Page 5 of 65 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151655 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 969

Thread: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW View Post
    Randy, you're putting words into their mouths. The early Premil is not saying Satan's binding will take place at the end of the age, when Christ returns and reigns for a thousand years...you are! So rather than accept the words actually written by them, you try to imagine what they might have meant instead. That's a pretty convenient way of making them say whatever fits your doctrine.
    No, I'm saying that the *Apostle John* wrote that Satan's binding will take place at the end of the age. And that is "early Premil!" Early Christian Fathers later talked about Satan's binding at the cross, and that was in an entirely different, non-eschatological sense. It had to do with Christ's work on the cross in defeating the Devil. That's what I said!

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW
    Again, guessing what might have been in the mind of the writer rather than to accept what is written.

    Frankly Randy, not to be rude, but why should we accept what you think they may have been thinking, and ignore that which is plainly stated?

    ECF who appear to have been Premill according to what you THINK they MIGHT have meant??? Why not simply accept what they have written and stop trying to re-write what they have written to fit Premill?
    I've read some of these things, Roger. That's what I got out of them. It makes far more sense to me than your version. Respectfully....

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,361
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW View Post
    Justin shows that he believed the thousand years are eternity on the new heaven and new earth when he quotes Isaiah speaking of the new heaven and the new earth.

    Chapter LXXXI.—He endeavours to prove this opinion from Isaiah and the Apocalypse.

    “For Isaiah spake thus concerning this space of a thousand years: ‘For there shall be the new heaven and the new earth, and the former shall not be remembered, or come into their heart; but they shall find joy and gladness in it, which things I create. For, Behold, I make Jerusalem a rejoicing, and My people a joy; and I shall rejoice over Jerusalem, and be glad over My people. And the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, or the voice of crying. And there shall be no more there a person of immature years, or an old man who shall not fulfil his days.2265 For the young man shall be an hundred years old;2266 but the sinner who dies an hundred years old,2267 he shall be accursed. And they shall build houses, and shall themselves inhabit them; and they shall plant vines, and shall themselves eat the produce of them, and drink the wine. They shall not build, and others inhabit; they shall not plant, and others eat. For according to the days of the tree of life shall be the days of my people; the works of their toil shall abound.2268 Mine elect shall not toil fruitlessly, or beget children to be cursed; for they shall be a seed righteous and blessed by the Lord, and their offspring with them. And it shall come to pass, that before they call I will hear; while they are still speaking, I shall say, What is it? Then shall the wolves and the lambs feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the ox; but the serpent [shall eat] earth as bread. They shall not hurt or maltreat each other on the holy mountain, saith the Lord.’2269 Now we have understood that the expression used among these words, ‘According to the days of the tree [of life2270] shall be the days of my people; the works of their toil shall abound’ obscurely predicts a thousand years. For as Adam was told that in the day he ate of the tree he would die, we know that he did not 240 complete a thousand years. We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’2271 is connected with this subject. 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 dwell2272 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. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’

    It is not I who believes the thousand years symbolize eternity, but it certainly appears to be how the ECF interpret this reference to TIME in eternity.

    Blessings,
    RW
    roger, this convo is frustrating because you do not seem to understand the historic premill position. Historic premills believe the NHNE begins at the 2nd coming just as Justin did. Afterwards, There is a 1000 years, then "thereafter" the GWT.

    To make the 1000 symbolically the same as the 1000 years (thus erasing the millennium) is nonsense and makes justin look stupid to say "thereafter" if there is no "after" in your opinion

  3. #63

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Beginner View Post
    roger, this convo is frustrating because you do not seem to understand the historic premill position. Historic premills believe the NHNE begins at the 2nd coming just as Justin did. Afterwards, There is a 1000 years, then "thereafter" the GWT.

    To make the 1000 symbolically the same as the 1000 years (thus erasing the millennium) is nonsense and makes justin look stupid to say "thereafter" if there is no "after" in your opinion
    It's not erasing the millennium, it's shows that Justin Martyr, like Premill lacks understanding of eternity. In his mind the thousand years, though he believed they had an end, were found in eternity. And that my friend cannot be! You cannot argue that eternity begins with TIME that has an end. It is because Justin believed the thousand years were in eternity that he quotes the prophet Isaiah, likening it to the thousand years.

    Blessings,
    RW

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW View Post
    The thousand years do NOT follow the second coming. And since the saints are given immortality at Christ's coming, they have no more fear of death, sin or Satan. None of those things can touch the immortal saints after Christ comes again. To be precise, according to Amil, the saints have eternal life in Christ the moment they believe. And then when Christ comes again after time is finished they will have immortal bodies to be re-united with their eternal souls.

