A Primer On Postmillennialism (*Includes Postmil View Of Rapture) | with Jeff Durbin 

Every believer will repent and be humbled for blindness in their theology when they stand before the great white throne. Eternity and the greatness and power of God cannot be fully comprehended by mortal beings. The great expositor, that is your pastor, included. That is why grace and humilty are essential to the body of Christ.

Heyyy! I don’t know if you remember me, but we went to church together. I’m in the same boat and have recently moved to a post mil church!

@@thewholeandholylife231 Aliya right!? What’s up!! Haha it’s a small world for us Postmillenials I guess! My wife follows you on social media and we both like your boldness in the social circles. It’s funny because just this week she said told me “hey, you remember Aliya? She’s Postmil now!” I guess she saw your one of your post about it recently. 👍🏼 Good to see you guys found a church like that in your area.

@@Fisherdrumming yes Aliya! And I know right?! we are actually moving back to Cali and so I’m not sure what church we’ll be at now. Thanks for the encouragement!

I believe the Pre-tribulational view is correct, after having started with a mid-tribulational view, so I understand your comment about people believing that you believe something you really don't. I admit I have never put much effort into examining the post-tribulational view. I'll do that. It's best to be civil about the whole thing after all, contrary to popular belief. After all, we do have to learn how to get along sometime. Why wait until Jesus has to tell us personally?

Yes! Bruce Gore is awesome! Learned a lot from him.

My wife and I love Bruce Gore. Since I turned her on to him she is constantly listening to him and R.C. Sproul. She has listened to Gore's teaching on Revelation (about 50 videos) over 5 times now.

When holding a futurist stance, Postmillennal is the best position.

It’s a true statement. But he clearly doesn’t understand either the Old Testament or revelation so has no business teaching this garbage. If he can pretend these Old Testament pictures of the kingdom are anything but Christ physically reigning from Jerusalem then he is a deceiver. The language is so plain. And anything that contradicts his view is just allegory or symbols. 😢. Just say it. You don’t believe the book of revelation.

Typology. As the snake was lifted up un the desert, as Jonah was in the belly of the whale.. Elijah shuts out rain for 3 1/2 yrs, the witness shuts up rain for 3 1/2 yrs. The Exodus was prophetic of a greater Exodus The events have already happened and have yet to happen. They are there to show us how things will transpire. Essentially drills for game time.

Amen brother.

Kinda like preach like an arminian but be assured like a calvinist.

@@RightResponseMinistriescan you makw something showing us where Matthew 24&25 switches from 70AD to the end of history? Im partial preterist and postmill but Im seeing this slippery slope to Full Pret. But I see clearly how that leads to literally another Gospel and is wrong.

🙄

Well said. I've heard it said before, History is like fractal patterns. Extrapolating on that, the pattern becomes larger and larger and more distinct and more fulfilled. Basically, the kingdom of God was here with David (a little bit), is here with Christ's Advent (quite a bit more), will be here with the Full Millennium (even more), and will finally be here *completely* when all evil is completely and totally cleansed.

I Chronicles 29:22-23

What earthly throne do you want to make for our Lord then? Even a throne 1000 times more splendid than the throne of Solomon will be a mockery to the greatness, holiness and majesty of the King of Kings! Heaven is His throne and the earth His footstool. I cannot wrap my mind around how premill views the glorified Christ. The first time He came humble and low and endured the hostility of sinners. This will not happen a second time. When He comes back evil will be completely done away with. The thought we have to wait another 1000 (!!) years until sin, evil and the devil will be completely done away with. The thought I need to share this earth a 1000 (!!) years longer with people who don’t love my Jesus. Horrible…

Yes!

The issue is one of epistemology. Do we put more weight on the extra-biblical testimony of several Church fathers, or do we give the words of Jesus more authority?

@@mchristr Jesus doesn't give a date on the writing of Revelation. A better question is _Do we put more weight on the extra-biblical testimony of several Church fathers or the speculations of modern disbelieving scholars?_

@@lausdeo4944 I would look at Kenneth Gentry's Before Jerusalem Fell (about the date of the Book of Rev.) and RC. Sproul's The Last Days According to Jesus (there is a video series on youtube as well by this name). Sproul's book has short section listing the many proponents of the early view of Revelation. the early date was the more common view in the 1800s, even by those who were futurist in how to interpret it. The only real reason for the late view is the external witness of Irenaeus. But there are other writers who seem to have thought John's exile was under Nero-Claudius (also known as the tyrant). And Irenaeus is not as clear as he could be whether it was John who was seen in the 90s or whether it was the vision. So the external evidence is sort of a draw. The major internal factors for an early date are that it says repeatedly these things are to happen soon (1:1,3, 22:10, 20), the number of 7 kings in Chap 17 fit Nero being the 6th head, reference to the temple as if it was still standing, the number of Nero's name, the millennial period is a long period of time (the current age) in contrast to the things that were soon to happen, and Jesus does not return until the kingdom period is complete (see 1 Cor. 15:24).

Well said.

Hahaha. Great question. The Puritans often used the word “religion,” virtually always in a positive light. Even more importantly, the Scripture uses the word religion positively in James 1:27 (“Religion that pleases God…”). In other words, religion is not inherently bad. The question is this: Which religion? According to Scripture, there is a religion that pleases God. Religion, in the proper sense, refers not only to a person’s beliefs, but their overall manner of life. Religion includes both doctrine and life; a person’s convictions and practices. In many ways, ironically, it is a better word than “relationship” because it encompasses so much more. Those Christians who champion relationship over religion often truncate the Christian Faith to mere feelings of intimacy with God, while neglecting regular practices of piety; obedience to God’s commandments in every realm of life.

