or in six thousand years, all the prophecies will be fulfilled. Then it says, ‘He rested on the seventh day.’ This signifies at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus, He will destroy the Antichrist, judge the ungodly, and change the sun, moon, and stars. Then He will truly rest during the Millennial reign, which is the seventh day.” Epistle of Barnabas 15:7-9
Commodianus, AD 240
“We will be immortal when the six thousand years are completed.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 35 “Resurrection of the body will be when six thousand years are completed, and after the one thousand years [millennial reign], the world will come to an end.” Against the Gods of the Heathens 80
Victorinus, AD 240
“Satan will be bound until the thousand years are finished; that is, after the sixth day.” Commentary on Revelation 20.1-3
Methodius, AD 290
“In the seventh millennium we will be immortal and truly celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.” Ten Virgins 9.1
Johnson, Ken. The End-Times by the Ancient Church Fathers (p. 11-12).
Judaism.
www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/607585/jewish/Significance-of-the-year-6000.htm
"The Talmud tells us that this world, as we know it, will last for six thousand years, with the seventh millennium ushering in the cosmic Shabbat, the Messianic Era. Six days a week we work, and on the Shabbat we rest and enjoy the fruits of our labor; the same is true with millenniums.
However, it is certainly possible for Moshiach (Messiah) to come earlier. And we believe, hope, and pray each day that this is the day when Moshiach will come...
So yes, we don't know exactly when Moshiach will come, but we do know that it will be before the year 6000. (Currently, as I write this response, we are in the year 5768 [2007-8].)"
So the Jewish calendar today says "5784" which we know the date is wrong based on the New Testament. But the concept of counting to the year 6000 is biblical.
What makes Bible prophecy so powerful is not only the events that are predicted in advance but also when they will occur and the order they will occur.
(Continued in Part 2)
A generation is 70 years, with strength 80 years.
“The days of our lives are seventy years; Or if due to strength, eighty years, Yet the best of them is but toil and exertion; For it is soon cut off, and we fly away.” (Psalms 90:10, TS2009)
I think you are taking John 5:43 wrong.
Our Messiah's name isn't J,sus. Is that the Hebrew name his momma called him? 2 billion christians and nearly the same number of Muslims are all waiting for J,sus. Now reread that name. Narrow path??
Cosmic? That's not scriptural. You claim it's a framework issue, yet you don't have a grasp on scriptural cosmology. Sigh
I am still on the fence on the subject of this video, but scripture as written sure makes more sense than a pre trib pre mill approach.
And uh. And uh. And uh
Can't take it.... too much...
PM just doesn't pass the sniff test, my opinion. But I hold James White in the highest esteem.
Agreed on both points, my friend.
Premillennialism also fails to pass the sniff test
Absolutely brother I agree.
Same
So where do I go to get an expositional teaching of the Book of Revelation? Daniel? Zachariah? That is verse by verse that explains it in a Post Millennial understanding? Could it be that unlike the Premillennialist that try for an expositional teaching of these books, thus causing some disagreements Post Millennialist just simple throw their hands in the air "well it doesn't mean that" so they don't try? I don't know. However I have not heard the verse by verse teaching from you guys yet on Revelation.
Bruce Gore has a very in depth study of Revelation on his channel, the playlist is 60 videos long if you are genuinely interested in a very detailed study of the postmil preterist understanding. I'm not sure about this particular series, but I believe a lot of the stuff on his channel is adapted from his university courses on Biblical topics, though given in a bit more informal a setting.
ua-cam.com/play/PLYFBLkHop2anlJ9wrDXdhugr95AJ3dMKA.html
The types of resources you want are out there if you are willing to look. I think its more that premil, and especially dispensationalism, has had an overinflated sense of importance of the doctrine of end times, plus it is more sensationalistic, so it's a lot easier to find and in more demand.
or may be get the book titled; Revelation Four Views
If you want to know the method of interpretation that most accurately lays out what the reformers and Puritans actually believed, then I’d recommend the longest and most exhaustive writing on the apocalypse that I know of, which is E.B. Elliot’s Horae Apocalypticae.
David Chilton's Days of Vengeance and Kenneth Gentry's He Shall Have Dominion and Before Jerusalem Fell are good reads on the Postmillenarian scheme. Look also for Biblical Hermeneutics by Milton Terry or Apocalypse I think the title of his book is
CREC fot the win 😂😁👍
Think of how many people have been saved through The Late Great Planet Earth (I am one of them). Dr. White, you don't think the Bride of Christ can become spotless and holy through the intense pressure, persecution, and calamity of the end times? Becoming holy is supported by Premil, not Postmil. We aren't all pre-trib...and even if we were, there will be much persecution before the last 7 years--and is already.