    Blessings,
    RW
    What a nonsensical response to a perfectly legitimate argument. David pointed out that *for Premils* eternity begins at the beginning of the Millennium *when the Church is resurrected and glorified.* That stands against your argument that the Millennial Age cannot be a segment of eternity!

    You are just falling back on your Amil argument--not responding to the Premil argument. You said a thousand year period cannot be part of an eternal period. That would be like saying a segment of a line cannot be part of an eternal line. Obviously, that is not true.

    What you're really arguing is that mortality on the old earth in the Millennium is so unlike your conception of eternity that they cannot be the same. For you, eternity means the eternal glorified state with no more sin, no more curse, no more unbelievers, no more wicked, no more corruption--just eternal bliss. And if this means anything else cannot be part of "eternity" you are right.

    But this is not how the Scriptures define eternity, nor necessarily how the ECFs defined eternity. I'm not sure the ECFs were even remotely concerned about these distinctions like you are? I think they were more concerned to prove that 1) Christ's Kingdom will literally come, in fulfillment of the Prophets, and 2) Christ's Kingdom will make an eternal change in the way the world operates, in accordance with biblical theology. The matter of defining "eternity" in this sense does not appear to be in their thinking. They are concerned to show only that the eternal Kingdom of Christ will come--without excessive concern about showing if mortality and immortality can coexist. In fact, one Church Father, Lactantius, does state this:

    “Then they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during those thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy, and beloved by God; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges.”

  5. #65

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    What a nonsensical response to a perfectly legitimate argument. David pointed out that *for Premils* eternity begins at the beginning of the Millennium *when the Church is resurrected and glorified.* That stands against your argument that the Millennial Age cannot be a segment of eternity!
    I would say it is nonsense to believe that eternity begins with time that has an end. How can it be eternity if any portion of it has an end? That is most assuredly nonsense!

    You are just falling back on your Amil argument--not responding to the Premil argument. You said a thousand year period cannot be part of an eternal period. That would be like saying a segment of a line cannot be part of an eternal line. Obviously, that is not true.
    So prove through the Scriptures that a time which has an end can be found in eternity???

    What you're really arguing is that mortality on the old earth in the Millennium is so unlike your conception of eternity that they cannot be the same. For you, eternity means the eternal glorified state with no more sin, no more curse, no more unbelievers, no more wicked, no more corruption--just eternal bliss. And if this means anything else cannot be part of "eternity" you are right.
    That is exactly how the eternal glorified state is depicted in Scripture.

    But this is not how the Scriptures define eternity, nor necessarily how the ECFs defined eternity. I'm not sure the ECFs were even remotely concerned about these distinctions like you are?
    I really don't think they gave much consideration to distinguishing between the thousand years and eternity.

    I think they were more concerned to prove that 1) Christ's Kingdom will literally come, in fulfillment of the Prophets, and 2) Christ's Kingdom will make an eternal change in the way the world operates, in accordance with biblical theology. The matter of defining "eternity" in this sense does not appear to be in their thinking. They are concerned to show only that the eternal Kingdom of Christ will come--without excessive concern about showing if mortality and immortality can coexist. In fact, one Church Father, Lactantius, does state this:

    “Then they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during those thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy, and beloved by God; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges.”
    I've already discarded Lactantius' doctrine regarding eternity. I've already shown the contradiction in his doctrine. But I can certainly understand why Premill wishes to cling tightly to his doctrine.

    Blessings,
    RW

  6. #66

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Beginner View Post
    Read it again... I put his name at the opening title line....


    Also, your the only human in this solar system that separates the classification of chiliast and premillennialist. The vast majority of Amill and post mill scholars have classified Lactantius as a chiliast
    You obviously have not read much on the subject. There is much more likeness between Amil and Postmil than ancient Chiliasm and modern Premil. We agree on much more than we disagree. We both believe on a climactic coming of Christ that sees an end of sin, death, corruption, the wicked and Satan. This is in total agreement also with ancient Chiliasm that stands with modern Amil and Postmil in anticipating a perfect new earth. What a difference to the Premil expectation of more of the same as our day.

    As has been seen by the recent Premil concessions, the only tenet were ancient Chiliasm and modern Premil agrees is a future 1000 years, but that is where it stops. The modern Premil expectation of restoring the whole OT Judaic sin blood sacrifice system, elevating Christ-rejecting Israel above the Gentiles, continued hatred, funerals, rape, disease, wars, Satan were anathema to the early church.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  7. #67

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    What a nonsensical response to a perfectly legitimate argument. David pointed out that *for Premils* eternity begins at the beginning of the Millennium *when the Church is resurrected and glorified.* That stands against your argument that the Millennial Age cannot be a segment of eternity!

    You are just falling back on your Amil argument--not responding to the Premil argument. You said a thousand year period cannot be part of an eternal period. That would be like saying a segment of a line cannot be part of an eternal line. Obviously, that is not true.