Yes! finally. i get this from christians too. especially when they know i'm Calvinist.

I hear this from Christian to use that statement as an excuse not to obey God. They say religion or obedience to God as "oppressive" or something like that. They usually just gnostics who are hierarchaphobes.

I have said that before myself. My reasoning was because of my perception of “religious people.” I always thought religious people were legalistic bible thumpers. And then I became a Bible thumper myself. But I’m not legalistic. I’m just a Christ follower. 🤷🏻‍♀️

It’s a common journey for pretty much all of us Christians here in America. God bless brother.

@@RightResponseMinistries I'm actually in south africa 🇿🇦 😁

Olivet Timing Revealed by Luke’s Gospel: Compare Luke's Gospel to that of Matthew if you want to understand the timing. The disciples asked two different questions. When will the temple be destroyed? What will be the sign of your Second Coming? Jesus Foretells Destruction of the Temple (These subtitles are found in e-Sword.) Luk 21:5　 Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said,　 Luk 21:6　 "These things which you see-the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down."　 (Mat 24:2　 And Jesus said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down."　) Luk 21:7　 So they asked Him, saying, "Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?"　 (Mat 24:3　 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?") (　Mar 13:3　 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately,　 Mar 13:4　 "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?")　 Luk 21:8　 And He said: "Take heed that you not be deceived. For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and, 'The time has drawn near.' Therefore do not go after them.　 (Mat 24:5　 For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many.　) Luk 21:9　 But when you hear of wars and commotions, do not be terrified; for these things must come to pass first, but the end will not come immediately." (Mat 24:6　 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.)　 Jesus Foretells Wars and Persecution Luk 21:10　 Then He said to them, "Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.　 (Mat 24:7　 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places.　) Luk 21:11　 And there will be great earthquakes in various places, and famines and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and great signs from heaven.　 (Mat 24:7　 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places.　) Luk 21:12　 But before all these things, they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons. You will be brought before kings and rulers for My name's sake.　 (Mat 24:9　 "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake.)　(Read Acts 22:19-20, where Paul reveals that he fulfilled this text.) Luk 21:13　 But it will turn out for you as an occasion for testimony.　 Luk 21:14　 Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what you will answer;　 Luk 21:15　 for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist.　 Luk 21:16　 You will be betrayed even by parents and brothers, relatives and friends; and they will put some of you to death.　 Luk 21:17　 And you will be hated by all for My name's sake.　 (Mat 24:10　 And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another.　) Luk 21:18　 But not a hair of your head shall be lost.　 Luk 21:19　 By your patience possess your souls.　 (Mat 24:13　 But he who endures to the end shall be saved.)　 Jesus Foretells Destruction of Jerusalem Luk 21:20　 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.　 (Mat 24:15　 "Therefore when you see the 'ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),　 (Look at the reference to Hanukkah in John 10:22, if you want to know what the Jews of Jesus time understood about Antiochus Ephiphanes attacking the city during 167 BC, when his forces killed thousands of Jews, and stopped the sacrifices. Those two things also happened during 70AD.) Luk 21:21　 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her.　 (Mat 24:16　 "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.)　 Luk 21:22　 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.　 Luk 21:23　 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. (See also Luke 23:28-31.)　 (Mat 24:19　 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!　) Luk 21:24　 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.　 (Almost all Bible scholars agree that the first part of the verse above is about 70 AD. At the end of the verse we find a period of time known as “the times of the Gentiles”. In the verses that follow we find the future Second Coming of Christ. Paul also referred to this time period in Romans 11:25, and Acts 28:28.) The Coming of the Son of Man Luk 21:25　 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring;　 (Mat 24:29　 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.)　 Luk 21:26　 men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.　 Luk 21:27　 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.　 (Mat 24:30　 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.)　 Luk 21:28　 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near."　 (Mat 24:33　 So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near-at the doors!) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: From "Antiquities of the Jews" by Josephus, Book 12, chapter 7 .......Now it so fell out, that these things were done on the very same day on which their Divine worship had fallen off, and was reduced to a profane and common use, after three years' time; for so it was, that the temple was made desolate by Antiochus, and so continued for three years. This desolation happened to the temple in the hundred forty and fifth year, on the twenty-fifth day of the month Apeliens, and on the hundred fifty and third olympiad: but it was dedicated anew, on the same day, the twenty-fifth of the month Apeliens, on the hundred and forty-eighth year, and on the hundred and fifty-fourth olympiad. And this desolation came to pass according to the prophecy of Daniel, which was given four hundred and eight years before; for he declared that the Macedonians would dissolve that worship [for some time]...... 7. Now Judas celebrated the festival of the restoration of the sacrifices of the temple for eight days, and omitted no sort of pleasures thereon; but he feasted them upon very rich and splendid sacrifices; and he honored God, and delighted them by hymns and psalms Josephus confirms above the understanding of the Jews of his time, who knew that Daniel had predicted the events of 167 BC, by Antiochus Epiphanes. Josephus confirms it as a historical fact. John 10:22 is a reference to the celebration of Hanukkah each year by the Jews of Jesus time. The Book of Matthew was addressed mainly to a Jewish audience. Jesus was telling the Jews of His time that something similar to 167 BC would happen during 70 AD. Not only did Antiochus desecrate the temple, but he also attacked the city killing thousands of Jews and stopped the temple sacrifices. The temple sacrifices would also stop in 70 AD, due to the destruction of the temple. Based on John 10:22, the Jews were well aware of this historical fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy. Luke’s Gospel was written to more of a Gentile audience, so he spelled it out for them. Matthew 24:15-16 and Luke 21:20-21 are clearly parallel accounts because of the common word elements in both passages. We also have the same reference to flee in the second verse in each Gospel.

@@CzechDog2022 not at all. Just that a pre trib rapture was taught as a fact, just like the Trinity. Didn't even know there were any other options till a few years ago.

Oh?

Where was your interpreter? Tongues must have an interpreter.

Not all partial preterists hold to a renewal of the ethnic people of Israel, but many post-mils and even a-mils (of which I am one), hold to a revival of Israel not separate from the church but into the church, who's head and King is Jesus (Ezk. 37:24, Isa. 66:20). So one can have renewal of Israel (a fullness, Rom. 11:12) which occurs in the latter half of the millennial/gospel age. I would hold that this renewal is even necessary before Christ returns from heaven (Acts 3:18-20). Thus the emphasis for a partial preterist is the progress of the kingdom through the world, the fullness of the gospel among the gentles, the fullness of it among Israel (Zach 13:9). Then Christ returns to save his people (contrast to the judgment against Israel) from the last great battle when Satan is released (Zach. 14 and Rev 20:9-13). I think the futurist view of Israel's renewal and peace is quite compatible with amil. Its unfortunate that these ideas have not yet been joined together. John Murry's teaching has helped encourage this view among amils. This possibility tends to get lost in the anti-premil fervor. I would look at Kenneth Gentry's Before Jerusalem Fell (about the date of the Book of Rev.) and RC. Sproul's The Last Days According to Jesus (there is a video series on youtube as well by this name). Sproul's book has short section listing the many proponents of the early view of Revelation. the early date was the more common view in the 1800s, even by those who were futurist in how to interpret it. The only real reason for the late view is the external witness of Irenaeus. But there are other writers who seem to have thought John's exile was under Nero-Claudius (also known as the tyrant). And Irenaeus is not as clear as he could be whether it was John who was seen in the 90s or whether it was the vision. So the external evidence is sort of a draw. The major internal factors for an early date are that it says repeatedly these things are to happen soon (1:1,3, 22:10, 20), the number of 7 kings in Chap 17 fit Nero being the 6th head, reference to the temple as if it was still standing, the number of Nero's name, the millennial period is a long period of time (the current age) in contrast to the things that were soon to happen, and Jesus does not return until the kingdom period is complete (see 1 Cor. 15:24). As an optimistic amil, I would hold to a physical resurrection of the martyrs in AD 70 when Jesus came in judgment (Peter and Paul, etc. who had been killed by the beast). This is no different than the resurrection of Jesus, except that their bodies are not disclosed but are taken to be with Christ in his heavenly dimension. But one could also take the traditional amil soul resurrection view at the time of salvation. But I think the premil's physical resurrection view makes more textual sense, and I see no reason not to combine it with a partial preterist amil viewpoint given the limited scope of the first resurrection (which also fits with Daniel 12:2). Mat. 24 and Revelation (John’s version of the Olivet discourse) is the unveiling of the partly revealed, partly sealed mystery of Daniel. Generally, the timeline of Revelation would be Chap 1-4 Letters to the churches (Jesus comes in judgment to Jezebel and others), 6-20 Jesus comes in judgment to the great city of Jerusalem and against the sea (Rome) in the great civil war and the year of the 4 emperors, Chap 20 is about the New Covenant kingdom era between AD 70 and the restoration of the city of Jerusalem unto Christ, the binding of Satan so that the gospel goes forth successfully (but not without suffering), then comes the end when Jesus returns from heaven and raises the dead and transforms the living (Acts 1:11, 1 Thess 4:13-18, 1 Cor 15:50-58). Then Chap 21-22 is about the fullness of the eternal kingdom which only immortal bodies can enjoy, and closes with the summary warning for judgment in John's own time. John on behalf of those suffering martyrdom (probably from the persecutions of Nero after the fire of Rome in AD 64, and by the Jews in Judea) prays for Jesus to come and relieve their sufferings. Because Jesus brings judgment on Jerusalem and Rome, the synagogue at Philadelphia will be forced to acknowledge what the Church there had been telling them about Jesus' predictions and about his true Messiahship. More than you probably wanted to know…but there you go.

I'm in the same boat Ben, why is Revelation so specific about certain numbers and times if it's completely symbolic? If Old Testament prophecy that was fullfilled in the New Testament almost entirely literal, why should we expect Revelation to be different? I do wonder if Revelation should be considered canon if it's completely symbolic and open to such wide interpretation. I don't think it's up to me to decide, I just value being able to definitively define what scripture means, especially prophecy that we are supposed to be looking for or be looking for in our past. Let me know if you've come to any peace on this, I'm still searching.

@Boomer Actually, I am deep in research right now regarding this. I can't believe that things will get better, there is too much prophecy in not only Daniel, Ezekiel, Revelation and other prophets who indicate very difficult times before Christ's return. I will let you know what I find.

@@bensbigadventure, I’m not post mil, but between partial preterist post mils and amils, it’s only a matter of degree regarding the way in which things will “get better.” There really isn’t a denial that the church will suffer. It’s expected that it will, the question is, will it accomplish God’s purpose? What is God’s purpose for the present time? That is an important question for any system of eschatology. Fundamentally, as far as those Bible books are concerned, the issue is the time frame and meaning of “the end time” in Daniel. Or when is the great tribulation in Revelation and Mat 24 supposed to occur, etc. Do you feel like you understand the framework of partial preterism for these things yet? It’s a different system. If you take certain futurist assumptions with you on the journey, it’s going to be confusing…if you assume that 1/3 of the earth in Rev means the globe and not the land around Palestine, it’s going to be confusing. I’d be curious what your questions/tension points are, as you go along.

@@Boomer7654, I’d be interested to know what you consider completely symbolic? I believe in biblical inerrancy and would use a basic historical-grammatical, literary approach to scripture. In my experience, there is not a whole lot of difference when it comes to symbolism between premils and amil/postmil. For example, we all take the beasts as symbolizing empires and kings, we all take the child in Rev 12 to be Jesus and the woman to be OT Israel. We all have to decide what the locust are in the 5th trumpet-I have never heard of anybody serious (I know there are crackpots out there) say that these locus are locust with actual human faces. So when it come down to being literal, does that just mean for you that 1000, must mean 1000 in that one place in chapter 20? I’m just trying to understand what you think is “completely symbolic” interpretation?

Basically that it would be the end of the Jewish age and change to a christian age....so in other words a change of the covenants

More generally, "the end of the age" is the end of whatever age is under discussion in context. That is often the end of the Jewish age to the new covenant age as Albert notes, and sometimes (but not always) it is looking forward to the age just before the second coming and sometimes some other age. I think people sometimes approach the Bible with a weirdly wooden rule where if some word or phrase refers to one thing in one context, it has to refer to that one thing in every context. That might be the case in a legal document or technical specification, but that is not how most writing works, including the Bible, and like any other document, we can know what sense is meant by looking at the context. For example, if a passage speaks of "this generation" experiencing the end of the age under discussion, we can be confident that it isn't speaking of an age that will come thousands of years after that generation is dead or one that came before they were alive.

@@oracleoftroy I really appreciate this reply. I suspect you're correct.

There can be few who find it, yet many saved. Take Rom 3's number and say there are zero who seek after God, and thus zero who find the narrow path on their own. But salvation isn't about man and what work he does to seek and find, it is about God and His work, and God is mighty to save.

Back in May of 2021

These one sided discussions are lobbing softball and strawman arguments for him to tear down. I wish he would just come out and say he doesn’t believe in revelation. I’m with you it’s symbolic but scripture interprets every single symbol. It’s not left for us to imagine what they mean. Dragon is Satan. Heads are kings of a successive monarchy the horns are ten other kings that partner with the last king in the succession of heads to make war on the lamb. The harlot is a city. It’s all plain as day in the text. What’s not interpreted or obviously not a symbol should be taken literally.

@@kingsolomon3175 agreed

@@isaacmaue-tg7kl I agree that is an obvious metaphor. Especially given the verse you are referencing uses the word “like”. I think most readers can distinguish what’s a clear metaphor. Revelation 20 is pretty doggone specific that talks of events before, during, and after a specific period of time that is repeated like 6 times. I mean no disrespect but to say because the Bible uses metaphors in some places referring to quantity then everything referring to quantity then must be a metaphor, is just a really bad argument. We’re there really 12 disciples? Or was that just a metaphor for a small crowd? Of course it isn’t because it’s specific to people with names and what they’ve done? The same thing with the 1000 years. We have events before, during, and after this 1000 year period so there would be no reason to not take it literal unless you wanted to teach myths and had to explain away scripture that doesn’t fit your view.

I don't see how they say there is no rapture. Im not saying its pretrib or any timing, but thats problematic if he says there's no rapture. When we talk about the rapture were actually talking about the resurrection of the saints on the last day. They are one and the same event. The Bibke clearly says that. Its nit a metaphor. "The dead in Chrust shall rise first and we which remain shall be CAUGHT UP (HARPAZO) TOGETHER WITH THEM to meet the Lord in the air and so shall we always be with the Lord. "If there's no rapture then there's no resurrection of the saints. If there's no physical bodily resurrection then Christ is not raised either. Thats what Paul says very clearly.

@@TheFreedomDefender there is no rapture. Being caught up in the clouds with Him when he comes in triumph, has nothing to do at all with the idea that God will take the church off the earth to pour out wrath. The idea of a rapture is truly not biblical.

@@micahlantz905 you're speaking of timing. Im not speaking of whether its pre, mid, or post. But the resurrection/rapture is thoroughly 1000% Bible. Thats what the scripture says. No way around it. "The dead in Christ shall rise first, and we which remain shall be CAUGHT UP (HARPAZO) TOGETHER WITH THEM TO MEET THE LORD IN THE AIR. And so shall we ever be with the Lord." Harpazo is where the word rapture comes from which is ultimately the resurrection of the just. Paul is very clear on this. "If there's no resurrection of the just, then Christ is not raised. If Christ is not raised then our preaching is in vain and you are dead in your sin." The rapture and the resurrection are the same event. Its when we are glorified together with Christ and are changed in the twinkling if an eye and receive glorified bodies just as Christ has.

Postmil.

Yes. There is a "primer" and an "explanation"; and shorter ones if Ya search them.

LOVE to be Iron for Ya tho, if Ya get through them and have any questions or comments (as i hold to what Jeff has presented).

It's a repeat episode.

Fair point. But I must say that I've had more exposure to partial preterism and post-millenialism via the Internet than I did in seminary. And I've listened to hundreds more sermon via RU-vid and other Internet sources than I could hope to find in books. And I've shared the Gospel more via Facebook, email, etc, than I ever could by relying on people to come to our church and by going door-to-door.

@@timmoreland Sure It’s just sorta funny when some of them point out how we should honor all these “modern comforts” as improvements and proof that the world is getting better. But they kind of quickly skip over the shadow side of these improvements and the side effects. I think most Christian’s would happily go back to a difficult pre-industrial society if it meant we would have moral improvement and a more upright society.