Pre trib here
When and where is the tha Marriage Supper of the Lamb?
Issue I always have with premillennialism, beyond just the Scriptural issues and hostility opposing it brings (which itself suggest its producing bad fruit) is the logical inconsistency of the position, a premil is putting more value on themselves and their time where they are then could ever be warranted, in most cases its people who have never been to places where Christianity never really was, or where Christianity is working out in a young church, or where there stands a continual strong church, you go to China and your eschatology can no longer work as premil, or much of Africa. It seems more that the modern premil application formed as a result of the many elements of laziness and selfishness then out of a reading from the Bible, if you're looking for an element of the text to tell you things, you weren't being honest with the text and are cherrypicking it to support a point. I often hear premils get into things like Revelation 19 and 20 or Matthew 24, except none of those Scriptures can be read in a way that demonstrates that because the claims don't even imply a premil interpretation, in the best of cases what it says is millennial-agnostic, you can't prove a position and if you're gonna claim it you're being led by a lie and not by the Scriptures. If you trust Sola Scriptura, then you should be able to abandon all knowledge, to become a fool, including all theology and eschatology, in order to become wise. If you aren't capable to do this, then you aren't observing the Scriptures with sincerity, you are seeking an agenda out of it, you're not following in that case by the Holy Spirit.
If you ask me, I don't truly care about millennialism, I am totally willing to abandon postmil when I read the Scriptures, it doesn't change anything if I do because its not doctrine and thus abandoning it is trivial. But modern premil makes it doctrine, which I suggest is why it produces bad fruit, what you make doctrine makes it inseparable from God's Word, and its why they have to fight so hard, when you make non-doctrine into doctrine, you are then required to defend it to the death, thus those who do this find premil more important then Sola Fide. If you truly trust the Holy Spirit, you must give up everything, all knowledge, all wisdom, so that God can educate you, you must not foremost value the words of another man before the Word God gave, only afterwards can you investigate the words of others. This is part of a humility and grace that understands that I shouldn't even have a gift to read God's Word, but He allowed me this, so I should be honest in myself. And thus I don't take any millennialism as doctrine nor do I read the text with any of it in mind, and it most certainly isn't something I'm gonna beat someone over the head as if it would save them. But those who do, you are certainly violating every command God gave on love, you are violating the Commandments directly.
Firstly, I also get baffled when people act as though the timing of the millennium is some essential part of the faith. It has nothing to do with our Justification, nor serves as instruction in our Sanctification; it's tertiary at best. I think it's just fun to engage and have conversations with others who are mature enough to recognize that. You mention the "modern pre-mil application", and it seems to be that which you are critiquing. This is actually one of the issues I run into when having discussions on the millennium. As a historic premil I find that most people conflate my position with dispensational pre-mil (which is a 19th century invention). Dispensational pre-mil is very modern and has a myriad of problems that require the twisting of scripture, not the least of which is dispensationalism's false dichotomy between the Church and Israel. The millennium is in the category of prophecy, and as such, I agree that it's not very wise to put hope an any given interpretation. We are told specifically to not despise prophetic utterance, but to test it. Since the Millennium is inseparably intertwined with the Second Coming of Christ, we'll really only know which position is right once He returns.
I see the dangers of the extremes of both positions: The extreme of modern, dispensational, premillennialism is that people often place their hope in a pre-trib rapture and are left completely unprepared to trust Christ through real hardship, were it to occur. Not only this, but many become so preoccupied with watching for potential prophetic signs that they end up living lives of fear and following conspiracies and con-men rather than the Word of God. The extreme of post-mil is that through dominion theology the people of God are convinced they are sure to take over society and make a world that is Christianized for Christ to return to and rule over, leaving them blind toward looking at potential prophetic events and therefore unprepared to face the Great Tribulation if the premil position is true due to proleptic nature of prophecy. Regardless of which position is correct, it doesn't change what we as believers are called to do: Glorify God by spreading the Gospel and being and making disciples within the sphere of influence that God has given us, regardless of the world around us. So, as of now, I remain a pre-millennial; watch for the coming of Christ as I seek to serve Him; and, honestly, kind of hope that I'm wrong and end up pleasantly surprised that we don't have to go through a one-world regime that is directly, outwardly, and violently opposed to Christ and His people; though I'm not saying that would necessarily happen in our lifetime.
Anyway, I honestly just loved to see someone taking a strong but balanced stance, and ultimately admitting that it's the scriptures that are right. I don't know you, but I love you. Early in my Christan walk, I came across a quote that shaped my studies, and I think you'll appreciate it: "Our object should not be to have scripture on our side but to be on the side of scripture; and however dear any sentiment may have become by being long entertained, so soon as it is seen to be contrary to the Bible, we must be prepared to abandon it without hesitation." - William Symmington
@@CrimKazanawa
Yes, while I don't agree with the premil perspective, even of the dispensationalist I've never once even considered calling them heretics or apostates because of it, my issue is more in line with what Dr. White often says when he was pointing out folks were heading towards such. I say the same, it often leads you into a heretical or apostate path and even if I could not dissuade someone Biblicalyl from that path, the least of what I can do is warn them and warn them by the Scriptures.
My position with everything I do has always been to go back to the Scriptures, that every position I take must foremost be something I can point back to the Scriptures and any topic that must be brought up among Christians for serious debate must be something I can absolutely prove in the Scriptures. When it comes to historical premil vs. postmil or even amil, the difference is usually minutia not really worth even discussing in my opinion. I share a similar perspective on Paedobaptism, despite being a Baptist, I see it as each individuals calling, whether any of us are right is not something we have yet been given, or may ever be given, God very well might be calling us to different minds for His purposes, so why even consider stirring divisions among the fellowship of the Church? This mindset, alongside many elements connected to it, (for theology is not compartmental but afflicts every parcel of life) has made me come to what I call anti-denominational, not just nondenominational, but indignant and completely opposed to the very idea of denominational divides among the body of the Church. (which is founded on the principals of no divisions in the Church found in 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Romans, and constantly implicated in the Gospels and demonstrates in the Old Testament)
Anyhow the principals for which I speak for discernment among so claiming brothers and sister must be principally on things that by exegesis I can demonstrate in the Scriptures, things for which God outright says to us that such people are in fact discerned from the Church. While this allows me to make rational argumentation extended from the Scriptures it is merely described as reaching the logical conclusion of the Scriptures for which I still must be able to point back to. As an example I openly and constantly address problems with the historical consideration of Genesis as actually happening because without it the logical conclusions say that Moses at best was a liar and at worst didn't even exist, and in John 5 it further clarifies that Jesus could not be believed without Moses who wrote of Him. Even more when we are not to add or remove anything given in the Scriptures which is iterated numerous times in Old and New Testament. Dispensationists have a problem with doing this, adding details that are not so specific, same to those who reject all of Genesis, especially 1-10, as being a historical fact. The Scriptures do not give that leeway and those who do such must be warned against. (and even then I may never call them apostates nor heretics, but at the least it disrupts faith and easily leads them to apostasy, heresy, or even total abandonment)
But those who merely suppose a case of saying they think it is one way or another, which doesn't change the production of their fruit, which does not describe compelled requirements to one way or another beyond Salvation in Faith Alone, Sola Fide, taught by the Scriptures Alone, Sola Scriptura, if these things are given, I have nothing to even address in the brotherhood. For it is those who change the doctrines and truths of the Scripture, and in turn reject Sola Fide entirely, they are the ones I will address.
And for why I see that anything beyond that case should not really even be debated is because of what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12, a body shares parts that commit to different roles, and these different roles have different callings and thus perform different behaviors. How this is described I don't think is limited to just office positions in the Church but it applies even more broadly that the Church is made of individual members who see things distinctly yet still by faith. And in this faith they have different callings that do no matter to faith but perform different purposes and accomplish different tasks for the sake of God. Not that He needs them to but that He wants them to and thus by the Holy Spirit He guides them to. Its not a case that there is no objective truth to this, but that what we are given to know is given for specific purposes and that which we don't is deliberately shrouded in mystery for our sakes. So for whatever purpose it serves, our difference of mind is I think part of God using our individual distinctions for a good purpose we don't have a right to criticize of each other unless we believe it violates doctrines and truth, in which case it must be addressed according to the Scriptures. The same too applies to the many denominations, which should designate different ideas of the church's resolution, not different or higher authorities to the local church. And that is why I am also anti-denominational, the divisions should've been for classification purposes, not for division and authority purposes. Each church is a local body and should be independent I argue with that, shared in a unified worship for God and a desire for His purposes. And though I be anti-denominational, I would not even call such things apostasy let alone heretical, but I do think it is a ignorance or even outright rejection of a calling from God which is destined to greatly harm many members of the Church body. (in such a way I aim to lovingly, and rationally, fight the human nature common among those who are making denomination authorities corrupted by the fleshly nature of man)
I have much more I could say on this, I love discussion and arguing the topic, but it'll start to waver on many topics and become a bit rant-like, so I'll leave it there. (though I did kinda do that, but know I could and have gone on for a lot longer before)
change the title of the video, it's not what is. James White was just talking why it make it sense in terms of Church History and Scripture but never gave a definition and why people opposed it.
9:48 Here’s my eschatology of hope. Titus 2 verse 13 (KJV)
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
I don't oppose postmillennialism, per se. I simply don't see it Scripture. I believe Christ is reigning now, with all authority on heaven and on earth, as given to Him by the Father. I believe all of Scripture, including those passages that speak of the victorious reign of the Son, as in Psalm 2, Psalm 110, and 1st Corinthians 15. I also believe that He will make a new heavens and a new earth, as it says in Isaiah 65 and 2nd Peter 3. These are wonderful proclamations of total victory from our reigning King. I simply don't see postmillennialism in those verses. I don't hold ill will against anyone who does, but I don't see it. All I know for sure is that Christ is going to return some day, and it will be glorious!
I believe the same. There are many people I greatly respect that were are Post mil like R.C. Sproul, and B B Warfield, but I just do not see Post mil in scripture. Its not about being optimistic or pessimistic. What do the scriptures say? Through out scripture, when times are good, the Church and Israel were at their worst, just loom at Rev. 3 Church of Laodicea.
I think the one thing Postmillennialism and amillennialism have going for them is that premillennialism is fraught with too many issues, the least of which is what happens to the natural people who have survived the tribulation period and are allowed to enter the millennial kingdom. What happens to these people when they die? Do they go to a Jesus-less heaven? And seeing that premmellinsits teach that only the wicked will partake in the last resurrection after the 1000 years, when will these millennial righteous people be raised? These are practical questions that are rarely discussed by the premil theologians
What do you see instead? Amillennialism? Those are really the only two biblical options.
Dr. White quoted, "Ask of me and I will give you the nations"...nations is goyim, meaning Gentiles, as individuals). Are you saying that all Gentiles are going to be saved, therefore that supports Postmil? No, I don't need to be PostMil just because this verse is true. I don't think that verse means what you think it means.
It's funny. I have read and listened to multiple people who claim to "define" Post-millennialism. I still have no idea which scriptures they are using and how they're interpreting them. It seems to be a big secret that is used to get people to keep clicking on videos that offer nothing. Sorry James White, I have listened to you multiple times and come away with 0 insight.
To be honest, I've noticed that from just about all the positions. Premil holders often assume their view is obvious from this or that passage, but when I read it coming from a postmil perspective, it seems to say the opposite of what they need it to say. For example, I don't get why many premil view Romans 9-11 as so favorable to their position when Paul seems to explicitly bring up their assumption about Israel in order to refute it. Or I just saw a comment about Daniel 2 being incompatible with Postmil, whereas I see postmil as the only position that does that chapter justice.
But from the other side, I don't know what is or is not obvious about my position and understanding of scripture if viewed from a premil angle. And the way these views are formed, they are bigger than any one verse or passage, but often come out of very different ways of reading scripture.
If you are familiar with amil, you will know most of the scriptural proofs Postmil uses as well. It might be more helpful to ask specific questions.
Thanks for saving me time. 👍🏽
Im not dogmatic about eschatology but I simply cant get on board postmilleniallism. It completely ignore vast swaths of scripture. There are holes in every viewpoint but the premillenial views at least attempt to address the tons of verses about 3.5 years, rebuilding the temple and sacrifices, mark of the beast, 7 bowls of wrath, Jesus wiping out his enemies in one giant swoop, etc., etc.
You grew up Disp/Premil....and slid into something you can't explain then spend an entire hour or so trying to define it? Call a spade a spade...your younger family members won't invite you too the cool parties unless you switch.
See, this is why Jesus chose tradesmen. I'm sure then as now the scholars were "off in the weeds."
Havent watched it yet but Never thought I'd see JW preaching on this subject
The title of this video should really be changed. I watched hoping to learn more about post millennialist but it wasn’t even defined.
AI will change his mind..thousands of year from now, we would be cyborgs. I’m a post trib guy but I’m not at all dogmatic on this subject.Irenaeus, has a great comment..
"But when the time has arrived, and the prediction has come to pass, then the prophecies have a clear and certain exposition"
The post-mill position is simply a position that is one step closer to the truth. If you made it this far, you have come a long ways. But keep going, don’t stop. It is actually not 100% correct, but close. 👍
Incompatible with Daniel 2
@@jeremyjean-pierre4977 Postmil is incompatible? It seems like the only one that actually accounts for the interpretation of the dream. The kingdom of God (the Church) enters the world as a tiny pebble 2000 years ago, and yet that insignificant rock ends up shattering the kingdoms of the world (Rome, Babylon, Persia, etc) and is now in the phase where it grows and grows and is becoming a great mountain that fills the whole earth. Premil usually has the kingdom of God stuck in heaven and when it finally comes to earth, it comes fully formed, not something that grows and fills the earth like Daniel 2 teaches. In fact, depending on the person, it pops into the world fully formed and then dwindles after 1000 years until there is a great apostasy because for some, not even God is a good enough king to keep a kingdom together for more than 1000 years.
With all respect, you never even defined the term let alone defend the position from scripture., You shared Psalms 2 as a defense of your position but never explained HOW Psalms 2 supports your position of postmill... I am STILL waiting for someone to actually defend this position from Scripture.
Part 2/2
So how can we know? Genesis 2:
15 Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
Now we know Adam ate. Did he die in the next 24 hours? No.
Genesis 5:5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
No one lived to see 1000. Adam lived from year 1- year 930 not 1000, not to "Day" 2. He died in that "day" as the LORD said he would.
Adam dies end of Day 1. End of Day 2 the LORD goes to Abraham year 2001. David in year 3000 and Jesus is just before year 4000 since 70-75 AD is year 4000. Year 6000 is 2070-2075 about then. This is a study but it's not that difficult what messes us up is the context. For example, In Genesis 7-8 we see the biblical calendar.
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." 2nd Month 17th Day. Genesis 8: 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days (150 days) the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat." 7th Month, 17th Day. (5 months later =150 days means each month is 30 days).
Our calendar is 365.25 days per year and in Genesis, it's 360 days per year. So Adam did live 900+ years even by our calendar. (930 years x 360 days =334,800 days. Our calendar would show Adam as living 916 years at 365.25 days per year). So when we apply our calendar of BC and AD to everything we mess up the biblical calendar a little. This is why this extensive biblical calendar says we are past the year 6000.
amazingbibletimeline.com/
This 5 days per year seems like a slight detail but if we apply this 360 day calendar from Adam and Eve to the destruction of the Temple (70AD or year 4000 from creation) and then switch to our 365.25 After the destruction we'd have a gap of 57 years
(Adam and Eve to The destruction of the Temple 4000 years at 360 days per year =1,440,000 days. Which would be 3,942.50 of our years.)
This is why we lose hope, for us 57 years is a long time but we're talking about a 6000 year period which the enemy has had to distort calendars, cause doubt, and develop alternative theories.
What the LORD has done is given us clues along the way to readjust our calendars so we have a clearer image. We know based on all available evidence and resources that humans can live a max of 115.5 some about then and 1 that claims to be 122.
www.unilad.com/news/health/maximum-age-humans-can-live-to-science-296127-20240214
So from 1948+122 years = 2070AD.
But Jesus didn't die and rise again in 70AD He died and rose again in 32AD. We are to watch for the signs and Isrsel being reborn as a nation was A massive sign to help us understand the window had been opened.
Jesus also says in Matthew 24:21-22 NLT
21 For there will be greater anguish than at any time since the world began. And it will never be so great again. 22 In fact, unless that time of calamity is shortened, not a single person will survive. But it will be shortened for the sake of God’s chosen ones.
If Jesus waits to the year 6000 we will have caused our own extinction. This is what He's saying. So in fact, all these things I mentioned at the top is the LORD's way of showing us where on the timeline we are.
Now you can believe whatever you choose. I am simply here to try to clarify the topic a little and try to help with the first step. Premillennialism is a 3000-year-old view going back to Moses in the first 5 books of Scripture. That history shows that from Adam to Jesus is just under 4000 years and that the destruction of the Temple was in the year 4000. That we are not quite 2000 years from the destruction of the Temple but we can't say Jesus could return 500 or 1000 years from now. Or as I heard recently, it's been 2000 years since Jesus and it could be 2000 years more, we just don't know. This is a false teaching.
We think that the LORD is slow that somehow because of some simple errors we throw out the whole view. Many Christians I also think that if the Premill view is correct that somehow Jesus's return is a loss for us.
It makes me wonder how many believers in the OT must have debated that the Messiah must not really die, that those passages must have meant something else. Here's why I do this.
I believe that WW3 and terrible times are coming because of what Jesus said. My concern is that many Christians will fall away from the faith because they haven't considered this view a biblical one. I would much rather be wrong and look foolish then not say something and have Christians lose faith in the LORD because events in the world don't match their image of Eschatology.
Take care. I hope this helps.
If it's post mill, what happened to the mark of the beast?
I'd prefer he used more scripture than stories of men. There was a great lack of Gods words.
While, we may all be wrong, we can’t all be right. Nice antidotes, stories and illustrations, but no substance.
I haven’t had time to watch the entire video yet, do they cover historic or “puritan” Postmillennialism?
I still think the rapture comes first, but it always is a blessing to hear Dr White ❤
You dont get a free pass because that was your tradition 😅😅
Youre waiting for a 3rd coming! 🤦♂️
@@iacoponefurio1915 I don't know that it's a salvation issue
@@iacoponefurio1915 White is wrong about eschatology and this was painful to listen to... 12 minutes in and he's still fumbling. He does the same with islam. He should stick to his area of expertise
@@iacoponefurio1915 You're conflating the rapture with the return to earth. typical
For as much respect as I have for Dr. White, this was quite the disappointment 😐
Those who hold to postmillennialism believe that this world will become better and better (even though it certainly doesn't look like it is) with the entire world eventually becoming “Christianized.” After this happens, Christ will return. However, this is not the view of the world in the end times that Scripture presents. From the book of Revelation, it is easy to see that the world will be a terrible place during that future time. Also, in 2nd Timothy 3:1-5 it says, “There will be terrible times in the LAST days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God." IF Christians and thereby Christ were reigning, do we really think we would have over a billion Muslims, who view Jesus as a prophet right below Mohamad, a billion Buddhists, who believe Jesus was an enlightened person, a billion Hindus, who believe Jesus studied yoga and became a guru to the Jews, a billion Catholics who are entrusting their souls to Mary at the hour of their death, nearly a billion atheists, the LGBTQ running rampant, TV shows and movies, that continually blaspheme God and His Christ, drinking, drugs, colleges that have become propaganda mills that promote Godless, Big-bang theology and Darwinian Evolution, human trafficking, and a host of other sinful deeds that will be eliminated during the reign of Jesus Christ, our Holy God. This is a good example of eisegesis; reading pre-conceived ideas into the text, rather than simply reading what the text is clearly stating.
Well said
People like Dr James White are proof that God always gives us a way out from temptation and darkness. In this case, we are strengthened by the preaching of God's servant, and thankfully this one does not bend to the pressures of the world's wicked culture.
1 Corinthians 10:12-13 ESV
[12] Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. [13] No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.
@robertstephenson6806 Why does Jesus's kingdom fall apart?
@robertstephenson6806 From what I gather on premil, at some point Jesus will return and establish a physical kingdom, but after 1000 years it falls apart and there is a great apostasy and the final battle. Why does that happen? Or is that wrong?
@robertstephenson6806 _"...Jesus returns and establishes the millennial kingdom (Ezekiel 37-46), _*_then Armageddon,_*_ then the earth is cleansed with fire..."_
And what is Armageddon? How does that come about?
@robertstephenson6806 So on the one hand, Jesus himself is on earth running the most perfect kingdom ever, and yet he is so terrible at it that there is a mass defection of people who go over to Satan's side in order to join his army and attack Christ. And this is not a failure. Make it make sense.
Well, unfortunately Jesus predicted all things will grow worse and worse, peoples hearts will grow cold, and there will be a big falling away before the Lord returns... This is opposite of postmillennialism. I do like that James finally quit ducking the question and took sides but he fell on the wrong end of things. Jeff is very persuasive but the two hermeneutics they (Jeff and James) hold are diametrically opposed. Consistency is is very important. James, being a literalist in hermeneutic has just adopted an allegorical eschatological hermeneutic. One of two things will happen, James will either allow this conversation to fall to the side, or he will drop one hermeneutic: the literal hermeneutical methodology one must have in order to arrive at Calvinistic interpretations, or the allegorical hermeneutical methodology one must have in order to arrive at Postmillennialism. The two hermeneutics are diametrically opposed.
John MacArthur is also the one I saw to first expose the oxymoron of a "Calvinistic Postmillennialist."
Church is the name of the daughter of Helios the Sun deity. She changed men she saduced int animals, mostly swine
If we are still early in church history then we still have thousands of years left of death and evil things like child molestation and cancer and war and I have no hope each day of being with Christ unless I die by the aging process which almost always is slow and degrading or if I die suddenly or get cancer or something else that would cause pain to those who love me But if my eschatology is right each day I wake up I have the hope of being with Christ and all of His church being with Him and rescued from the pains and trials and tears of this present evil age and this in no way hinders my motivation in service to Him or discourages me from living well wise and pleasing to Him but in fact it motivates me to do so and so all the premill believers I know live like today may be the day but prepare and plan for the future if it’s not
Huh? I don't think I follow you.
Are you saying the Christians 2000 years ago had no hope because Christ's return was still ~2000 years off given your (right) eschatology? That's what you seem to say about Christians today should Christ's return not be for another 2000+ years. I don't see how that matters or makes your position better.
Otherwise, I agree with the last bit about living like a postmil. Premil believers, don't put all your hope in Christ returning so soon that you don't bring enough oil to last until the groom comes. Hope Christ returns soon, but lay down a foundation for your grandchildren and great grandchildren, etc, that will be ready for Christ to return 2000+ years from now.
I really appreciate Dr. White shares his long apathy for eschatology at the start... I have listened to him for years and immediately cringed at the vid title!
Brother James is well grounded in theology. I think he will come back to the Dispensational Premillennial side of things before long. You cannot have an allegorical hermeneutic in regards to eschatology and a literal interpretation with everything else. Either the Calvinistic hermeneutic or the Allegorical hermeneutic will eventually be cast aside... John MacArthur hath spoken it!!!! 😎
@chrisc7579 If your comment is meant to be sardonic humor, you nailed it. But the likelihood of Dr. White coming full circle to dispensationalism has to be miniscule... are you familiar with its origin, namely Friar Manuel Lacunza?
@@brettschlee7090 just to be clear, you think the origin of dispensationalism in its current form (historical dispensationalism) is from Friar Manuel Lacunza? 1731-1801?
@@chrisc7579 Of course; J. N. Darby learned Spanish to absorb Lacunza's book "The Coming of the Messiah in Majesty and Glory" better. His plan to shift Protestant focus/identification away from the Pope as antichrist is ingenious, in a Satanic kind of way.
@@chrisc7579 dispensationalism came about in 1830. John Nelson Darby's creation with the assistance of one Margaret McDonald who attended Edward Irwin's church, I hope I mentioned the correct name. In any case, dispensationalism is a failed eschatology. Too many failed prophetic suggestions (e.g., Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth's 1988 speculation) .
When you take Israel to mean the church you’ve messed up the whole clock for understanding eschatology
Yep!
Pretty much every false doctrine is a result of this failure to distinguish the two. I couldn't agree more.
Dr. White claims that dispensationlists don’t use the same hermeneutic for the Trinity as they do the millennium and the rapture etc. but there’s no demonstration of what those hermeneutics are and what Bible verses he’s referring to.
And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.
Luke 17:26-30 NKJV talking about puzzle pieces not fitting. How does this fit in a postmil view? As I recall the earth wasn't full of righteousness in Noah's day.
Where is righteousness discussed in that text?
@@jlettizard6465 I think he’s referring to the postmil view that all the earth will be converted before Christ’s return.
@@jlettizard6465 Are you kidding?
Lost me at sheologians
Compare what you believe regarding Jesus's return to 2 Thess 2:1-4
What I gleaned from this presentation: Those who adhere to postmillennialism use that word outside of the definition of the word within it - millennial. Postmillennialists have no intent to mean anything relating to a 1000 year time period. Really hoped this PhD would have used Scripture to define postmillennialism and why he believes it.
Yes. The hyper focus on the 1000 years is a very modern trend (in the last ~150 years or so), and post- "millennialism" is much older than that. Given that it only appears in one book, it is a weird thing to make the end all and be all of one's end times philosophy. Some Postmil do see it as more literally 365250 days or there abouts, but many others view it as a similar timeframe that Peter speaks of for the final judgement in 2 Pe 3 when explaining why Jesus isn't being slow to return.
Yeah thanks, your nonsense only works because we didn't know classic history as well in the 90s during all that Left Behind crap. Ignoring the destruction of Israel not 40 yrs after the death of Christ allows you to come to your view. Ignoring Nero Caesar in 666. Ignoring why the Gnostics form in the descendants of Ishmael (the nations mentioned in Revelation are the nations surrounding Israel aka the Muslims now).