    What you're really arguing is that mortality on the old earth in the Millennium is so unlike your conception of eternity that they cannot be the same. For you, eternity means the eternal glorified state with no more sin, no more curse, no more unbelievers, no more wicked, no more corruption--just eternal bliss. And if this means anything else cannot be part of "eternity" you are right.

    But this is not how the Scriptures define eternity, nor necessarily how the ECFs defined eternity. I'm not sure the ECFs were even remotely concerned about these distinctions like you are? I think they were more concerned to prove that 1) Christ's Kingdom will literally come, in fulfillment of the Prophets, and 2) Christ's Kingdom will make an eternal change in the way the world operates, in accordance with biblical theology. The matter of defining "eternity" in this sense does not appear to be in their thinking. They are concerned to show only that the eternal Kingdom of Christ will come--without excessive concern about showing if mortality and immortality can coexist. In fact, one Church Father, Lactantius, does state this:

    “Then they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during those thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy, and beloved by God; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges.”
    How can eternity begin when time continues on your alleged future Millennial age. This temporary age you advocate is so corrupt that it needs replaced 1000+ years after its inception, swamped by billions of stiff-necked rebels who become instant Satan worshippers after suffering 1000 years of Christ's righteous rule.

  8. #68

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW View Post
    I would say it is nonsense to believe that eternity begins with time that has an end. How can it be eternity if any portion of it has an end? That is most assuredly nonsense!



    So prove through the Scriptures that a time which has an end can be found in eternity???



    That is exactly how the eternal glorified state is depicted in Scripture.



    I really don't think they gave much consideration to distinguishing between the thousand years and eternity.



    I've already discarded Lactantius' doctrine regarding eternity. I've already shown the contradiction in his doctrine. But I can certainly understand why Premill wishes to cling tightly to his doctrine.

    Blessings,
    RW
    Amen. And rightly so. What few Premils want to acknowledge is that Lactantius was the 1st to run with the modern Premil doctrine since Cerinthus the heretic (who is the 1st in history), and he based his theology on the pagan Sibyl prophetesses. Not healthy origins!

  9. #69

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Beginner View Post
    Barnabus ascribed to the millennial sabbath theory and said there was 6,000 years of human history under the curse. This is in step with the rest of the chilast. He then spoke of a 8th day which demands the presence of a 7th day. The strange and strained interpretation that you give trying to make the 8th day the same as the 7th requires great gymnastics. It requires that you make the first thousand years disappear and is logically unsound.



    Where did he mention a CURRENT 1000 years kingdom on this earth?



    Where did he mention a CURRENT 1000 years kingdom on this earth?
    So, what number was the Christian Sabbath known as?

    How many days are in a week?

  10. #70

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW View Post
    Yes, typical reply "if I say it is true, you must simply believe me" does not truth make. I would think this could all be put to rest once and for all if this so-called vast majority of historical theologians were simply produced!

    Blessings,
    RW
    Exactly! This is getting more like "my daddy is bigger than your daddy" rather than a serious objective historic evidencial discussion. The silence is deafening from the Premil camp. Barnabas is suddenly designated a Premil now because he used the phrase "future world" - which a Chiliast also used 100 years later. This is the ludicrous place the evidence has arrived at. This would quite frankly render you and me as Premils as we use the same language to describe the future eternal perfect age. Also, guilt by association is now being levelled at early writers. Basically if you ever knew a Chiliast you are a Chiliast. That would also me a Premil because I have mainly preached in Premil pulpits over this past 20 years. Honestly this type of evidence is so ridiculous it would be thrown out of every legitimate court in the land. If I would have furnished evidence like this to my superiors in the police in Northern Ireland it would never have reached court.

  11. #71

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Of course they would have no more fear of death, satan, etc. For the sake of argument only, since I realize this is highly debatable, let's assume there is a thousand years following the 2nd coming, and that satan is then loosed and goes out to deceive the nations and that they are then see surrounding the camp of the saints. Why might they do that at this point? For the past 1000 years Christ and His saints would have been ruling the planet with a rod of iron. So maybe satan is loosed one final final time in order to let these mortals living in the thousand years decide if they want to continue following Christ, regardless`it has been strict for them during this time, or do they allow satan to deceive them into thinking they could actually overthrow the everlasting kingdom?
    Exactly. And what do they do on your NHNE? En-masse in their billions (as the sand of the sea) they supposedly surround Christ and the glorified saints in the biggest turnaround in history 1000 years+ after Christ comes in power and glory to destroy His enmies and put down all rule and all authority. From a globe totally submitted to the righteous rule of Christ with a rod of iron to complete anarchy. This was one of the 1st matters that caused me to question Premillennialism as a Premil. I thought this was fanciful.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW View Post
    I would say it is nonsense to believe that eternity begins with time that has an end. How can it be eternity if any portion of it has an end? That is most assuredly nonsense!
    Simple Math would inform you that a segment of a line can be part of an infinite line. This is not absurd. This is common knowledge.

