The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics.

[jeffweeder]

The reason, I personally believe, Premill was the early position is because that was John's position in Rev 20. He taught Premill! And John's followers followed that position quite literally.

So why was this position abandoned for Amill?

No way Randy.
Johns position was the revelation Given him by Jesus.
Jesus clearly alluded to An Amill framework in the Gospels When teaching about his own coming.
Study every reference he gave and it should become clear to you all.

God bless

 

[Randy Kluth]

It is a figurative term in Scripture and history. What is more, the text oozes symbolism. Finally, your view contradicts numerous Scripture that shows the second coming is the end of time, sin and sinners, crying and dying, disease and decay, Satan and his demons.

The text "oozes symbolism?" How so? Many of the earliest Church Fathers didn't think so, apparently! For them, it "oozed" literalism! ;)

 

[WPM]

Text “oozing” symbolism. Men love to tag Scripture with terms, of symbolism, not literal, blah, blah....

Personally I trust the simplicity THAT God CAN NOT LIE, THAT the WORD of God CAN NOT LIE...

YOUR CALIM...my view “contradicts numerous Scripture” ?
Nah!
I understand, this day, that day, these days, those days, IN Context.

Matt 24: gives a prelude..
[3] And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
[4] And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
[5] For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
[6] And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
[7] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
[8] All these are the beginning of sorrows.
[9] Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
[10] And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
[11] And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
[12] And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
[13] But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
[14] And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

All nations shall Hear the Gospel...
Since you are UNBELIEVING, of Jesus’ 1,000 year reign, you obviously are UNKNOWING, Jesus’ shall Reign as KING of kings, LORD of lords...
“Those kings and lords” are mortals reigning over their own Nations outside of Jesus’ KINGDOM!
Satan loosed After 1,000 years, expressly DOES WHAT?
Deceives the Nations of mortal kings, lords, and people of those Nations!
Satan Deceives the Nations, TO DO WHAT?
Come AGAINST Jesus’ KINGDOM!
The kings, the lords, the people who come AGAINST KING Jesus, LORD Jesus, shall be killed.
Satan coming against the Nations, against Jesus’ Holy Angels SHALL be defeated and bound in the pits of Hell.

THEN shall “THIS” world end...in complete harmony between Matt & Revelations Teaching!

Read the text instead of voicing your opinion all the time. After the great commission is the end. Hello! Every text proves that, including Revelation 19. Revelation 20 takes us back to the first resurrection. It relates to Christ defeating Satan during His earthly ministry and thus defeating Hades for the redeemed.

None of your supposed supporting text mentions a future millennium. All we await is eternity.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There is no need for posting endless historical scholarly material proving that historical arguments exist in the Amil vs. Premill controversy. For much of Church history, Amil has had a dominant position. However, in the earliest part of Church history, Premil was dominant. I will here provide evidence of that, in brief. You can check out the url if you wish to read more.

I would quote here from a Dispensationalist website, Liberty University, which gives a brief view of this from the Premill perspective. I'm not a Dispensationalist, but I find the statements credible and scholarly on this particular subject. Premill appears to be dominant early on.

The reason, I personally believe, Premill was the early position is because that was John's position in Rev 20. He taught Premill! And John's followers followed that position quite literally.

So why was this position abandoned for Amill? It was abandoned because in the OT Scriptures the eschatological Kingdom of God was closely associated with Israel's renaissance and restoration. At that time, only Israel was God's people, and only they were addressed with respect to God's Kingdom.

It's not that other nations were being left out of the future Messianic Kingdom, but that only Israel was the audience in the OT period. And so, as Christians saw the hard-heartedness of the Jewish nation, they began to challenge the Premill view of the Kingdom in which Israel had a dominant position.

And I don't disagree with the idea of equality among nations in the Millennium. This was basically just a misunderstanding of OT prophecy as it addressed Israel exclusively, without excluding other nations from the same inheritance. But the root cause was doubt that Jewish hard-heartedness could ever be cured. And certainly, many generations of hard-hearted Jewish majorities were indeed incapable of leading the nation to repentance.

