Life After Death🤔 What the Church Fathers Believed✝️ - Interview with Dr. Charles Hill 

I think the scripture is much less explicit about the particulars of these things than some people claim, and as a result some have gone far ahead of what has actually been revealed. The truth is likely something far more spectacular than what we've imagined, and beyond our categorizations of it.

As I listen to this, I'm finding out I'm an oddity. My eschatology is a millennium, but I believe we go to paradise or torments when we die as Jesus mentions in his story about Lazarus and the rich man. Then when Christ returns to judge the world the dead in christ will be raised first and those that are still alive on the earth will meet Christ in the air and that is when we will "in a twinkling" be changed in to our immortal bodies. You're definitely making me think here. Thank you!

I love the way you guys process information and then ask questions

The belief that we go straight to be with the Lord upon death is not unique to amillennialism. Very few premillennialists would deny that. Am I misunderstanding? He seems to be suggesting that any early church fathers who believed that must be amill.

I believe that the biggest mistake generally made in these discussions is the assumption that the eternal and spiritual Kingdom exists in some connection to the entropic chronological state in which we exist in this creation. I believe that the Kingdom is and exists in eternity, free from the bonds of time and entropy. We just can't mentally grasp what this state means or how it works.

AMEN TO FOCUSING ON CHRIST AND THAT HE IS OUR HOPE ! SO GLAD YOU ENDED ON SUCH A HIGH NOTE , LOVE THE WAY YOU APPROACH TEACHING . THANK YOU BOTH FOR YOUR QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU IN HOW YOU ANSWERED! LET US ALL LOOK AND AIM HIGHER AND STOP ALL ARE ARGUING AND BEING CONTENTIOUS AND CALLING OURSELVES HIS BODY ! WE CAN ALL DO SO MUCH BETTER THAN WINNING AN ARGUMENT ,WE CAN BE ONE OVER TO THE FATHER THROUGH CHRIST AND TRULY LOVE EACH OTHER SINCERELY AND DEEPLY FROM THE HEART BECAUSE HIS HEART HAS TAKEN A HOLD OF OURS! IF JESUS CAME TO WIN AN ARGUMENT WE'VE ALL WRONG BUT IF HE CAME TO RESTORE THAT WHICH WAS LOST AND DESTROY THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL. THAT'S SOMETHING WORTH LIVING AND DYING FOR . MADE RIGHTEOUS INSTEAD OF STILL LIVING SELF-RIGHTEOUS

You guys need to interview David Bercot of Scroll publishing on this topic. He’s an expert in the early church and is Anabaptist. He takes the early church pre-millennial view.

When someone is preaching heavy on heaven vs hell, I would imagine these questions certainly need to be answered. That being said, for those things that are not certain where the “jury’s still out”, I couldn’t imagine those things need to be known in order to preach the gospel. That tells me that we need to examine what exactly we need in order to preach the gospel. If we can’t clearly know and explain things such as new heaven and new earth, then how can we preach the gospel if we believe the gospel is dependent on the thought of where we go when we die?! Not sure if you’re catching what I’m saying but if there’s all these different camps of belief about what happens after we die, then I guess those particular doctrinal things really aren’t needed to preach the gospel fully, or else scripture would’ve defined that with the preaching of Peter and Paul.

Craig Keener points out that John 14:2-3 is about the Spirit abiding with us now, not about us going to heaven. Read the whole chapter and it fits.

Perhaps one of the most important questions you could try to answer, great video!

Such an informative episode. Thank you. One thing, though… Isn’t it the wolf and the lamb and not the lion and the lamb?

If I can’t cite Irenaeus for premillennialism without adopting his view of the intermediate state, does that mean I can’t cite Sam Storms on tongues without taking his view of election? That’s silly.

Super encouraging! Love Dr. Hill’s emphasis on the fundamental shift that Christ brings in through his work, that now instead of going down to Sheol we are now given the honor of being brought up to heaven! Hallelujah!

Very interesting show! Thank you all.