    So what it really boils down to is not the difference between a segment of time and the infinite line of eternity. Rather, it has to do with the compatibility of temporal things with eternity. For example, can created man live forever. The answer is yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW
    So prove through the Scriptures that a time which has an end can be found in eternity???
    Rev 11.15 The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:
    “The kingdom of the world has become
    the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah,
    and he will reign for ever and ever.”


    The world is a temporal reality, and becomes, at the return of Christ, an eternal reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW
    That is exactly how the eternal glorified state is depicted in Scripture.
    Most prophecies of the Kingdom of Messiah reflect a victory over evil. However, I'm not sure that the beginning of this Kingdom indicates universal glorification or a complete transformation into a sinless reality. My thought is that the beginning of Messiah's Kingdom is in fact the restoration of Israel as a nation, along with a company of Christian nations--all being mortal and still in the sin nature. This is indicated in Scriptures, I think, by the fact the glorified Church and Christ himself act as judges over the earth in the beginning of this Kingdom.

    For example, the twelve tribes of Israel represent the entire territory of Israel (there are no longer 12 tribes, but only the areas that at one time were represented by 12 tribes). And Jesus said his apostles would judge this area of Israel at the coming of his Kingdom:

    Matthew 19.28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

    The depiction by the Prophets of the restoration of Israel seems to indicate that Israel's enemies will be restrained, and that judges will keep rampant sin under check.

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerW
    I've already discarded Lactantius' doctrine regarding eternity. I've already shown the contradiction in his doctrine. But I can certainly understand why Premill wishes to cling tightly to his doctrine.
    Blessings,
    RW
    Then you ignore evidence that at least some ECFs viewed the Messianic Kingdom as containing a mortal population. I think many Jews before Christ saw things this way as well. And it was *their Scriptures* that they were interpreting!

    But the most important evidence you ignore is Revelation 20 itself, by allegorizing what should probably be taken as a literal 1000 year period, which includes fallen, mortal mankind in it, who are judged and ruled over by the glorified saints (perhaps from heaven).

    I don't claim to have a total grasp of it. This is just my present assessment.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    10,001
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    I agree bro. All we are getting is wild unsubstantiated evasive statements from Premils that notable fail to furnish us with any mention of this alleged future age.
    Talk about unsubstantiated evasive statements - where is the evidence a single ECF in the first 100 years after the cross stated that there is no Millennium or that the Millennium is BEFORE Jesus returns?
    What you have NO evidence. In which case your case is thrown out of court.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    10,001
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    How can eternity begin when time continues on your alleged future Millennial age. This temporary age you advocate is so corrupt that it needs replaced 1000+ years after its inception, swamped by billions of stiff-necked rebels who become instant Satan worshippers after suffering 1000 years of Christ's righteous rule.
    Wow, when does eternity begin?
    Is God NOT eternal?
    Eternity began BEFORE the world was made!
    So there is no problem with eternity beginning BEFORE any particular event - in fact scripture shows it began along time ago. In many ways that is what eternity means - all of time.
    So you seem to be confused over how time works, just as you argue that time ends, which would mean eternity ends too.

    However I notice that as soon as your basis for your claims is shown to be empty, you go onto the strawman arguments and make up your own additions to what Premil means. You don't seem to see the wood for the trees, seemingly thinking that a tree IS the wood.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    ADELAIDE / South Australia
    Posts
    3,972

    Re: Were the Early Church Fathers really Premillennial?

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    How can eternity begin when time continues on your alleged future Millennial age. This temporary age you advocate is so corrupt that it needs replaced 1000+ years after its inception, swamped by billions of stiff-necked rebels who become instant Satan worshippers after suffering 1000 years of Christ's righteous rule.
    That was really good comment lol.
    Gods timing for making all things new will be the perfect reward for the righteous. They will not endure a complacent bunch of doubters and fence sitters like we do now on a NHNE where only righteous dwells.
    God is commanding today that all people everywhere are to repent if they want to participate in the blessed hope of a NHNE. This will be the inheritance like it was in the foundation of world. God prepared Eden and God now prepares a place for us that we are to receive at his COMING.....all things made new and eternally separated from any hint of evil.
    And those castles made of sand....fall into the sea......eventually

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Early Church Fathers on Sabbatical Millennium
    By The Beginner in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 245
    Last Post: Nov 12th 2015, 08:27 PM
  2. Replies: 79
    Last Post: Jan 2nd 2014, 11:45 PM
  3. Replies: 40
    Last Post: Aug 16th 2011, 12:07 PM
  4. Early Church Fathers
    By Opally in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Apr 18th 2008, 06:02 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •