Thank you for this post. I am studying the postmill position after only knowing the pretrib, premill position. It makes a lot of sense, but it is hard to have an entire paradigm shift.
Same here, the first time a relative mentioned it to me I looked at him like he was crazy. But the more I looked into it, the more sense it made to me.
@royal priest Yeah I’m actually leaning more postmillinnial now then 4 months ago now I’m trying to parse out which type of postmillinnial view is correct the positive amil or the kind held by folks in the great awakenings and revivalist movements.
A funny, loving, kind, thoughtful man. All that knew him loved him (non Christians included). His wife committed adultery and remarried, and he still deeply loved her.
I see nothing in Rev. 20 that talks about an apostsy taking place at the end. 1 Thessalonians talks about an apostasy that takes place in regard to the revealing of the man of lawlessness which was a 1st century fulfillment. If Jesus is coming back for a spotless bride, it makes no sense that there will be a great apostsy taking place as this would not be representative of a spotless undefiled church.
Also how does he respond to the birthing pains and nation rising against nation up to Christs return.. how does that fit into your 1000 years of peace?
@@Jaryism christ came and was crucified we agree on that but then the acts and revelation 7-19 happened literally. We're in 20:8 Satan's little season.
It’s frustrating as a Prewrath believer… he dodges just like the Pretribs, every single precursor and major passage about it, like Mathew 24 and 1Thes 5 and 2Thes 2 and comparing the sequence to Rev 6… it’s clearly stated the precursors of the abomination and apostasy and celestial signs come before Christ returns. The millennial reign isn’t mentioned till after the wrath.
@@transatlanticwhirlwind7589 He sounds more like a Historist tbh, that the 4 horsemen and precursors and 1260 years or whatever it was, that there was no "gap theory" or church age between the time of the death of Jesus and fall of the temple in 70 AD, it all played out in the events of history till now. This is an impossible to defend theory 'cause the numbers and years just don't play out.. there was like the Great Upset in the mid 1800's since at the time 150 years ago many of the Plymouth Bretheren literally thought the numbers added up to his return around mid 1800 and it didn't happen, so they feigned that he DID return but only in spiritual form and were technically in the Milennium now. I think this is more of the direction Bahnsen goes because he believes there's no "gap" or any "future 70th week" to come. I think this is technically heretical.... well, for one the Postmillenial position teaches there'll be this 1000 years where Christianity will create sort of a "heaven on Earth" and we're generally headed toward that.... I call BULLSHIT lol, I mean look around at the rise of radical Leftism/progressivism/Islam increasing at a far more rapid rate (it's predicted Islam will overcome Christianity by 2050)... you can't possibly fucking think we're headed toward some global Christianity taking over the world, in fact like it says in Mathew 24 regarding the "Nation Rising against Nation... neighbor against neighbor... birthing pains..." etc. this is 100% more in align with what were seeing, we're seeing a world becoming more and more depraved and satanic, more secular, more lack of empathy toward human life and pro abortion, pro-transgendering kids, etc. The underlying spiritual evil from "the man of sin" satan is banging the drums and getting closer to hell than heaven, and the arrival of Christ will come like a thief in the night when the world starts to completely go to hell. That's what I think Revelations says and I feel like most pre-wrath all agree to this, it seems far more parsimonious to what scripture actually says than Bahnsen's cherry picking.
@@JustinHonaker He didn't really challenge, it's the fact that they dodge the major passages, like the Olivet discourse, the longest passage of text Jesus speaks in one saying.. and refuses to acknowledge any of the "precursors" that completely counter his Pretrib and millenarian position. Imagine if you gave me a ton of evidence I'm wrong about something, but I'm just like "yeah, but..." and pivot right back to ignoring what you just said, that would be obnoxious right? This is every pretrib when faced with the obvious major texts that challenge their fictional interpretation.
I do not believe the man of lawlessness and the beast are the same individual because the man of lawlessness, as it says in Scripture, will be destroyed with the brightness of the Lord’s coming.
Pretrib. Hi friends I have videos for you on Bible Prophecy and the End Times. Please consider going to Papa Joe Fortner or Shockwaves of the End Times or The Watchmen Series with Papa Joe. Thank you and God bless you 🙏
The hole in Brother Bahnsen's argument against the premillenial view is that he overlooks the timescale of "a day with the Lord is a thousand years" which would make the last "day" one thousand years long at the beginning of which "day" Christ returns and resurrects his saints, during which Christ reigns with His resurrected saints, and at tbe end of which He resurrects and judges the unregenerate dead.
@@toolegittoquit_001 i would be interested to see some reasons for your rejection of the inference that a day in God's timeline for earth is 1000 years
I have never heard any pre-trib. teacher teach what you say is the pre-trib. view concerning the dead going one place and the living going somewhere else. You have already made several untrue statements and suppositions in your first 3 or 4 minutes. When you start making statements about what Christ thought are you kidding? You have no idea what Christ thought about this because if we knew there would not be any controversy here. You have a bias just like the other folks and not you find post-trib. imaginings under every bush. Your logic and bible verse connections are no better than those of the pre-trib. view. The truth is that the bible teaches "you" something that it does not teach others. You have the audacity to believe that the Holy Spirit is giving you the truth and not giving the truth to others who disagree with you. I understand why you believe your understanding of this doctrine. I have read all the stuff and listened to all the sermons [more or less obviously]. I follow your dot connections and your personal ideas and concepts about what you believe concerning biblical history and as you weave your narrative and supply your rightly divided understanding you come up with what you believe is biblical evidence that supports your position. The problem is that many folks find your logic and biblical dot connections unconvincing. There are dozens of holes in your logical conclusions that are so real to you but are not real to others. Intellectual honesty finds the better part of wisdom admitting that bottom line we have differences here. And to correct you about one thing you said as a pre-trib. believer, I will not have a problem working with you are any other balanced believer here. As a Calvinist I understand the non and anti-Calvinist and realize that we are both on the same road. It is more likely that he will reject me, but I will walk with him if he allows me to. [ I realize this speaker is with the Lord now].
As a calvinistic post-trib believer, while we may disagree with some topics, I simply wanted to say that I agree with you on the last part of what you said and wanted to express my appreciation for you making that clarification. Many need to learn to have this kind of grace towards others. Bless you.
not postmil Revelation 3:10 10 Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth. Tereo ek tay-reh'-o Verb NAS Word Usage - Total: 71 1. to attend to carefully, take care of a. to guard b. metaph. to keep, one in the state in which he is c. to observe d. to reserve: to undergo something Ek ek Preposition NAS Word Usage - Total: 62 1. out of, from, by, away from harpazō 1) to seize, carry off by force 2) to seize on, claim for one' s self eagerly 3) to snatch out or away