​@@Rome_77I think it works as a quick counter to the common and equally flawed argument that "this headline" or "that poll" shows things are declining in (this narrow region of) the world, therefore postmil is wrong. Ultimately the truth or falsity of any system is how well it comports with scripture, not how well it comports with our limited understanding of current events.

@@Rome_77 my son would be dead in a pre- industrial society. I don't want to go back. Coveting the past is a sin

Hey Nancy, Post-mills are at least partial preterists. Which means that they believe that many of those prophecies have been fulfilled - if not all. They of course understand that many prophecies are yet to be fulfilled, as mentioned in this video. As an amillennialist myself, I must say that their biblical arguments regarding many of those text appear to be sound. Although I have not heard how they handle every single one of those texts, I have seen how they handle many. You may not know this, but many amillennialists are partial preterists too. In fact, certain amillennialists are so preterist, that in a short conversation they may come off as post-mills.

@@isaiasvinales2657 Yes thanks. I've had a hard time figuring out the difference but I am now getting it.

@@nancythornton8300 Glad I could help a bit sister! May the Lord bless you.

Multiple Second Coming Visions in Revelation: (book not in chronological order ) Christ returns at the end of Revelation chapter 6, with signs in the sun, moon, and stars, as are found in the Olivet Discourse. Those at the end of the chapter are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb. Why would they be hiding if Christ is not present? The "kings", "captains", "might men", "free", and "bond" are also found in chapter 19 at the return of Christ. He returns at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:15-18. The beginning of chapter 12 is a history lesson containing the fall of Satan, and the birth and death of Christ, who is the seed promised to crush the head of Satan in Genesis 3:15. The Second Coming is found in the "harvest" of chapter 14, which is related to the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew chapter 13. He comes as a thief at Armageddon, and we find the greatest earthquake in history in chapter 16. This occurs when the 7th angel pours out his vial. How powerful is an earthquake which moves islands and destroys the mountains? What is happening to the planet? He comes on a horse in chapter 19. Chapter 20? Does He come with the fire, and the judgment of the dead at the end of chapter 20, which agrees with what Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and 2 Timothy 4:1? (The time of the judgment of the dead is also found in Revelation 11:18.) There are no mortals left alive on the planet at the end of Matthew 25:31-46. Why does an angel come down from heaven with a key to unlock the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:1-2, if the pit was not already locked before that time? Revelation 9:14 proves some of the angels were previously bound in some manner. Because the two witnesses were bodily resurrected from the dead in Revelation 11, the "first resurrection" at the beginning of Revelation 20 is not the first bodily resurrection in the book. The principle of "Recapitulation" means there are multiple visions of His return.

His Kingdom is not of this world, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work in and through this world. We are not of this world either, but we are in it and changing it. Another way of saying it would be that His Kingdom does not derive its authority from this world, nor does it operate like a kingdom of this world.

Well said brother. Thanks for your honesty.

This is a common objection but we definitely have to look outside try 10-15 years before us and after us. The world is undoubtedly better now than in the days of Jesus. From 12 disciples to the gospel going to all nations and million and millions of believers. We could very well be in the early church. The trajectory is up & down but trends upwards :)

@@sarahd5341 amen!

It would really benefit you to look up Gary DeMars two part bit called “Clearing the prophetic chessboard”. New paper exegesis has been a stumbling block for many over many decades.

@@abramkuhlman7201 thanks for that. Really enjoyed the videos👍

Doesn't MacArthur's Why Every Calvinist Should Be a Premillennialist take 6 parts and several hours to get through? Seems like a double standard...

In Ezekiel it’s the same language describing the temple used in Revelation to describe the New Jerusalem. The New Testament refers only to another temple than the second temple in spiritual terms. The NT temple is the body of Christ, His physical body and the body of believers. The vision of Ezekiel portraits the perfectness of this temple by the measurements. Another interesting thought to consider: in Ezekiel 47 it’s talking about water flowing from the temple. On the cross there came water out of the side of Jesus when He died. His death opened the fountain for sin, a spring of water that became broader, stronger and deeper when the Gospel spreads more and more.

Ok. Allegorizing in other words. That's why I have a hard time with post-mil.

‘you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.’ ‭‭1 Peter‬ ‭2‬:‭5‬ ‭

Ok. But why all the exact measurements that goes on for chapters? How do you interpret them?

Why all the measurements and details of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21? I already said above how I interpret Ezekiel.

The sword comes from His mouth. The sword is symbolic of His Word aka the Bible

“Coming” doesn’t always refer to second coming. It also references coming in judgement (against 1st century Jews) and coming into his kingdom.

Multiple Second Coming Visions in Revelation: (book not in chronological order ) Christ returns at the end of Revelation chapter 6, with signs in the sun, moon, and stars, as are found in the Olivet Discourse. Those at the end of the chapter are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb. Why would they be hiding if Christ is not present? The "kings", "captains", "might men", "free", and "bond" are also found in chapter 19 at the return of Christ. He returns at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:15-18. The beginning of chapter 12 is a history lesson containing the fall of Satan, and the birth and death of Christ, who is the seed promised to crush the head of Satan in Genesis 3:15. The Second Coming is found in the "harvest" of chapter 14, which is related to the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew chapter 13. He comes as a thief at Armageddon, and we find the greatest earthquake in history in chapter 16. This occurs when the 7th angel pours out his vial. How powerful is an earthquake which moves islands and destroys the mountains? What is happening to the planet? He comes on a horse in chapter 19. Chapter 20? Does He come with the fire, and the judgment of the dead at the end of chapter 20, which agrees with what Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and 2 Timothy 4:1? (The time of the judgment of the dead is also found in Revelation 11:18.) There are no mortals left alive on the planet at the end of Matthew 25:31-46. Why does an angel come down from heaven with a key to unlock the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:1-2, if the pit was not already locked before that time? Revelation 9:14 proves some of the angels were previously bound in some manner. Because the two witnesses were bodily resurrected from the dead in Revelation 11, the "first resurrection" at the beginning of Revelation 20 is not the first bodily resurrection in the book. The principle of "Recapitulation" means there are multiple visions of His return.

You can’t reconcile it. Don’t let these deceivers craft some myth to take hold of. It says what it says. Jesus is returning to establish His reign on earth. He is reigning from heaven now, but anyone that can read through the Bible and think that is the finality of what is described, then they are intentionally ignoring the plain language. You don’t have to have a seminary degree to read and understand what it says.

​@@kingsolomon3175, I don't see anyone saying you need a degree to understand. Can you point to a place in Revelation where it says that Jesus sets up his kingdom on earth (obviously he does so in the Gospels, Mat. 11:20, see also Col 1:13)? The throne room is in heaven in Chap 5, the thrones in Daniel 7 are in the clouds (heaven), Psalm 110, places Jesus' throne at the side of the Father. Why should the thrones set up in Rev. 20 be on earth when they are said to reign with Christ. Rev. 19 does not say that he rides down to earth, but only that heaven is opened and Christ rides forth to judge and make war. Yahweh would ride forth on a cloud to judge and make war in the OT (Isa. 19, his presence is said to melt idols, but this describes the Babylonian capture of Egypt, see Jer. 46:25, Ezk 29:17). Yahweh was not "seen" with the eyes but with the understanding in relation to his words which made him present in the events that were fulfilled, so also for the ascended Jesus, who rides forth to war. Clearly there will be a kingdom on earth, but it is the new heavens and earth. The current gospel of the kingdom is the millennial kingdom which follows upon Christ's binding of Satan in the cross and at the fall of disobedient Jerusalem. No worldwide peace is spoken of in Rev. 20. That is reserved for Rev. 21. I don't think you are a deceiver just because we disagree. This stuff is hard. Lots of puzzle pieces to fit together. None of us probably have them all right, but that's not the point. The point is to have confidence in him and work toward unity as we can. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Feel free to push back. I'll consider what you say. .

The thousand year reign is literal in that it describes a really long time period with certain conditions that are unique to it. The binding of Satan is not said to results in gobal peace (that is imported from other places), but is simply said to result in the nations no longer "being deceived." In the gospels when the disciples were preaching, Jesus says that he sees Satan falling from heaven (a place of power). Jesus' death on the cross triumphed over the spiritual rulers and provided for the power to bind Satan (Col 2:15, 20). If one takes a partial preterist view of revelation, then the abyss, opened in Rev 9:1, describes the more intense period of the war at Jerusalem in AD 70 (the 5 months of the Roman siege between Nisan and Av 9th, when the temple was burned). The closing of the pit in Rev 20:3 describes the end of this particular conflict. The binding also relates to the growth the gospel was going to see in the nations, compared to before Jesus came and before the opposition of the unbelieving Jewish community and temple system was brought to an end. The growth of the kingdom, however, is gradual as described in the parables of the kingdom as well as the rock which becomes a mountain in Daniel 2. The binding of Satan himself does not mean that all Satanic activity ceases, but rather that the gates of hell/death will not prevail against the kingdom work of the gospel in the nations. It means that Satan won't be successful in keeping the gospel from the China or Africa or anywhere else.

Have you read Gentry's book BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL?

You really need to look into Ken Gentry’s work on Revelation. It helped me tremendously.

@@gregb6469 I have not

@@collinerb3802 -- It is the most thorough, detailed study of the question of the date of the writing of Revelation ever published.

I also would say look at Kenneth Gentry's Before Jerusalem Fell (about the date of the Book of Rev.) and RC. Sproul's The Last Days According to Jesus (there is a video series on youtube as well by this name). Sproul's book has short section listing the many proponents of the early view of Revelation. The early date was the more common view in the 1800s, even by those who were futurist in how to interpret it. The only real reason for the late view is the external witness of Irenaeus. But there are other writers who seem to have thought John's exile was under Nero-Claudius (also known as the tyrant). And Irenaeus is not as clear as he could be whether it was John who was seen in the 90s or whether it was the vision. So the external evidence is sort of a draw. The major internal factors for an early date are that it says repeatedly these things are to happen soon (1:1,3, 22:10, 20), the number of 7 kings in Chap 17 fit Nero being the 6th head, reference to the temple as if it was still standing, the number of Nero's name, the millennial period is a long period of time (the current age) in contrast to the things that were soon to happen, and Jesus does not return until the kingdom period is complete (see 1 Cor. 15:24).

😅😅😅😅 Third coming cult

They claim the church is the new Isreal.

We have to leave what “we want to believe” out of the argument. This isn’t the place to find truth. Post-mill eschatology can be dismantled with scripture in a few verses with hundreds more to counter what they teach. These one-sided videos are nothing but strawman arguments and softball questions. The passage you mention in Matthew is the antichrists kingdom. 1 John 2 talks about them going out from us with the antichrist though they were with us. 2 thess 2 says this event must happen before the day of the Lord. The resurrection of the just happens when Jesus returns. There are dozens of passages that mandate this. Revelation 20 says this event precedes the 1000 years. There are so many problems with post mill it’s migraine inducing. They go straight against the Bible and nobody cares. You can’t be post mill unless you claim we missed the resurrection. Scripture doesn’t allow it. Paul had extremely harsh words for those claiming the resurrection has already happened. This is nothing more than repackaged dominionist heresy. Research Christian reconstructionism and you’ll see they quote their playbook. What they aren’t telling you is eventually to achieve what they want, reconstructionism believes in death penalty for apostates.

Generally speaking, partial preterists see the end of the OT temple system as the end of the age (1 Cor. 10:9, Heb. 1:2, 8:13, 12;26, Mat. 24:3, 14). So Mat. 13:39 is understood as defining the general time frame for the parable. The idea is that Jesus sends Israel and the nations apostles and prophets. From the time of the cross to the war of AD 70, God mercifully withheld judgment on the Israel. This allowed the Gospel to be planted in all the "known" world (Mat. 24:14, compare use of world in Lk. 2:1). Once the generation of mercy was up, judgment came, which John the B. spoke of in Mat. 3:10 "The ax is already at the root of the trees...He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” In Mat. 13 the angels gather the wicked OUT of the kingdom and are burned up. This occurs through the Roman army who comes through Judea killing and burning (AD 66.5-70) as well as the internal fighting of the various false messiah factions (John of Gischalla and Simon son of Giora). On the other hand, those in Israel that believed Jesus, were gather to his Assembly (Heb. 10:25), and more particularly fled Jerusalem at the right time so as to avoid the great tribulation of its destruction (the wrath that was to be poured out on Israel, 1 Thess. 2:16). This gathering away from the destruction is illustrated by the idea of being gather to the safety of Jesus' barn. Righteous Israel was left on the land because the meek will inherit the earth. Not all partial preterists hold to a renewal of the ethnic people of Israel, but many post-mils and even a-mils (of which I am one), hold to a revival of Israel not separate from the church but into the church, who's head and King is Jesus (Ezk. 37:24, Isa. 66:20). So one can have renewal of Israel (a fullness, Rom. 11:12) which occurs in the latter half of the millennial/gospel age. I would hold that this renewal is even necessary before Christ returns from heaven (Acts 3:18-20). Thus the emphasis for a partial preterist is the progress of the kingdom through the world, the fullness of the gospel among the gentles, the fullness of it among Israel (Zach 13:9). Then Christ returns to save his people (contrast to the judgment against Israel) from the last great battle when Satan is released (Zach. 14 and Rev 20:9-13). I think the futurist view of Israel's renewal and peace is quite compatible with amil. Its unfortanate that these ideas have not yet been joined together. John Murry's teaching has helped encourage this view among amils. This possibility tends to get lost in the anti-premil fervor. I would look at Kenneth Gentry's Before Jerusalem Fell (about the date of the Book of Rev.) and RC. Sproul's The Last Days According to Jesus (there is a video series on youtube as well by this name).

@@jrhemmerich ok, but what do you see as a contradiction with the plain reading of revelation 20 with the rest of scripture that would give us any reason to create these other interpretations. Why do we dismiss it for what it says then create another theological system in which to view Bible prophecy so it can fit our view of the millennium. What if everything already fits just fine with the plain reading? No pre-millennial denies that 70ad was a type of tribulation but its kinda a square peg into a round hole. It’ll go if you have a big enough hammer but Jesus first advent was very very literal in the prophecies spoke of his crucifixion. The ones they apply allegorically are literal fulfillments at his second coming. The disciples didn’t understand the nature of two comings at the time. We have the big picture now. History repeats itself.

@@kingsolomon3175, that’s a good question. For me, I was raised with the historic premil view (with some influence from my father who had been trained in the historicist view). I found the amil view of Rev 20 on the resurrection to be very difficult when I started studying these things in my late teens. It just made no sense. So no, If things make sense elsewhere, then Rev 20 probably isn’t the place to find the center of one’s views. For me it came late, as something to fit into the larger picture and actually solve other problems (like is all Rev fulfilled soon?, should the resurrection as hinted at in Dan 12:2, be understood as a first followed by a second?) For me the crucial tensions were the (1) Jesus’ teaching in Mat 23 and again in 24:34 that those events were to happen in that generation. I had a bible professor who used Luke 21 to try and argue that Mathew’s cloud comings could be split off and come latter in history. This satisfied me for a time, but when you look all the events in all three Synoptics, they are all the same. I’m not convinced that one can separate the cloud coming from the earlier part of Mathew. So it seems it all fits in a relatively close time context (a generation). But all the details in the passage (“that” temple, “those” stone, “those” Apostles, etc.) are all located back there, and Jesus use of “this”generation in Mat was always his generation (e.g. Mat 12, at the last judgment Sodom will condemn this generation). This became a real problem for me. Everything in the text points toward that generation. I could try and appeal to double fulfillment, but on what basis in the text? And supposing I did, I would still need to arbitrarily excise Jesus’ coming on the clouds because he obviously did not descend to earth in AD 70. So that is the central problem as I see it. For me, if I take the time teaching of the events as the literal truth, it did seem reasonable to explore more flexible understandings of cloud comings. This led to the insight that the OT had a paradigm for cloud comings which focused on God’s judgment of nations in history and not necessarily Jesus’s final judgment at the end of history. For me this was the ahha moment/insight that changed everything. We can add to this the several problem places where Jesus says the son of man or kingdom with power will come before all of the Apostles are dead or finish their teaching ministry to Israel. Jesus’ glorification on the mountain didn’t solve the issue because it’s not far enough in the future for only some of the Apostles to be remaining alive. And if the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Mosaic order (which proved the Apostles words about Jesus true) isn’t a coming in power of the Kingdom, a light show on a mountain certainly isn’t (though it was proof to the disciples who saw it of who Jesus was). Then I started noticing things like Rev. says it’s supposed to happen soon. The seven woes of Mat 23 fit the seven seals/trumpets/bowls pattern. The 1/3 destruction of the earth and trees fits the first exile pattern (Ezek. 5:1-3). The great city is defined as Jerusalem (Rev 11:7) all of these things started building a very consistent picture that was hard to deny. Eventually, my study of the history of events during the Jewish-Roman war (which lasted for seven years, with the temple being destroyed in the middle of the week) put to rest my objection that, well x didn’t happen back then. There are still things I’m not sure about, but they bear the weight of the paradigm for me. They are fun points of further study. The other major contradiction for me (2) was in Daniel 7 and 11:36-Chap 12. In my study, I’ve been convinced that Daniel’s “end time” and the “shattering of the power of the holy people” really fits the fourth empire. All the events in Dan 11:36-12 fit with the Roman period described in Dan 2, 7, and 9. The only reason to take this time frame and stretch it out was the resurrection in 12 and Paul’s citation of the man of lawlessness in 2 Thess 2. So here is the question. Just like in Mat. 24, should we use the “obvious” time keys to determine what it means for Jesus to destroy the man of lawlessness, or do we fix that event in the future and then shape Daniel around that event (even if it rips and distorts how we would read Daniel without that assumption)? For me that was the second point of tension. It’s a slightly separate problem. As one could accept a past fulfillment of Mat 23-24, but still put 2 Thess 2 and most of Revelation 5-20 and 21 in the future. I’ve considered that. But at least at this point, I’ve been convinced that the events around the man of lawlessness can be located in the period of the Jewish war with Rome and the major false messiahs at that time. But if you wanted to explore a place to tap the breaks, that’s a place I explored. Anyway, those are some thoughts. If you feel comfortable with the explanations you have, then stick with them, until you see the reasons to change. There is no reason to change because of little problems here or there, every picture has them. But for me some of the tension points were so strong, I needed another way for it to make sense. But it’s also important to me that there be some earlier Christian teachers who saw some of these possibilities, but I think we have these in Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria. But that’s another rabbit hole. I think the distinction between 2 types of cloud comings is a biblical and exegetically sound way to solve the promise of an “already” coming in the first century, but a “not yet” coming in the future. Maybe that’s wrong, but it’s convinced me and been really fruitful in solving lots of textual issues.