But what added to the Amil trend after a couple of centuries of Premill belief was the rise of the Catholic Church, which wanted to view itself as "God's present Kingdom," which is another form of Amill. Jesus, however, never gave up on Israel's ultimate restoration, and he never ceased to depict the eschatological Kingdom as being *future,* beginning at his Coming.


I provide this because in this thread and elsewhere I'm told "I have nothing" to offer in this regard. I could post in detail support for all of my statements. But this is a tactic to shut down close scrutiny with an avalanche of quotes, which are not needed except on occasion.

So here is evidence by Liberty University that Premill was the early dominant position. The modern rise of Premill seems, in my view, to take place in conjunction with the fall of Catholic dominance and with the rise of questions about its eschatology.


It is generally recognized within the scholarly world of early church historians that premillennialism was the most widely held view of the earliest church tradition. One of the leading experts on the doctrine of the early church is J. N. D. Kelly, who says, “millenarianism, or the theory that the returned Christ would reign on earth for a thousand years, came to find increasing support among Christian teachers. . . . This millenarian, or 'chiliastic', doctrine was widely popular at this time.”17 "The great theologians who followed the Apologists, Irenaeus, Tertullian and Hippolytus, were primarily concerned to defend the traditional eschatological scheme against Gnosticism,” explains Kelly. “They are all exponents of millenarianism." 18 Philip Schaff, the dean of American church historians and himself a postmillennialist, provided the following summary of the early church’s view of the millennium: The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, that is the belief of a visible reign of Christ in glory on earth with the risen saints for a thousand years, before the general resurrection and judgment. It was indeed not the doctrine of the church embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius. 19 European scholar and church historian, Adolph Harnack echoes Schaff and tells us, “First in point of time came the faith in the nearness of Christ’s second advent and the establishing of His reign of glory on the earth. Indeed it appears so early that it might be questioned whether it ought not to be regarded as an essential part of the Christian religion.” (https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1021&context=pretrib_arch)

This is flat out ridiculous and completely biased. I think even the early church father and premil Justin Martyr would laugh at this nonsense.

He said this in the early or maybe mid 100s:

"I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion (temporal 1000 year reign), and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise." (Dialogue with Trypho, CHAPTER LXXX -- THE OPINION OF JUSTIN WITH REGARD TO THE REIGN OF A THOUSAND YEARS.)

 

[WPM]

The text "oozes symbolism?" How so? Many of the earliest Church Fathers didn't think so, apparently! For them, it "oozed" literalism! ;)

Which ones? You come out with these claims but fail to provide hard historic support. That is because you don't have a clue about what you are talking about. You depend on flawed and bias Premil web pages that are as ill-researched and ignorant as you.

You are way out of your depth. Nothing + nothing = nothing. Every post is reinforcing the veracity of the Op.

 

[covenantee]

[6] And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
[7] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

They did, and there were.

WARS AND RUMORS OF WARS

Matthew: "And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars. See that ye be not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom" (24:6,7).

Mark: "And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled; for such things must needs be, but the end is not yet, For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom" (13:7, 8).

Luke: "But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified; for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by [immediately]. Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom (21:9,10).

We are told that when Jesus gave this prophecy, the Roman Empire was experiencing a general peace within its borders. Jesus explained to his disciples that they would be hearing of wars, rumors of wars, and commotions. And did they? Yes. Within a short time the Empire was filled with strife, insurrection, and wars.

Before the fall of Jerusalem, four Emperors came to violent deaths within the space of 18 months. According to the historian Suetonius (who lived during the latter part of the first century and the beginning of the second), Nero "drove a dagger into his throat.'' Galba was run down by horsemen. A soldier cut off his head and "thrusting his thumb into the mouth," carried the horrid trophy about. Otho "stabbed himself" in the breast. Vitellius was killed by slow torture and then "dragged by a hook into the Tiber." We can understand that such fate falling on the Emperors would naturally spread distress and insecurity through the Empire.

In the Annals of Tacitus, a Roman who wrote a history which covers the period prior to 70 A. D., we find such expressions as these: "Disturbances in Germany," "commotions in Africa," "commotions in Thrace," "insurrections in Gaul," "intrigues among the Parthians," "the war in Britain," "war in Armenia."

Among the Jews, the times became turbulent. In Seleucia, 50,000 Jews were killed. There was an uprising against them in Alexandria. In a battle between the Jews and Syrians in Caesarea, 20,000 were killed. During these times, Caligula ordered his statue placed in the temple at Jerusalem. The Jews refused to do this and lived in constant fear that the Emperor's armies would be sent into Palestine. This fear became so real that some of them did not even bother to till their fields.

But though there would be wars, rumours of wars, and commotions, Jesus told his disciples: "See that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the END is not yet." The word "end" that is used here is not the same Greek word as in the expression "end of the world." As [theologian Albert] Barnes says, the end here referred to is "the end of the Jewish economy; the destruction of Jerusalem."

Wars, rumors of wars, and commotions were of a general nature. These things were not signs of the end; to the contrary, they were given to show that the end was NOT yet. None of these things would be the sign which would cause the disciples to flee into the mountains.

FAMINES, PESTILENCES, EARTHQUAKES

Matthew. "And there shall be famines and pestilences, and earthquakes in divers places, all these are the beginning of sorrows (24:7,8).

Mark: "And there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles. These are the beginning of sorrows" (13:8).

Luke: "And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines and pestilences, and fearful sights" (21:11).

The Bible records that there was famine "throughout all the world...in the days of Claudius Caesar (Acts 11:28). Judea was especially hard hit by famine. "The disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea" (verse 29). Paul's instructions concerning this "collection [of fruit] for the saints" is recorded in First Corinthians 16:1-5; Rom. 15:25-28.

Historians such as Suetonius and others mention famine during those years. Tacitus speaks of a "failure in the crops, and a famine consequent thereupon." Eusebius also mentions famines during this time in Rome, Judea, and Greece. Yes, there were famines in those years before the fall of Jerusalem.

Along with famines, Jesus mentioned pestilence; that is, plagues, the spread of disease, epidemics. Famine and pestilence, of course, go hand in hand. When people do not have proper food or insufficient food, pestilence results. Suetonius wrote of "pestilence" at Rome in the days of Nero which was so severe that "within the space of one autumn there died no less than 30,000 persons." Josephus records that pestilences raged in Babylonia in A. D. 40. Tacitus tells of pestilences in Italy in A. D. 65. Yes, there were pestilences in those years before the destruction of Jerusalem.

During this period, Jesus said there would also be earthquakes in many places. Tacitus mentions earthquakes at Rome. He wrote that "Frequent earthquakes occurred, by which many houses were thrown down" and that "twelve populous cities of Asia fell in ruins from an earthquake."

Seneca, writing in the year 58 A. D., said: "How often have cities of Asia and Achaea fallen with one fatal shock! how many cities have been swallowed up in Syria! how many in Macedonia! how often has Cyprus been wasted by this calamity ! how often has Paphos become a ruin! News has often been brought us of the demolition of whole cities at once." He mentions the earthquake at Campania during the reign of Nero. In 60 A.D., Hierapous, Colosse, and Laodicea were overthrown—Laodicea being so self-sufficient that it recovered without the Imperial aid furnished other cities. In 63 A.D,, the city of Pompeii was greatly damaged by earthquake. There were earthquakes in Crete, Apamea, Smyrna, Miletus, Chios, Samos, and Judea. Earthquakes in divers places.

Source: "Great Prophecies of the Bible" by Ralph Woodrow

 

[covenantee]

[14] And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

And it was.

GOSPEL TO BE PREACHED TO THE NATIONS

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then [not until then] shall the end come" (Mt. 24:14). Unless we take this verse clear out of its setting, "the end" in view here is the end or destruction which was to come upon Jerusalem and the temple. This was the question that Jesus was answering in the verses before, and the verses that follow are still speaking about Jerusalem and Judea. Jerusalem would be destroyed, but "first" the gospel would be preached unto all nations (Mk. 13:10).