Your view is essentially the Muslim end time world view just flip the good guys and bad guys.
The problem is you are also OK and frankly want the world to burn and you want us to ignore the intentional attempt to fulfill prophecy in refounding Israel. Why fight anything? Just accelerate right? The worse it gets the faster we get to Jesus' return right? You can tell Him how you did nothing and that was all part of the plan right?
We should have just let Islam take over Europe in the 7th century and the Vikings to take the British isle's right? I mean accelerate...more non belief and evil the faster we get to Jesus right? Which one really sounds like a idea sent from Satan and which one sounds like God?
He made a better amillennialist.
He is not addressing the main topic from the scriptures. He is wandering around in personal experiences.
I’d encourage everyone to listen to John MacArthur’s series why every Calvinist should be a premillennialist, it’s an amazing series. It would be great if Dr. White took the time to go through all the series an try to refute it. I’ve learned a lot from Dr. white but in this topic I think he is wrong , he alway talks about consistency, in this case I’d say he is using a different hermeneutical interpretation compared to when he defends the doctrine of the trinity.
White talks continually about hermeneutical consistency and brings it up in his critiques and debates.
There is a reason why the different eschatologies are birthed from different hermeneutic frameworks and it affects all of the systemic dogmatics as well.
Keep studying and seeking the truth and you'll find that MacArthur is the one in want of consistency and a hermeneutic in alignment with the full council of scripture.
@@umaikakudo still baffled that John MacArthur is a premil Dispey
Well, as a postmillennial fulfilled-covenant preterist, I can say that I respectfully disagree with you. But I can live with that. However, I must also advise you that we agree on far more issues than we differ. I love to hear your messages.
I like his teachings on manuscripts
And the history of it all buut i Noticed He has never talked abt book of Rev concernin his view he has never done a verse by verse in Rev concernin Postmill this is Suspicious...😮
Still waiting for the definition of postmillennialism. I love James White and listen to him all the time, but postmillennialism still doesn't make any sense and he didn't even seem to try to convince me of this doctrine in this video. I wonder how much he actually believes in this. I appreciate how gracious he is towards other eschatological views.
Postmillennialism is the view that the current church age coincides with the millennium. At the death, burial and glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ, Satan was, in a sense, bound (Revelation 20:1-3). The Kingdom of God that Jesus brought into the world at His First Advent (Colossians 1:13) is really the millennial reign of Christ, Who now reigns in the heavens at the right hand of God the Father. The millennium is now 2000 years and counting. Unlike the Old Testament age in which mainly Israel served Yahweh -- the true and living God -- God is now served throughout the entire globe by millions of Gentiles -+ something that was almost unheard of in the Old Testament. The Kingdom is expanding because Satan has been restricted by the Lord. Remember, the Gentile nations all served Baal, Chemosh, Ra, along with other pagan gods.
IF you believed the Bible is God's word there is no way you would preach the lie of postmillennialism ..............
Wasn’t defined
postmil:
those who see chapter 20 of revelation as Christ coming back to earth after 1,000 years of basically peace and prosperity for Christianity, this is to begin some time in the future.. hope this helps!
This is the only subject where I see Dr White appeal to feelings rather than scripture. It has always been a disappointment trying to understand the basis for his conversion of eschatology as hinging on his hope for seeing grandchildren. I don't think the doctrine of eminency precludes a desire to see your descendants, but it would seem to detour changing end times beliefs to accommodate a hopefulness of a budding utopia for them.
The doctrine of imminency must be discarded ASAP. The failed prophetic suggestions in Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth that Jesus might return before 1988 has all but sounded the death knell of imminency
25:04 Marriage, kids, grandkids. Cool. Well that sucks for all us single people! (who are not single by choice). I guess we have no hope of maturing. Thanks for the words of encouragement
Such an uncharitable interpretation of what he said. He was saying that those events really change your view of life, not that you can’t mature until you experience them. The sarcasm you used makes you look bitter. It would probably be better to not comment at all if that is the only/main reaction you have to such a long video.
@@coltonm9278 thanks Colton. Maybe you’re right. And I like Dr. White and usually agree with him on most things. But I don’t think what I said was THAT uncharitable. That is what he said. Obviously I said it with sarcasm and the video has more substance than just that comment but he did spend a lot of time on it considering it was supposed to be a video about postmillennialism. I hear something like that and I just scratch my head and think “really? How can he not realize how that sounds to some people?”