@@jrhemmerich few thoughts to consider. I’m both futurist and historicist if that makes sense. I believe the Olivet discourse was for two generations. They would read it as their generation for the 70ad, we would read it as the fig tree generation. The gardener and the fig tree parable and the subsequent cursing of the fig tree are very important keys. The language is it dried up and withered. The generation in Matthew 24 is the one that sees the branches become tender. Trees are nations in the Old Testament. Syria is the oak, Lebanon is the cedar, Jordan is the cypress, and Israel is the fig tree. Meaning we are in the final generation when we see the fig tree again and as Luke puts it “also all the trees”. All four of these nations were rebirthed after WWII when nation rose against nation unlike we’ve never seen any other time. So place that that thought aside. Scripture parses the two resurrections in multiple places besides Daniel and revelation. There is no reason to assume Daniels two resurrections are at the exact same moment. It’s just saying at “that time”. What is “that time”? Day of the Lord of course. How long is the day of the Lord. 2 Peter 3 and revelation 20 place the day of the Lord as 1000 years. Revelation 20 clearly speaks that the first resurrection is at the beginning and the second at the end. It’s the clearest of all the passages to view the other scriptures through. It tells us events before during and after this 1000 years it repeats 6 times. There is no conflict. It’s just the final revelation and explanation of all the previous prophecies given. The biggest problem you have to reconcile with your view is that the first resurrection happens before the 1000 years. This is when Christ returns. There are dozens of NT passages that say we are resurrected when Christ returns. I’m not sure how anyone can say this has already happened. And Paul had some very harsh words for those that claimed it has in 2 thess 2 and this one. “and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some.” ‭‭2 Timothy‬ ‭2‬:‭17‬-‭18‬ ‭ESV‬ Don’t lock in your viewpoint. Daniel 7 is no different. There is nothing in Daniel 7 that says it’s the Roman Empire. Or that that event happened at Christ first advent. Sure it may have similarities. But that language is hard to reconcile as past to me since Jesus kills the lawless one at His coming. Just like revelation and all the NT says. It’s the same narrative. It’s no different from Jesus saying John Baptist is Elijah but say Elijah must still come and restore all things. Same with us being a new creation but what we will be has not yet been revealed. Rome is not mentioned in any of the OT day of the Lord proohecies. Rome was only a foreshadowing of the final empire. All the end times events revolve around mainly Edom (Esau) and Israel’s immediate neighbors. Even if we want to call it rome that’s fine as Rome was iron mixed with clay and these nations were all part of that empire at that time. None of the Roman emperors were worshipped by all the nations and performed signs and wonders to deceive part of the church into apostasy. There is too much left to the story in scripture for any of 70ad or events before or shortly after to fulfill it. The saints have to be conquered before Jesus returns. It’s the difficult truth to accept but Jesus told us we would be betrayed and put to death for his namesake. We have not seen the resurrection of the just in which Jesus said we’d be repaid for our good works, therefore we haven’t seen the millennium.

Hahaha.

Yes where does that fit in?

Depends upon what one counts as a quote. But that sounds about right, as John never introduces anything with "as it is written" or the "the prophet says". Mostly there are very strong allusions, what is sometimes called intertextuality or echoes. Nonetheless, the allusions are typically easier to spot in contrast to other types of literature.

Yeah I feel like a lot of these post-mill guys don't bring the Holy spirit working through us through gifts given by the father for us to actually see his kingdom come over the lives of people to bring them into the family of God.

🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪🤥🤥🤥🤥🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🐍

Zionist puppet cult