In Polycarp’s epistle to the Philippians, ch5, he gives a brief summary of the end times that indicates chiliasm: "If we please Him in this present world, we shall receive also the future world, according as He has promised to us that He will raise us again from the dead, and that if we live worthily of Him, “we shall also reign together with Him,” provided only we believe. In like manner, let the young men also be blameless in all things…since “every lust warreth against the spirit;’ and ‘neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God," (1 Cor 6:9-10) While Polycarp does not specifically mention a period of a thousand years, he does affirm several key distinctives of Premillennialism. Saints are to reign with Jesus only after they are resurrected. In instructing on how to inherit this future age Polycarp quotes 1 Corinthians 6:9, thereby equating the period after the resurrection with the kingdom. Such teachings would not have been found in any eschatological view outside of Premillennialism.

No Wednesday show? Noo! Haha. Am super super excited for Rowntrees book… do we have an approx eta on that?

I think I’m still a Premillennialist? But Amillennialism, I’m finding, also has many points in its favor. I thought, though, that during the interview with Dr. Hill, he could’ve been pressed on what seems to be an argument from silence on the part of Amillennialists - that going to Heaven immediately after you die is tantamount to a belief in Amillennialism. Just because many early Premils (that wrote about it, or that had their writings preserved until the present) had the view that, after death one experienced soul sleep, or went to Sheol - does that mean that all of them did? Maybe many or all of the early church fathers that Dr. Hill claimed for “his team “ were actually also Premillennialist. I don't see an automatic argument in scripture for saints in Heaven not being able to return with Christ at His second coming, and at that point receiving their new bodies, as those saints still alive on earth rise to greet the Lord in their new bodies.

Horah! Horah! One of my Favorite Biblical/Scholarly Discernment Channels is now Showing One of the KC ProFits Vidios that You Guys DELETED! VERY INFORMATIVE! MUCH INSIGHT INTO YOUR WORLD OF HYPERCHARISMATIC/NAR (Moravian Cult?) MADNESS! 😮 (Thank God for Pastor Ernie Gruen! 🙏)

Subscribed to channel and newsletter. And I’m amill. Peace.

We've all heard people qoute Revelation 21, "no more tears," in reference to Heaven, even before it comes down to earth. But it says after! We also get a glimpse of heaven before it's joined to earth in the 5th seal of Rev 6. The martyres under the altar are crying out for vindication. Doesn’t sound as blissful as chapter 21. This is just a thought, there can be tears in heaven now. The martyres still cry out, while they reign with Christ now from Heaven. I know its symbolic imagery but it may be a fair suggestion 🤷‍♂️ There will be a time when "all things sad come untrue." I'd never thought of afterlife texts as proof of Amillennialism before. Will definitely be listening to this one again.

Awesome discussion!

Subscribed for newsletter

There were early church fathers who were post mil as well according to pastor Joel of right response ministries.

You guys gonna answer that last really long response by fight 4 faith? The last part about his denomination especially. He really should not have made that teen girl squad video & I think his denomination should address him for that behavior but he had some points in the main response that could not be ignored.

Dr. Hill indicates that Hippolytus is an amillennialist, but what about this quote? "But that we may not leave our subject at this point undemonstrated, we are obliged to discuss the matter of the times, of which a man should not speak hastily, because they are a light to him. For as the times are noted from the foundation of the world, and reckoned from Adam, they set clearly before us the matter with which our inquiry deals. For the first appearance of our Lord in the flesh took place in Bethlehem, under Augustus, in the year 5500; and He suffered in the thirty-third year. And 6,000 years must needs be accomplished, in order that the Sabbath may come, the rest, the holy day "on which God rested from all His works." For the Sabbath is the type and emblem of *the future kingdom of the saints, when they "shall reign with Christ," when He comes from heaven,* as John says in his Apocalypse: for "a day with the Lord is as a thousand years." Since, then, in six days God made all things, it follows that 6,000 years must be fulfilled. And they are not yet fulfilled, as John says: "five are fallen; one is," that is, the sixth; "the other is not yet come." (Hippolytus, THE EXTANT WORKS AND FRAGMENTS OF HIPPOLYTUS, TRANSLATED BY THE REV. S. D. F. SALMOND, available on earlychristianwritings) I am a historic premillennialist, but I still appreciated the discussion.

To be absent from the body is to be present w the lord.

Premillennialism does not deny that Christ is the rightful ruler now. But it does deny that the present age of men is ruled by Christ. Rather it is under the thumb of 'the prince of the power of the air'. In premillennialism, Satan is not completely bound, and the earth continues in rebellion against its rightful ruler. Premillennialism has always been a radical proposition, that the rulers of this world are condemned for their wicked rebellion, their evil works, including the oppression of humanity. Amillennial ideas, the symbolic reading of those eschatological scriptures, became more prevalent precisely at the time when some church leaders were seeing the advantage in seeking rapprochement with the Roman rulers. The desire for persecution to end, of course, was part of it. But the temptation of political influence and power was also there. Through this reading of the scriptures, church leaders could rationalize their becoming a tool for social conformity through alliance with murderous rulers by insisting it was for the salvific good of the citizenry. That harlotry on the part of church leaders led to enforced church hierarchies, the use of the tools of the state to instigate crusades and attacks on religious minorities, and widespread corruption as church leadership became enmeshed with the political ruling families.

Why would you have a life in heaven and then a kingdom on earth? YOU wouldn’t but HE would. WE are not the arbiters of life, but the One who said there would be a millennial kingdom on earth is.

Curious how close partial preterism is to amillennialism.

I love his book! Very helpful!

Iraneous was wrong... Yes Jesus did descend into Hades, BUT he emptied Hades taking a host of the faithful with him. The faithful who were waiting for the promise to Abraham to be fulfilled. Jesus descent into Hades was to take the keys of death away from Satan thus conquering death and to assure mankind that they too would be resurrected.

And the resurrection? What's the point of the body if I'm in heaven?

Good talk guys, but to say if you are in the good section of Hades is to be away from God is simply not so. Psalms 139:7-10 If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me. Some quotes from the Ante Nicene on this. IMO, I see no A mil teaching from the ANF. The souls of the godly remain in a better place, while those of the unjust and wicked are in a worse place, waiting for the time of judgment. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.197. You may have fallen in with some [Gnostics] who are called Christians. However, they do not admit this [intermediate state], and they venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham. . . . They say there is no resurrection of the dead. Rather, they say that when they die, their souls are taken to heaven. Do not imagine that they are Christians. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.239. [The Gnostics] are in all points inconsistent with themselves when they declare that all souls do not enter into the intermediate place, but only those of the righteous. Irenaeus (c. 180, EJW), 1.403. Our answer to this is that the Scripture itself .. . expressly distinguishes between Abraham's bosom (where the poor man dwells) and Hades. Hades means one thing; and "Abraham's bosom," another. A great gulf is said to separate those regions and to hinder a passage from one to the other. Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.406.

17:28 Hippolytus??? Did Dr. Hill misspeak? Hippolytus was famously premill, following Irenaeus.

Irenaeus is the man! But I love Justin Martyr and Cyprian too.

I have never heard a more confused description of Pre-millennial , A-millennial, and Post-millennial. I think he is confused or is trying to pick and choose pieces to fit his narrative. Premillennialism is the view that Christ’s second coming will occur prior to His millennial kingdom, and that the millennial kingdom is a literal 1000-year reign of Christ on earth. In order to understand and interpret the passages in Scripture that deal with end-times events, there are two things that must be clearly understood: a proper method of interpreting Scripture and the distinction between Israel (the Jews) and the church (the body of all believers in Jesus Christ). An amillennialist sees the 1,000 years as spiritual and non-literal, as opposed to a physical understanding of history. Although the prefix a- would typically signify a negation of a word, the amil position sees the millennium as “realized,” or better explained as “millennium now.” To simplify, amillennialism sees the first coming of Christ as the inauguration of the kingdom, and His return as the consummation of the kingdom. John’s mention of 1,000 years thus points to all things that would happen in the church age. In amillennialism, the “1,000 years” is happening right now. (Although it’s been nearly 2,000 years since Jesus rose from the grave.) Postmillennialism is an interpretation of Revelation chapter 20 which sees Christ’s second coming as occurring after the “millennium,” a golden age or era of Christian prosperity and dominance. The term includes several similar views of the end times, and it stands in contrast to premillennialism (the view that Christ’s second coming will occur prior to His millennial kingdom and that the millennial kingdom is a literal 1,000-year reign) and, to a lesser extent, amillennialism (no literal millennium). Prophecy has always been fulfilled literally, we know from the Bible that what has happened in the past will happen again. Ecclesiastes‬ ‭1‬:‭9‬ ‭ ”That which has been is what will be, That which is done is what will be done, And there is nothing new under the sun.“ ‭‭ Applying a literal method of interpretation to Scripture results in the pieces of the puzzle coming together. All of the Old Testament prophecies of Jesus’ first coming were fulfilled literally. Therefore, we should expect the prophecies regarding His second coming to be fulfilled literally as well. Premillennialism is the only system that agrees with a literal interpretation of God’s covenants and end-times prophecy.

Was the Reformation “novel” in 1517?

Is there a "best" printed version of "Against Heresies"?

In my opinion, Jewish eschatology is correct as is pre-mill. How? Based on tons of OT scripture, most everyone before the cross, except Enoch and Elijah and probably Moses (since he shows up with Elijah at the Transfiguration) and perhaps a handful of others, went to Sheol when they died to await the day they'd be ransomed (tetelestai) and could ascend to heaven, which I believe happened in the 3 days between Christ's burial and resurrection. I also suspect that Enoch, Elijah, and Moses had a high price to pay to remain in heaven without the price of the cross being paid, just as Isaiah had to burn his lips to make them pure. I'm sure there was a price on that side of the cross to being so near the presence of the Almighty. However, that changed as soon as the cross happened, which is why Jesus could say, this day you will be with me in Paradise. Of course, it seems to me like Jesus didn't go to Paradise himself until 40 days later, but perhaps he gained some sort of omnipresence back upon his death. I don't know.

Curious why the thief on the cross is considered to go to "paradise" to be with Jesus many going to heaven, when Jesus Himself went in to the earth.

Not one scripture in the new testament says anyone goes to heaven when they die. First Enoch saw the four chambers in the earth where people go. 1 chamber for the martyrs, 1 for the righteous, 1 for the wicked who are judge when Messiah returns and are then cast into the eternal fire, and the 4th chamber are for the sinners who thought they were righteous and are judged after the millennial reign. Also paradise would be the Garden of Eden which is also enclosed in the earth till this day.

Those who died before Jesus The perfect sacrifice could not ascend to heaven..so He went down to bring them up upon his death & those who have received Him after His death go to be with Him

43:04 does he not mean the wolf lying down with the lamb?

This all assumes that God doesn’t mean what he says concerning the people, the land, the temple, and the kingdom was not literal. It’s really bad. I expect to live with Christ on a New earth forever. My hope is not to go be anywhere out of the body, but the bodily resurrection of the dead.

Origen was supposedly post mil

54:16 Oooookay. Got it! So basically, Hippolytus is a premillennialist that doesn’t fit Dr. Hill’s theory. Hippolytus agreed with most contemporary premillennialists, that the dead in Christ go to heaven, thus proving you can’t determine anyone’s millennial views based on their view of the intermediate state. Also, just because someone talked about being with the Lord after death, doesn’t mean they thought that was in heaven. (Psalm 139:8)

John 3;13

finally someone says this truth about the early church

Thinking the afterlife is ONLY about being with Jesus is gnostic thinking... escapism, anti-matter, to be free of flesh is bliss. And paradise =/= heaven. By his own description of Ireneus' position he knows that's not how they used the term. So his reasoning is muddled on this. He nakes excellent points about Jewish eschatology. He's 💯 right. But amill reflects a system of thinking that completely breaks continuity with the jewish understanding. Jesus didn't abolish the jewish system, he cristened it. He gave them resurrection, and in giving us himself and ascending he he gave us heaven... but Jesus isn't merely STAYING there. He's returning. Therefore the bodily resurrection and the earthly locus of the heavenly kingdom. He seems to conveniently ignore that being WITH Jesus means being on earth post second coming. To think you never come back is to minimize the resurrection. To thonk you stay in heaven and dont physically live on earth is to say Jesus ISN'T RETURNING!!!

Ah-mill or AY-mill…..that IS the question! And when will Michael Miller be included in the opening reel!? 😂

I have been attending a reformed church the last 2 years and this amillennialism was the biggest shocker. Fortunately the pastor avoids the topic. Reformed theology adopted the most vicious hatred for Jews that it colors much of their understanding of Scripture. They are required to bend over backwards to rephrase, obfuscate, or declare false parts of the Bible that don't allow them to negate Gods promises to Israel. It might sound polite and scholarly but its sophistry and sourced from hate.

I'm afraid your guest is mistaken. Premillenialism (belief in a literal thousand year reign of Christ upon the earth yet to come.) was clearly the predominant view among the earliest Christians. Anyone who has read their writings can see this quite easily. Here is just one typical example of many... THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS(1) CHAP. XV. Further,(16) also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai, "And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart."(17) And He says in another place, "If my sons keep the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them."(18) The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: "And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it."(19) Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, "He finished in six days." This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is(20) with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth,(21) saying, "Behold, to-day(22) will be as a thousand years."(23) Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. "And He rested on the seventh day." This meaneth: when His Son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man,(24) and judge the ungodly, and change the-sun, and the moon,(25) and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day. Moreover, He says, "Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart." If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things,(1) we are deceived.(2) Behold, therefore:(3) certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness.(4) Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves.(5) Further, He says to them, "Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure."(6) Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but that is which I have made, [namely this,] when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead.(7) And(8) when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens

The entire premise of the speaker is fallacious... no, you're not amill if you believe you go to heaven. And you can't ASSUME the one from the other. Its logically absurd.

Funny question, "Where do we GO, when we die." Why "funny", because the Scriptures in Genesis, which tell us SPECIFICALLY as to what happens when we die, say NOTHING about "going" anywhere. God specifically told Adam that he would die, after having sinned, and RETURN somewhere. Where would he RETURN? We are told, he would RETURN TO DUST. That Law has never been rescinded. All people who have died, except for one Man, have RETURNED TO DUST. No one has GONE anywhere, however, we can use EUPHEMISMS, such as, "He went to be with the fathers", or "He went to Paradise", etc. Those are just Cultural Sayings and not ACTUAL situations. Jesus died to pay for "the wages of sin", i.e., DEATH. He was RESURRECTED by God, without seeing corruption, and JUSTIFIED so that he could JUSTIFY and give Everlasting Life to those who believe. Those who died, being justified by God, will be RESURRECTED, just as Christ. We ARE bodies which are either Living or Dead. Men are not "immortal spirit beings", we are MORTALS, subject to death. We have nothing in our bodies which is "immortal". We die because our "breath" is "cutoff", and we "return to dust", i.e., we begin to "see corruption". Jesus died and his "breath" left him, he stopped breathing. He was DEAD, in a Grave here on Terra Firma, for 3 days and nights. He "did not see corruption" because biology tells us that the CORRUPTION of the body does not begin (as a rule) to decay until 72 hours after death. The Scriptures, specifically Peter in the second chapter of Acts, tell us Jesus was in Hades, dead and not alive. God "raised him from the grave", because the GRAVE is where he was, and not dashing around like a Caspar Ghost.

Wish there was some Biblical backing for this talk.... but I don't see any.