It was a tremendous prophecy. Picture the scene. Here on the mount of Olives, Jesus was speaking these words to seemingly insignificant men. Who would have supposed that the names of these humble men would become known around the world and that even in our day—almost 2,000 years later—the seeds of truth that they planted would still be producing fruit? Who would have supposed that this unpopular gospel that Christ committed to these men would ever spread beyond that immediate area? Such a vast preaching program unto all nations seemed almost impossible of fulfillment. But it was fulfilled, and in a very real sense the gospel did go to all nations before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. D..

On the day of Pentecost when the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, there were present in Jerusalem "devout men, out of every nation under heaven" (Acts 2:5). They heard the gospel preached by Peter and 3,000 were converted that day. Many of these, no doubt, returned to their various countries and preached the gospel.

Later when persecution came against the church, the believers at Jerusalem were scattered and "went every where preaching the word", throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1,4). Philip took the message to the city of Samaria with great results (verses 5-8). Later he was directed to a high ranking government official from Ethiopia who was gloriously converted (verses 26-40). It is believed that this man took the message to the continent of Africa and many were converted because of his influential testimony.

Peter took the message to the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius, an event that was a turning point in the missionary activities of the church (Acts 10, 11). The book of Acts gives a sketch of the mighty missionary work that advanced rapidly.

The message spread to Rome. By the time of Nero, the Christians had grown so numerous that they aroused the jealousy of the government. The story of the great fire in Rome in 64 A. D. —for which the Christians were falsely blamed—is well known. In writing to the Christians at Rome, Paul opens his epistle by saying, "Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world" (Rom. 1:8), and his closing words talk about the gospel as having been "made known to all nations for the obedience of faith" (16:26).

Concerning even far away England, Newton says: "There is absolute certainty that Christianity was planted in this country in the days of the apostles, before the destruction of Jerusalem." Eusebius and also Theodoret inform us that the apostles preached the gospel in all the world and some of them "passed beyond the ocean to the Britannic isles."

By the time Paul wrote his letter to the Colossians, he could say: 'The gospel...is come unto you, as it is in all the world" (Col. 1:6). Likewise, in verse 23, he mentions '"the gospel which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven."

By 70 A. D., the gospel had gone forth to the world for a witness. No longer was God's message to man confined to one nation or race.

Source: "Great Prophecies of the Bible" by Ralph Woodrow

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You keep saying things like this but refuse to address explicit passages that talk about the removal and replacement of the old earth with a new earth.

Jesus said in Matthew 24:35-44: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.”

Jesus says “Heaven and earth shall pass away" you say "no, that will not happen Jesus, i know better."

2 Peter 3:3-13: “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of His coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

Peter says “the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved," you say "no, that will not happen Peter, i know better."

Revelation 20:11-15 – 21:1-5: “And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away (or departed). And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new.”

John says “I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away," you say "no, that will not happen John, i know better."

I'm afraid, Amils go with Jesus, Peter and John here rather than Randy.

Well said. To think that some Premils accuse us Amils of spiritualizing everything. Yet, our doctrine is founded primarily on taking passages like Matthew 25:35-44 and 2 Peter 3:3-13 literally. So, their accusations are clearly false since Amils are often take scripture more literally than Premils.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That's historically what happened in Christian history, especially with the establishing of the western Christian nations when The Gospel was received on huge scales. The Church begin to think by the spread of Christianity and power among nations, that the millennial reign of Jesus Christ must then have begun, which is why they wrongly began thinking of the Kingdom established here now on earth, which it has only in Spirit, and not literally yet.

Oh, the kingdom has "only" been established in Spirit? That's all. I guess that isn't very significant to you. LOL. Ridiculous.

 

[Randy Kluth]

No way Randy.
Johns position was the revelation Given him by Jesus.
Jesus clearly alluded to An Amill framework in the Gospels When teaching about his own coming.
Study every reference he gave and it should become clear to you all.

God bless

I appreciate you can disagree agreeably, brother! God bless you too!

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is flat out ridiculous and completely biased. I think even the early church father and premil Justin Martyr would laugh at this nonsense.

He said this in the early or maybe mid 100s:

"I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion (temporal 1000 year reign), and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise." (Dialogue with Trypho, CHAPTER LXXX -- THE OPINION OF JUSTIN WITH REGARD TO THE REIGN OF A THOUSAND YEARS.)

I don't understand. The quote I provided from Liberty University is "ridiculous and completely biased?" Why don't you and WPM actually respond to what's in the statement?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Which ones? You come out with these claims but fail to provide hard historic support. That is because you don't have a clue about what you are talking about. You depend on flawed and bias Premil web pages that are as ill-researched and ignorant as you.

You are way out of your depth. Nothing + nothing = nothing. Every post is reinforcing the veracity of the Op.

Instead of trading insults, I'll provide the info that you indicate is "too deep for me," and material that you apparently think is "beneath you."

Again, it is available on the website from Liberty U.:

A BRIEF HISTORY OF EARLY PREMILLENNIALISM
Tom's Perspectives
by Thomas Ice
I believe that premillennialism is so clearly taught in Revelation 19 and 20 that I still
cannot understand how anyone can think otherwise without realizing deep down that
they are going against the biblical text. A kingdom reign of the Messiah was just as
clearly taught in the Old Testament. Jesus and His Scripture writing disciples also
support the notion of an earthly kingdom headed by the Messiah. Such clearness in the
Bible provides the likely reason why the early church fathers who spoke on this matter
were all premillennialists.
THE FIRST PREMILLENNIALISTS
The first premillennialists were those who received God’s revelation and wrote it
down in the Bible. Eusebius tells us that one of the earliest church fathers that had
heard the Apostle John and others who had known the Lord and His Apostles was
Papias (A.D. 60–130) the bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, Asia Minor. Papias taught
“that there will be a millennium after the resurrection of the dead, when the kingdom of
Christ will be set up in material form on this earth.”1 Irenaeus (A.D. 130–202) tells us
that Papias “related that they had heard from him how the Lord used to teach in regard
to these times” (the millennium) in book 4 of Papias’ writings, which are no longer
extant, except a few fragments. Papias is recorded as saying: “there will be a
millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will
be established on this earth.”2 Polycarp (A.D. 70–155), bishop of Smyrna, is also said to
have been a premillennialist.
3 The Epistle of Barnabas (written between A.D. 120–150)
presents the common belief that “in six thousand years, all things will be finished. . . .
then shall He truly rest on the seventh day.” The writer speaks of the second coming of
Christ with the clear implication that He will set up the thousand year kingdom on
earth, followed by the eight day or the eternal state.
4Justin Martyr (A.D. 100–165) in his Dialogue With Trypho (@ A.D. 140), a Jewish man,
made the following premillennial statement:
But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured
that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in
Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, as the prophets
Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.
5
Justin considered premillennialism an aspect of orthodoxy in his day.
And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of
the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him,
that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in
Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal
resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.
6IRENAEUS AND TERTULLIAN
Two of the greatest ante-Nicene fathers were Irenaeus and Tertullian (A.D. 160–230).
Irenaeus grew up in Asia Minor and was discipled by Polycarp, who knew the Apostle
John. Irenaeus had a very extensive view of Bible prophecy in his last five chapters of
Premillennial History — Page
Against Heresies, which were suppressed throughout the Middle Ages by antipremillennialists and rediscovered in 1571.7 The restoration of a more literal
interpretation and reading of the early church fathers by many post-Reformationists led
to a revival of premillennialism in the early 1600s.
8 Irenaeus’ writings played a key role
because of their clear premillennial statements. “John, therefore, did distinctly foresee
the first ‘resurrection of the just,’ and the inheritance in the kingdom of the earth,” he
says, “and what the prophets have prophesied concerning it harmonize [with his
vision].”9 Again, Irenaeus declares:But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will
reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and
then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father,
sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing
in for the righteous the times of the kingdom.
10
Tertullian, who gave us the Latin word “Trinity,” was also a strong premillennialist.
He makes his premillennialism clear when he says the following:
But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although
before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after
the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem,
“let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from
above;” and, while declaring that our citizenship is in heaven, he predicts of it
that it is really a city in heaven. This both Ezekiel had knowledge of and the
Apostle John beheld.
11

 

[Randy Kluth]

Read the text instead of voicing your opinion all the time. After the great commission is the end. Hello! Every text proves that, including Revelation 19. Revelation 20 takes us back to the first resurrection. It relates to Christ defeating Satan during His earthly ministry and thus defeating Hades for the redeemed.

