Love the book A case for Amillennialism, I hold this position. I also love your material and look forward to the rest of your content. I am excited for this interview!
I love the way Dr. Riddlebarger differentiates the historic etymology for Amil/Post mil language of various theologians, pastors and writers. The wisdom of stating the need to look at individual passages and make interpretive summaries from there cannot be understated. Often hardliners of either the Amil or Post mil postion will claim or name drop X, while that same person exegesis develops in a way that departs from the supposed group they would identify with in today's terms. Very thankful for this whole conversation. Thank you for hosting such a wonderful interactive discussion. I've cited much of Dr. R's work in my own writing, preaching and teaching, and am thankful for benefiting again from his wisdom here.
Okay ~ As an Amill, who agrees with Dr. Kim's eschatology, and feels Apolitical as well, I find his comments around the 36:00 mark to be pretty sad. Like, for shame. The Postmill church I attend does tend to be pretty political, but if you can't preach on the evils of abortion because there might be someone in the congregation that's had an abortion, then you really can't preach to anyone. One of the key points of preaching is to call to repentance. What in the world Kim?
Chris: This should clarify: When it comes to the matter of abortion, local churches must approach the issue in a manner completely foreign to the standard two-party political calculus. A Christian minister must preach the whole counsel of God on matters of the sanctity of human life and the protection of the unborn, the most helpless members of society. This means preaching the law and the gospel to those who have had abortions, as well as to those who are proud that they would never do such a thing. On any given Sunday there will be those present in the congregation who, when the subject is mentioned, are immediately proud of the fact that they would never take the life of their own unborn child. They quietly thank God that they are not like others who have done such a horrible thing. These self-righteous individuals must be confronted with the law just as Jesus confronted the self-righteous members of his audiences (cf. Luke 18:9-14). But there may be one or more women present in the same congregation who have undergone this horrible procedure and who are racked by guilt because of what they have done. These woman have repented of their sin, are restored to fellowship with Jesus Christ, yet, if the truth be known, many are bruised reeds and smoldering wicks who need to be comforted with the promise of the gospel that no sin is so awful that it cannot be forgiven (Matt. 12:20). When these women hear the subject of abortion addressed in a political context, their own sin immediately comes to mind and they are overcome by guilt and shame. Their question is not whether abortion is permissible or not, but “can God ever forgive me for what I have done?” There may be a teenager present that same Sunday who finds herself contemplating an abortion because of her fear of what her parents might do if they discover that she is pregnant. There may be a professional woman in attendance who too is pregnant and unmarried and does not want her successful career disrupted by the birth of a child and the attendant responsibilities which go with it. Despite their different stages in life, these two women need to be instructed from God’s word that God is the author of all human life, and that the taking that life by means of abortion is a violation of the sixth commandment. These women need to be confronted with the law of God so that they become aware of their sin, and so that their minds are changed because of what Scripture says about the matter. At the same time they need to witness firsthand the charity and support of God’s people toward those women who have fallen into sexual sin, have become pregnant, and nevertheless brought these precious lives into the world. Unlike the activist on the political right who champions the cause of life so as to appeal to a particular segment of the electorate, or those on the political left who champion a woman’s “right to choose” for similar electoral reasons, the minister of the gospel must deal with all of these intensely personal situations simultaneously. In order to do this, God has given him the law and the Gospel. Those who have taken life and are repentant need to comforted by the gospel. Those who have taken life and who are not repentant need to confronted by the law, and disciplined by the church if necessary. The woman contemplating an abortion needs to consider her circumstances in the light of God’s word, and decide to give her child up for adoption (in the case of the young woman), or else realize that God’s chosen path for her career was not the one she had mapped out (the career woman). And while those who have not had abortions have exercised a certain and commendable civic righteousness, they too must realize that they have, in effect, sinned in their hearts against those women whom they have judged to be less righteous than themselves. They too must repent. Given the complex individual circumstances just described, we can see the vast difference between the way an issue such as abortion impacts the kingdom of Christ and those in the civil kingdom. The redemptive mission of the church requires an entirely different approach to such matters than the political activists and party politics which operate in the civil kingdom. That said, the church does have a prophetic function in calling those in the civil kingdom to repentance whenever the state allows, or even endorses, the taking the life of the unborn--the prophetic mission of the church. As Christians seek to fulfill the Cultural Mandate we must value life, and this means raising our families in a manner which is consistent with our theology, taking up the cause of the unborn in the civil kingdom in a manner consistent with our view of the legitimacy of the state, and understanding both the role and limits of political activism.
This is exactly the type of engagement we hope to foster amongst the Body of Christ. That rather than retreating to our various camps, we seek to understand one another and to sharpen and mold where neccesary. We see no benefit in dismissing one another based on particular outworkings of our theology, but must continue to care deeply and passionately about these issues while maintaining unity in the bonds of peace.
@@kimriddlebarger3238 Thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood what you were saying. I do agree that we need to keep politics out of the pulpit. It really does become an extra layer of static or noise that interferes with communicating the word. I thought you were saying that we needed to tiptoe around topics that were political lightning rods.
So disappointed. Lost a lot of respect for KR here. I watched this to hear the AM case, but instead heard KR blame everyone else for straw manning his view while building a huge straw man against postmil by saying it’s not based on biblical basis, but on political purposes. It’s sad when folks misrepresent the other view so badly.
@@mobeans7945 sure, in a nutshell, it teaches that the millennial kingdom was inaugurated at Jesus 1st coming and will be consummated at His second coming.
Something that helped me and is helping me understand the book of revelation is this, the book of revelation is speaking of the same.things the rest of the NT is speaking of just with apocalyptic language.
I'm Roman Catholic but I still highly recommend this book because his interpretation of the book of revelation and the two age model of eschatology is very good. I would also recommend 'The City of God' by Saint Augustine of course if you're looking to read more about this system. I don't agree with his understanding of the covenant of grace and the covenant of works, I would formulate that differently but in terms of the eschatological system his work is quite good.
Yet, being pro-family and pro-life by necessity makes one political today. Nearly every political issue today is also a moral issue that pastors must address no matter who is sitting in their pews. If you address life issues, it is political. If you address moral issues, it is political. The issue is not republicans vs. democrats but speaking God's will clearly in the church and in the world. Maybe if the church in California stood as Bonhoeffer did it would not be the growing cesspool that spews its immorality throughout the whole world. From a fellow amil.
Around the 21:30 mark, the question of hermeneutics comes up. As an Amill, it seems to me that the Pre-mills and the Post-mills basically use the same hermeneutic. But because it's such an unwieldy tool, it's hard to keep it in line when applying it to the Bible.
Argument against Postmillennialism "I don't see the world getting better." 😅 But really.. compared to? 50 years ago? 100 years ago? Try going back further... 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000
Jesus and a few of the disciples were leaving the Temple Mount marveling at the buildings and Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, there is coming a time when not one stone will be left on another, all will be thrown down as rubble." Then they went up on the Mt of Olives and came to Jesus privately and said, "When will these things be and what will be the sign of your coming again and the end of the age." There Jesus launched into the "Olivet Discourse." One of the things He said was, " And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the WHOLE WORLD as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." The Gospel was NOT preached to the whole world in the first century. Jesus also said, " For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now-and never to be equaled again." Whatever happened in the first century was NOT the greatest distress the world has ever been in. Then Jesus said, " “Immediately after the distress of those days “‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’ This did not happen in the first century. “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that [a]it is near-at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation (that sees these things start to unfold) will by no means pass away till all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away. Then Jesus said, "Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then ALL the PEOPLES of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the FOUR WINDS, FROM ONE END OF THE HEAVENS TO THE OTHER. If this happened in the first century, why don't historical records from every country/civilization on earth abound with reports of the greatest site ever?
I like how he dismissed postmill position as to only being because of political reasons. Some of that might be true. But most people i know go postmill then become political. I used to be amill until dealing with the scriptures. The amill position doesn't use scripture to defend it's position but instead uses theology as their hermeneutic on eschatological passages. It's basically gnostic premill using a postmill hermeneutic 😢
There is a lot of presumption here. Many Premillennialists have read and studied scripture their whole life and still remain Premillennialists. This guy never really understood Premillennialism. They should have true Premillennialists like James Kaddis speak against his understanding vs. Amillennialism. I find this video as a biased view not really a true discussion of the different understandings.
My take on the narrative, or "story" on the Book of Revelation, is this: The Revelation was given to John by Christ to deliver His message to seven churches in Asia, written in signs for events that would soon take place beginning in the first century. The book concerns itself with the defeat of the enemies of Christ and His church, who were empowered by Satan, who ultimately was also defeated. The Jews were the first to persecute the Christians, documented in the Book of Acts, beginning with the stoning of Stephen, and continuing through to one of the last stonings of the Jews, recorded by Josephus (62 AD), the death of James, the brother of Jesus. Israel, with its capital city, Jerusalem, the adulterous harlot, or Babylon, rode the beast (Roman Empire - "We have no king but Caesar, crucify Him! Let this man's blood be on our heads and on our children's heads"). The beast hated her, however, and eventually destroyed her (70 AD), and with the punishment reserved for the daughters of priests who became harlots, she was burned up by fire. God had been "married" to Israel, who never was faithful to Him, and because of her spiritual adultery, she was "executed" by the Romans as Jewish law permits. This allowed the Bride of Christ (church), the New Jerusalem, to take her rightful position at the marriage supper of the Lamb. She replaced the executed adulterous Old Jerusalem as this bride. Next, the beast, with the forced worship of its Emperor as God by all of its citizens, was dealt with. The beast continued to persecute the church and eventually was defeated by the rider of the white horse (Christ), whose weapon was the sword of the Spirit coming from His mouth (the gospel, the Word). By the 4th century, the Roman Empire declared Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire and, in complete reversal, the church had triumphed. Eventually, Paganism was made illegal, conquering the beast. For a lengthy period of time (millennium), Satan was prohibited (bound) from empowering nations to continue to persecute Christians on a worldwide basis like the Roman Empire days, and simultaneously the martyred souls who were slaughtered came to life and reigned with an already reigning Christ. This allowed Christianity to flourish and progress throughout this period, uninhibited and spread to every corner of the world. Then, after this lengthy time period (millennium), an event yet still in the future, Satan will be released briefly to attempt to empower all of the nations for worldwide persecution of the church once again, hoping to finally destroy them (he surrounds the great city, the New Jerusalem). Just before this occurs, however, Christ intervenes and destroys Satan and then institutes the final judgment of all humanity. Then eternity begins with the righteous receiving their reward and the damned sentenced to eternal punishment.
I am answering my own post, but I consider myself amill on the millennium. Things are definitely not getting better. IMO, if we are not currently living in the days of Revelation 20:7-10, then we definitely are not far from it. When the French Revolution happened, with its Cult or Age of Reason, the influence of Christianity in Europe was forever changed. By the mid 19th century, you had the writings of Karl Marx and Charles Darwin, both who greatly influenced the 20th century. Here we are in the early 21st century, and Christianity in the West is in retreat. The religious "nones" are the fastest growing group in America. Churches in Europe are being turned into museums. Muslims are growing fast in the East. This is not progress.
What's to understand? It's made up of neoplatonic gnostic catholic allegorical metaphorical and supposedly "spiritual," theology and eschatology. It's not really scriptural. The scriptures that are used to support it are interpreted allegorically and metaphorically; and by doing that you can prove anything. 🙏✝️👑✝️🙏
Who teaches "Classical" Dispensationalism? I'd like to know because they apparently teach different forms of salvation in different dispensations, but I'm in the Dispensational camp, and I don't believe that, and authors I've read don't either.
There are a few teachers in the Bible Belt that still teach classic Dispensationalism. But most have gone the “revised” Ryrie route, or teach a more “progressive” version of Disp, a la Darrell Bock. I still use my Scofield Bible, which is an excellent example of the more classic form. Though as a historic Premil, I disagree with some of his teachings..
@@biblehistoryscience3530 What we know as “classic” Disp came to fruition in the late 1800’s, with writers like James H. Brookes and W.E. Blackstone. One can trace it all the way back to the Reformation, since that is when expositors began to take Israel’s promises seriously. There was another line of thought within the Reformed tradition which accepted and embraced the “old Catholic” view of Israeology (=supersessionism) and ran with it. That is the group we hear from more loudly today..
@biblehistoryscience3530 Probably the Jewish apocalyptic perspective. This is why they tried to make Jesus King on the spot, due to their misunderstanding of things eschatological. Of course, Jesus rejected this misunderstanding, "The kingdom does not come with observation, but is within you; my kingdom is not of this world."
Riddlebarger condemned his own amil views. Once you allegorize something that isn't obvious, you back yourself into a corner and you can't get out without allegorizing everything. That's what Augustine had to do. Then, at the end of his life, he admitted he allegorized too much and basically refuted his own views, since he didn't get allegorizing from the OT. He got that from Tyconius, Philo, Clement of Alexandria and Origen, not the bible. Amils have to make everything fit and because they reject obvious literal scriptures, they have to allegorize almost everything. It didn't make sense to you because you rejected what the scripture says. You should have rejected your feelings, not the scriptures. This is how heresy starts.
I think what is disappointing is Dr. Riddlebarger portrays Postmillennialism from the perspective of the 1950's and Boettner. If he was just willing and able to examine contemporary postmil perspectives he would find very few people who propagate issues like a future millennium as opposed to the millennium being between the first and second advents. And the notion of a future 1000 period is foreign to the current voices of postmil thought. As for theonomy, what is wrong with Christians getting involved in politics. The argument could be made that the reason America is in this state is because the Church has made the deliberate choice to handover our culture to the non-believing world. They did this by being silent. Jesus wasn't silent brethren.
Love the book A case for Amillennialism, I hold this position. I also love your material and look forward to the rest of your content. I am excited for this interview!
I love the way Dr. Riddlebarger differentiates the historic etymology for Amil/Post mil language of various theologians, pastors and writers.
The wisdom of stating the need to look at individual passages and make interpretive summaries from there cannot be understated. Often hardliners of either the Amil or Post mil postion will claim or name drop X, while that same person exegesis develops in a way that departs from the supposed group they would identify with in today's terms.
Very thankful for this whole conversation. Thank you for hosting such a wonderful interactive discussion. I've cited much of Dr. R's work in my own writing, preaching and teaching, and am thankful for benefiting again from his wisdom here.
Post millennial and amilleniel are two totally different views of end time. You cannot compare them
Im currently reading this book right now! Thanks to my boy @Adam Carmichael !!
Okay ~ As an Amill, who agrees with Dr. Kim's eschatology, and feels Apolitical as well, I find his comments around the 36:00 mark to be pretty sad. Like, for shame. The Postmill church I attend does tend to be pretty political, but if you can't preach on the evils of abortion because there might be someone in the congregation that's had an abortion, then you really can't preach to anyone. One of the key points of preaching is to call to repentance. What in the world Kim?
Chris: This should clarify:
When it comes to the matter of abortion, local churches must approach the issue in a manner completely foreign to the standard two-party political calculus. A Christian minister must preach the whole counsel of God on matters of the sanctity of human life and the protection of the unborn, the most helpless members of society. This means preaching the law and the gospel to those who have had abortions, as well as to those who are proud that they would never do such a thing. On any given Sunday there will be those present in the congregation who, when the subject is mentioned, are immediately proud of the fact that they would never take the life of their own unborn child. They quietly thank God that they are not like others who have done such a horrible thing. These self-righteous individuals must be confronted with the law just as Jesus confronted the self-righteous members of his audiences (cf. Luke 18:9-14).
But there may be one or more women present in the same congregation who have undergone this horrible procedure and who are racked by guilt because of what they have done. These woman have repented of their sin, are restored to fellowship with Jesus Christ, yet, if the truth be known, many are bruised reeds and smoldering wicks who need to be comforted with the promise of the gospel that no sin is so awful that it cannot be forgiven (Matt. 12:20). When these women hear the subject of abortion addressed in a political context, their own sin immediately comes to mind and they are overcome by guilt and shame. Their question is not whether abortion is permissible or not, but “can God ever forgive me for what I have done?”
There may be a teenager present that same Sunday who finds herself contemplating an abortion because of her fear of what her parents might do if they discover that she is pregnant. There may be a professional woman in attendance who too is pregnant and unmarried and does not want her successful career disrupted by the birth of a child and the attendant responsibilities which go with it. Despite their different stages in life, these two women need to be instructed from God’s word that God is the author of all human life, and that the taking that life by means of abortion is a violation of the sixth commandment. These women need to be confronted with the law of God so that they become aware of their sin, and so that their minds are changed because of what Scripture says about the matter. At the same time they need to witness firsthand the charity and support of God’s people toward those women who have fallen into sexual sin, have become pregnant, and nevertheless brought these precious lives into the world.
Unlike the activist on the political right who champions the cause of life so as to appeal to a particular segment of the electorate, or those on the political left who champion a woman’s “right to choose” for similar electoral reasons, the minister of the gospel must deal with all of these intensely personal situations simultaneously. In order to do this, God has given him the law and the Gospel. Those who have taken life and are repentant need to comforted by the gospel. Those who have taken life and who are not repentant need to confronted by the law, and disciplined by the church if necessary. The woman contemplating an abortion needs to consider her circumstances in the light of God’s word, and decide to give her child up for adoption (in the case of the young woman), or else realize that God’s chosen path for her career was not the one she had mapped out (the career woman). And while those who have not had abortions have exercised a certain and commendable civic righteousness, they too must realize that they have, in effect, sinned in their hearts against those women whom they have judged to be less righteous than themselves. They too must repent.
Given the complex individual circumstances just described, we can see the vast difference between the way an issue such as abortion impacts the kingdom of Christ and those in the civil kingdom. The redemptive mission of the church requires an entirely different approach to such matters than the political activists and party politics which operate in the civil kingdom. That said, the church does have a prophetic function in calling those in the civil kingdom to repentance whenever the state allows, or even endorses, the taking the life of the unborn--the prophetic mission of the church. As Christians seek to fulfill the Cultural Mandate we must value life, and this means raising our families in a manner which is consistent with our theology, taking up the cause of the unborn in the civil kingdom in a manner consistent with our view of the legitimacy of the state, and understanding both the role and limits of political activism.
This is exactly the type of engagement we hope to foster amongst the Body of Christ. That rather than retreating to our various camps, we seek to understand one another and to sharpen and mold where neccesary.
We see no benefit in dismissing one another based on particular outworkings of our theology, but must continue to care deeply and passionately about these issues while maintaining unity in the bonds of peace.
@@kimriddlebarger3238 Thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood what you were saying. I do agree that we need to keep politics out of the pulpit. It really does become an extra layer of static or noise that interferes with communicating the word. I thought you were saying that we needed to tiptoe around topics that were political lightning rods.
So disappointed. Lost a lot of respect for KR here. I watched this to hear the AM case, but instead heard KR blame everyone else for straw manning his view while building a huge straw man against postmil by saying it’s not based on biblical basis, but on political purposes. It’s sad when folks misrepresent the other view so badly.
Amilleniel are Catholics.. plain and simple..
Catholicism has proven to be a cult
Amil here, it makes the most sense of all the biblical passages on what happens at the 2nd coming
Explain shortly. I was Catholic once.
@@mobeans7945 sure, in a nutshell, it teaches that the millennial kingdom was inaugurated at Jesus 1st coming and will be consummated at His second coming.
Something that helped me and is helping me understand the book of revelation is this, the book of revelation is speaking of the same.things the rest of the NT is speaking of just with apocalyptic language.
I'm Roman Catholic but I still highly recommend this book because his interpretation of the book of revelation and the two age model of eschatology is very good. I would also recommend 'The City of God' by Saint Augustine of course if you're looking to read more about this system. I don't agree with his understanding of the covenant of grace and the covenant of works, I would formulate that differently but in terms of the eschatological system his work is quite good.
God bless you. Thank you 🙏🙏❤️
The sound was terrible. Thanks for the discussion. ❤
Yet, being pro-family and pro-life by necessity makes one political today. Nearly every political issue today is also a moral issue that pastors must address no matter who is sitting in their pews. If you address life issues, it is political. If you address moral issues, it is political. The issue is not republicans vs. democrats but speaking God's will clearly in the church and in the world. Maybe if the church in California stood as Bonhoeffer did it would not be the growing cesspool that spews its immorality throughout the whole world. From a fellow amil.
Around the 21:30 mark, the question of hermeneutics comes up. As an Amill, it seems to me that the Pre-mills and the Post-mills basically use the same hermeneutic. But because it's such an unwieldy tool, it's hard to keep it in line when applying it to the Bible.
The PostMill view allows for many anti Christs, sufferings, tribulation, and persecution as well.
❤
Argument against Postmillennialism "I don't see the world getting better." 😅
But really.. compared to? 50 years ago? 100 years ago? Try going back further... 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000
Jesus and a few of the disciples were leaving the Temple Mount marveling at the buildings and Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, there is coming a time when not one stone will be left on another, all will be thrown down as rubble." Then they went up on the Mt of Olives and came to Jesus privately and said, "When will these things be and what will be the sign of your coming again and the end of the age."
There Jesus launched into the "Olivet Discourse." One of the things He said was, " And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the WHOLE WORLD as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." The Gospel was NOT preached to the whole world in the first century.
Jesus also said, " For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now-and never to be equaled again." Whatever happened in the first century was NOT the greatest distress the world has ever been in.
Then Jesus said, " “Immediately after the distress of those days “‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’ This did not happen in the first century.
“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 33 So you also, when you see all these things, know that [a]it is near-at the doors! 34 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation (that sees these things start to unfold) will by no means pass away till all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
Then Jesus said, "Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then ALL the PEOPLES of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the FOUR WINDS, FROM ONE END OF THE HEAVENS TO THE OTHER. If this happened in the first century, why don't historical records from every country/civilization on earth abound with reports of the greatest site ever?
Very difficult to hear
Indeed. Nothing could be done to fix this, apologies
I like how he dismissed postmill position as to only being because of political reasons. Some of that might be true. But most people i know go postmill then become political. I used to be amill until dealing with the scriptures. The amill position doesn't use scripture to defend it's position but instead uses theology as their hermeneutic on eschatological passages. It's basically gnostic premill using a postmill hermeneutic 😢
So are you currently postmil?
There is a lot of presumption here. Many Premillennialists have read and studied scripture their whole life and still remain Premillennialists. This guy never really understood Premillennialism. They should have true Premillennialists like James Kaddis speak against his understanding vs. Amillennialism. I find this video as a biased view not really a true discussion of the different understandings.
Your guest appears to know very little about Russia today.
My take on the narrative, or "story" on the Book of Revelation, is this:
The Revelation was given to John by Christ to deliver His message to seven churches in Asia, written in signs for events that would soon take place beginning in the first century. The book concerns itself with the defeat of the enemies of Christ and His church, who were empowered by Satan, who ultimately was also defeated.
The Jews were the first to persecute the Christians, documented in the Book of Acts, beginning with the stoning of Stephen, and continuing through to one of the last stonings of the Jews, recorded by Josephus (62 AD), the death of James, the brother of Jesus. Israel, with its capital city, Jerusalem, the adulterous harlot, or Babylon, rode the beast (Roman Empire - "We have no king but Caesar, crucify Him! Let this man's blood be on our heads and on our children's heads"). The beast hated her, however, and eventually destroyed her (70 AD), and with the punishment reserved for the daughters of priests who became harlots, she was burned up by fire.
God had been "married" to Israel, who never was faithful to Him, and because of her spiritual adultery, she was "executed" by the Romans as Jewish law permits. This allowed the Bride of Christ (church), the New Jerusalem, to take her rightful position at the marriage supper of the Lamb. She replaced the executed adulterous Old Jerusalem as this bride.
Next, the beast, with the forced worship of its Emperor as God by all of its citizens, was dealt with. The beast continued to persecute the church and eventually was defeated by the rider of the white horse (Christ), whose weapon was the sword of the Spirit coming from His mouth (the gospel, the Word). By the 4th century, the Roman Empire declared Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire and, in complete reversal, the church had triumphed. Eventually, Paganism was made illegal, conquering the beast.
For a lengthy period of time (millennium), Satan was prohibited (bound) from empowering nations to continue to persecute Christians on a worldwide basis like the Roman Empire days, and simultaneously the martyred souls who were slaughtered came to life and reigned with an already reigning Christ. This allowed Christianity to flourish and progress throughout this period, uninhibited and spread to every corner of the world.
Then, after this lengthy time period (millennium), an event yet still in the future, Satan will be released briefly to attempt to empower all of the nations for worldwide persecution of the church once again, hoping to finally destroy them (he surrounds the great city, the New Jerusalem). Just before this occurs, however, Christ intervenes and destroys Satan and then institutes the final judgment of all humanity. Then eternity begins with the righteous receiving their reward and the damned sentenced to eternal punishment.
I am answering my own post, but I consider myself amill on the millennium. Things are definitely not getting better. IMO, if we are not currently living in the days of Revelation 20:7-10, then we definitely are not far from it. When the French Revolution happened, with its Cult or Age of Reason, the influence of Christianity in Europe was forever changed. By the mid 19th century, you had the writings of Karl Marx and Charles Darwin, both who greatly influenced the 20th century. Here we are in the early 21st century, and Christianity in the West is in retreat. The religious "nones" are the fastest growing group in America. Churches in Europe are being turned into museums. Muslims are growing fast in the East. This is not progress.
Heaven is not in a literal earth it's a state of mind .A-mill it's a biblical reality.because we reign NOW with Christ IN US.
I think he don't understand postmillennialism
Chapter 20 explains it all
Post mil is wrong anyway so just ignore it.
What's to understand? It's made up of neoplatonic gnostic catholic allegorical metaphorical and supposedly "spiritual," theology and eschatology. It's not really scriptural. The scriptures that are used to support it are interpreted allegorically and metaphorically; and by doing that you can prove anything. 🙏✝️👑✝️🙏
Where is the full preterist discussion?
Dr Riddlebarger condemns full preterism towards the end of the interview.
Perhaps we can have him on again for a more in depth take.
Who teaches "Classical" Dispensationalism? I'd like to know because they apparently teach different forms of salvation in different dispensations, but I'm in the Dispensational camp, and I don't believe that, and authors I've read don't either.
There are a few teachers in the Bible Belt that still teach classic Dispensationalism. But most have gone the “revised” Ryrie route, or teach a more “progressive” version of Disp, a la Darrell Bock. I still use my Scofield Bible, which is an excellent example of the more classic form. Though as a historic Premil, I disagree with some of his teachings..
@@pheelanmcphalen6390, thanks for that info. And do you know who started "Classic"? Was it Darby, Scofield, or someone else?
@@biblehistoryscience3530 What we know as “classic” Disp came to fruition in the late 1800’s, with writers like James H. Brookes and W.E. Blackstone. One can trace it all the way back to the Reformation, since that is when expositors began to take Israel’s promises seriously. There was another line of thought within the Reformed tradition which accepted and embraced the “old Catholic” view of Israeology (=supersessionism) and ran with it. That is the group we hear from more loudly today..
@biblehistoryscience3530 Probably the Jewish apocalyptic perspective. This is why they tried to make Jesus King on the spot, due to their misunderstanding of things eschatological. Of course, Jesus rejected this misunderstanding, "The kingdom does not come with observation, but is within you; my kingdom is not of this world."
I have listened to the good doc before...the audio sucks...big time...
Riddlebarger condemned his own amil views. Once you allegorize something that isn't obvious, you back yourself into a corner and you can't get out without allegorizing everything. That's what Augustine had to do. Then, at the end of his life, he admitted he allegorized too much and basically refuted his own views, since he didn't get allegorizing from the OT. He got that from Tyconius, Philo, Clement of Alexandria and Origen, not the bible. Amils have to make everything fit and because they reject obvious literal scriptures, they have to allegorize almost everything.
It didn't make sense to you because you rejected what the scripture says. You should have rejected your feelings, not the scriptures. This is how heresy starts.
I think what is disappointing is Dr. Riddlebarger portrays Postmillennialism from the perspective of the 1950's and Boettner. If he was just willing and able to examine contemporary postmil perspectives he would find very few people who propagate issues like a future millennium as opposed to the millennium being between the first and second advents. And the notion of a future 1000 period is foreign to the current voices of postmil thought. As for theonomy, what is wrong with Christians getting involved in politics. The argument could be made that the reason America is in this state is because the Church has made the deliberate choice to handover our culture to the non-believing world. They did this by being silent. Jesus wasn't silent brethren.
Go Yankees!!
Just say you're Catholic
50:39 Paul isn’t calling full preterism a heresy because AD70 hadn’t happened yet 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
If Paul lived and wrote it a thousand years later, Full Preterism would still be heresy.
@@kimmykimko think that through again…
@kimmykimko Yes, the very last enemy to be destroyed is death itself. It has not yet happened for sure.