None of your supposed supporting text mentions a future millennium. All we await is eternity.

The "end" is the end of the age, and not the end of time in history. The "age" has to do with the time of Jewish Punishment, which Jesus said would last "until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled," which refers to the time of Gentile opposition to God's Kingdom.

 

[WPM]

Instead of trading insults, I'll provide the info that you indicate is "too deep for me," and material that you apparently think is "beneath you."

Again, it is available on the website from Liberty U.:

A BRIEF HISTORY OF EARLY PREMILLENNIALISM
Tom's Perspectives
by Thomas Ice
I believe that premillennialism is so clearly taught in Revelation 19 and 20 that I still
cannot understand how anyone can think otherwise without realizing deep down that
they are going against the biblical text. A kingdom reign of the Messiah was just as
clearly taught in the Old Testament. Jesus and His Scripture writing disciples also
support the notion of an earthly kingdom headed by the Messiah. Such clearness in the
Bible provides the likely reason why the early church fathers who spoke on this matter
were all premillennialists.
THE FIRST PREMILLENNIALISTS
The first premillennialists were those who received God’s revelation and wrote it
down in the Bible. Eusebius tells us that one of the earliest church fathers that had
heard the Apostle John and others who had known the Lord and His Apostles was
Papias (A.D. 60–130) the bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, Asia Minor. Papias taught
“that there will be a millennium after the resurrection of the dead, when the kingdom of
Christ will be set up in material form on this earth.”1 Irenaeus (A.D. 130–202) tells us
that Papias “related that they had heard from him how the Lord used to teach in regard
to these times” (the millennium) in book 4 of Papias’ writings, which are no longer
extant, except a few fragments. Papias is recorded as saying: “there will be a
millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will
be established on this earth.”2 Polycarp (A.D. 70–155), bishop of Smyrna, is also said to
have been a premillennialist.
3 The Epistle of Barnabas (written between A.D. 120–150)
presents the common belief that “in six thousand years, all things will be finished. . . .
then shall He truly rest on the seventh day.” The writer speaks of the second coming of
Christ with the clear implication that He will set up the thousand year kingdom on
earth, followed by the eight day or the eternal state.
4Justin Martyr (A.D. 100–165) in his Dialogue With Trypho (@ A.D. 140), a Jewish man,
made the following premillennial statement:
But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured
that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in
Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, as the prophets
Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.
5
Justin considered premillennialism an aspect of orthodoxy in his day.
And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of
the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him,
that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in
Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal
resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.
6IRENAEUS AND TERTULLIAN
Two of the greatest ante-Nicene fathers were Irenaeus and Tertullian (A.D. 160–230).
Irenaeus grew up in Asia Minor and was discipled by Polycarp, who knew the Apostle
John. Irenaeus had a very extensive view of Bible prophecy in his last five chapters of
Premillennial History — Page
Against Heresies, which were suppressed throughout the Middle Ages by antipremillennialists and rediscovered in 1571.7 The restoration of a more literal
interpretation and reading of the early church fathers by many post-Reformationists led
to a revival of premillennialism in the early 1600s.
8 Irenaeus’ writings played a key role
because of their clear premillennial statements. “John, therefore, did distinctly foresee
the first ‘resurrection of the just,’ and the inheritance in the kingdom of the earth,” he
says, “and what the prophets have prophesied concerning it harmonize [with his
vision].”9 Again, Irenaeus declares:But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will
reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and
then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father,
sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing
in for the righteous the times of the kingdom.
10
Tertullian, who gave us the Latin word “Trinity,” was also a strong premillennialist.
He makes his premillennialism clear when he says the following:
But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although
before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after
the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem,
“let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from
above;” and, while declaring that our citizenship is in heaven, he predicts of it
that it is really a city in heaven. This both Ezekiel had knowledge of and the
Apostle John beheld.
11

What? Your rebuttal is Thomas Ice. Honestly? The main advocate of the Pretrib hoax in America and the Left Behind novels. Enough said! This confirms everything I have been alleging about your ignorance of this subject. Your reliance upon Ice steals the biscuit. This confirms everything I have suspected. How do you expect any of us to take you seriously on this thread?

Why am I not shocked?

Ice is totally discredited in many orthodox circles.

 

[covenantee]

Instead of trading insults, I'll provide the info that you indicate is "too deep for me," and material that you apparently think is "beneath you."

Again, it is available on the website from Liberty U.:

A BRIEF HISTORY OF EARLY PREMILLENNIALISM
Tom's Perspectives
by Thomas Ice
I believe that premillennialism is so clearly taught in Revelation 19 and 20 that I still
cannot understand how anyone can think otherwise without realizing deep down that
they are going against the biblical text. A kingdom reign of the Messiah was just as
clearly taught in the Old Testament. Jesus and His Scripture writing disciples also
support the notion of an earthly kingdom headed by the Messiah. Such clearness in the
Bible provides the likely reason why the early church fathers who spoke on this matter
were all premillennialists.
THE FIRST PREMILLENNIALISTS
The first premillennialists were those who received God’s revelation and wrote it
down in the Bible. Eusebius tells us that one of the earliest church fathers that had
heard the Apostle John and others who had known the Lord and His Apostles was
Papias (A.D. 60–130) the bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, Asia Minor. Papias taught
“that there will be a millennium after the resurrection of the dead, when the kingdom of
Christ will be set up in material form on this earth.”1 Irenaeus (A.D. 130–202) tells us
that Papias “related that they had heard from him how the Lord used to teach in regard
to these times” (the millennium) in book 4 of Papias’ writings, which are no longer
extant, except a few fragments. Papias is recorded as saying: “there will be a
millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will
be established on this earth.”2 Polycarp (A.D. 70–155), bishop of Smyrna, is also said to
have been a premillennialist.
3 The Epistle of Barnabas (written between A.D. 120–150)
presents the common belief that “in six thousand years, all things will be finished. . . .
then shall He truly rest on the seventh day.” The writer speaks of the second coming of
Christ with the clear implication that He will set up the thousand year kingdom on
earth, followed by the eight day or the eternal state.
4Justin Martyr (A.D. 100–165) in his Dialogue With Trypho (@ A.D. 140), a Jewish man,
made the following premillennial statement:
But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured
that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in
Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, as the prophets
Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.
5
Justin considered premillennialism an aspect of orthodoxy in his day.
And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of
the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him,
that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in
Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal
resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.
6IRENAEUS AND TERTULLIAN
Two of the greatest ante-Nicene fathers were Irenaeus and Tertullian (A.D. 160–230).
Irenaeus grew up in Asia Minor and was discipled by Polycarp, who knew the Apostle
John. Irenaeus had a very extensive view of Bible prophecy in his last five chapters of
Premillennial History — Page
Against Heresies, which were suppressed throughout the Middle Ages by antipremillennialists and rediscovered in 1571.7 The restoration of a more literal
interpretation and reading of the early church fathers by many post-Reformationists led
to a revival of premillennialism in the early 1600s.
8 Irenaeus’ writings played a key role
because of their clear premillennial statements. “John, therefore, did distinctly foresee
the first ‘resurrection of the just,’ and the inheritance in the kingdom of the earth,” he
says, “and what the prophets have prophesied concerning it harmonize [with his
vision].”9 Again, Irenaeus declares:But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will
reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and
then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father,
sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing
in for the righteous the times of the kingdom.
10
Tertullian, who gave us the Latin word “Trinity,” was also a strong premillennialist.
He makes his premillennialism clear when he says the following:
But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although
before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after
the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem,
“let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from
above;” and, while declaring that our citizenship is in heaven, he predicts of it
that it is really a city in heaven. This both Ezekiel had knowledge of and the
Apostle John beheld.
11

Irenaeus left no time for a millennium.

“For in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall it be concluded. And for this reason the Scripture says: "Thus the heaven and the earth were finished, and all their adornment. And God brought to a conclusion upon the sixth day the works that He had made; and God rested upon the seventh day from all His works." This is an account of the things formerly created, as also it is a prophecy of what is to come. For the day of the Lord is as a thousand years; and in six days created things were completed: it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the sixth thousand year." (Against Heresies, 5:28:3)

 

[WPM]

The "end" is the end of the age, and not the end of time in history. The "age" has to do with the time of Jewish Punishment, which Jesus said would last "until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled," which refers to the time of Gentile opposition to God's Kingdom.

The unindoctrinated Bible student should have no difficulty in understanding the meaning and weightiness of the phrases/events “the beginning” and “the end.” That is because they actually mean what they say. These expressions are often used on their own throughout Scripture because the Holy Spirit evidently expects the believer to take God literally at His Word and accept these plain and obvious statements at face value.

Whether one is reading a book, watching a movie, or observing a ball-game, the concept of “the beginning” and “the end” of something is too obvious to even debate or explain. Hello! It is as clear as clear can be. We are talking about normal 101 common sense. One is the complete antithesis of the other.

 

[Christian Gedge]

Of course, Premils have to limit the destruction that occurs at the coming of Christ in 2 Peter 3 in order to explain away this explicit text. Some try to assign a limited localized extent to the devastation; others try to restrict it to the land or ground above water. They do this by diluting down the meaning of the references to “heavens” and “earth” (ouranos and gē) and especially in regard to the Greek word gē translated earth. They contend we should view this word as ground, land or soil (or the outer surface) of the earth, not necessarily the whole globe. ouranos they say alludes to a part of the atmosphere.

With this latter approach there are many major difficulties. The most notable is the fact that the Holy Spirit uses these two words (ouranos and gē) consistently in the Word to describe the “heavens” and “earth.” A further significant inconsistency arrives when you arrive at Revelation 20 – the main Premil proof text. ouranos and gē are used at the end of Revelation 20 to described the destruction of the heavens and the earth. Every Premil scholar that addresses this much-debated chapter insists on a literal interpretation of the same. There is no thought that these two words refer to just a part of the atmosphere and or a part of the earth as some Premils suggest. The heavens and earth (ouranos and gē) come to an end. Of course this correlates beautifully with 2 Peter 3, giving us another picture of the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

May I suggest that anyone who reads 2 Peter 3 compares it with Zephaniah. There is no way in my mind that our solar system is only gonna get singed on top.

 

[WPM]

May I suggest that anyone who reads 2 Peter 3 compares it with Zephaniah. There is no way in my mind that our solar system is only gonna get singed on top.

Good to see you.

Which chapter bro?

 

[Randy Kluth]

What? Your rebuttal is Thomas Ice. Honestly? The main advocate of the Pretrib hoax in America and the Left Behind novels. Enough said! This confirms everything I have been alleging about your ignorance of this subject. Your reliance upon Ice steals the biscuit. This confirms everything I have suspected. How do you expect any of us to take you seriously on this thread?

Why am I not shocked?

Ice is totally discredited in many orthodox circles.

Ice is not the point. The representations of what the mentioned Church Fathers believed is the point. I'm not a Pretrib, but I'm using him on behalf of Premill, which I do agree with. He cites Church Fathers who were Premill. You said I provide nothing. You aren't correct. You just wish to ignore it.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The unindoctrinated Bible student should have no difficulty in understanding the meaning and weightiness of the phrases/events “the beginning” and “the end.” That is because they actually mean what they say. These expressions are often used on their own throughout Scripture because the Holy Spirit evidently expects the believer to take God literally at His Word and accept these plain and obvious statements at face value.

Whether one is reading a book, watching a movie, or observing a ball-game, the concept of “the beginning” and “the end” of something is too obvious to even debate or explain. Hello! It is as clear as clear can be. We are talking about normal 101 common sense. One is the complete antithesis of the other.

No, face value only means what it does in context. I'm surprised that you would relegate "context" to 2nd place or worse.

The beginning of what? The end of what? In context, the Bible refers to Israel's punishments as time periods, or ages. In the Gospels, Jesus identified the period of NT judgment as an age. The context indicates that age will end when the "times of the Gentiles" come to an end.