...Which Is Why We Were Instructed to Pray for it to Come | Doug Wilson
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- I owe John Piper more than I can possibly express, and so it is most necessary for me to preface any disagreement with him in terms of highest respect. And that is what I do here, right at the top, lest anyone miss it.
This is an odd kind of disagreement, because I actually agreed with an awful lot of the article I will be interacting with ('My Kingdom Is Not of This World'). The disagreement arises because he expends a great deal of energy critiquing a position that I would also oppose, but which I think he believes to be somehow inherent in any kind of mere Christendom project. More on this below.
Doug Wilson's Blog & Mablog video is presented by Canon Press. 
Развлечения
Jesus said “My Kingdom is not ἐκ this world.” His Kingdom is not “out of, from” this world; it has not its origin from the world. It doesn’t mean His Kingdom is not “of” this world, ie has nothing to do with. That’s a big difference.
The queen of England still has authority over Australia, even though her kingdom is not of Australia.
@@ericthehalfmexican9187Well, she did! Now it's the King!
Exactly. He is Lord of Heaven and Earth. But He is transcendent, begotten of His Father before all worlds. Very God of Very God. Begotten, not made. This verse about His Kingdom is one of those "proof" texts for that portion of the Nicene Creed. To assert that Christ's rule doesn't extend immutably to all that He has made isn't even Christian. And it's plainly unbiblical. Thanks for bringing in the Greek. You beat me to it. 👍🏼
Well that and we need to take the line in context with what was occurring when He said it. Jesus has to die to absolve mankind of sin, which is evidently God's own rules about how things work in that regard. But I do think we as protestants sometimes overlook the wild events the occur after that which don't make the Bible: specifically the destruction of Israel and the conversion of Rome (which is ultimately destroyed as well as far as a state power goes).
In other word's God had His own plans at the time so His holding back to allow Himself to be killed isn't the same as saying "my kingdom isn't of this world so just sit on your hands and do nothing but hope for your death and going to Heaven".
@@darthbigred22 Good observation. But death coupled-with resurrection is the key, just as the little stone rolled down the mountain, and topples the statue, and grows into the mountain that fills the earth in Nebuchadnezzar's dream.
Who's mountain fulls the earth? Human's mountain or the Lord's mountain? The fact that it's a mountain that's not crafted by fallen human hands is key. What did that mountain do before it filled the earth? It toppled wicked earthly system(s). And that is the modus operandi of the Kingdom - which always begins as a mustard seed or a little leaven....or a little stone that tumbles.
And Rome fell concomitantly with many, many Israelites who heard the gospel in the synagogues. I'm not so sure that the great re-ingrafting of Israel didn't occur during that time. Synagogues throughout the empire split, and many times, a church was constructed nextdoor to them. So, later, we have John telling us that there are j3ws that claim to be that, but are not. That is a biblical category that has to be dealt-with. (Rev. 2:9 & Rev. 3:9).
Christ is risen - the first fruits of many brethren. (1 Cor. 15:23).
"You can't legislate morality!"
Uh... all laws legislate morality. That's what laws are.
Piper's unrelenting unbiblical irrational pacifism twists him in knots , again.
Woah! 🙌
Go into ye all the world and make disciples , baptising them . In the apostles mind , the world contains those who are Elect justified by faith , the Elect who are not yet justified by faith and the reprobate . The forunner word here is make disciples. A disciple is one who is becoming like his teacher , this rules out those who reprobate and those who are not yet justified , they are not disciples yet, that means Doug we are only baptising the ones who have become disciples . The marching orders are to call home the Elect as they are becoming disciples (Christians) through the holy ghost in whom we therefor teach to obey. Narrow is the gate that leads to the way Doug and few be that find it. God preaches his words through his disciples, this is how the spirit works in the new covenant . How can one hear without a preacher.
Isn’t this prayer for the kingdom to be wrought within us? That’s how I was taught anyways.
Right. And a kingdom wrought by God in human beings is a kingdom that manifests itself in all that we think, say, and do, which changes the world. Anyone's worldview affects what they think, say, and do, and those things affect everyone around them, in one way or another, depending on the circumstances. An entire town of people who will not allow drag queens to read to their children can and will prevent such from happening in their village. And when others around this town see what's done in this town, they are encouraged to do the same, and depending on how many are on the same page, the success will vary. But change, positive change in the world, is the result of Christians being obedient to God in all things, including defending their families, and if necessary with force.
@@stegokitty I really like how you put this, very well said. Thank you for responding.
I disagree with Doug. The entire NT is bereft of what Doug is talking about. No where in the book of acts, or any of Paul's letters will you find a case for Christian Nationalism. Jesus does have all authority in heaven and earth, BUT WE DO NOT and were are not to institute His authority, rather on account of Him and His authority we are to make disciples (calling everyone everywhere to repent and look to Him in faith and worship). You will not find governments in the NT being used an instrumen to accomplish the great commission. IF this were to happen praise God, but to say it is and should be the aim of the body of Christ is wrong. Doug is wrong here.
Prior to criticizing what you believe is Wilson’s position, you should take the time and rub the neurons necessary to actually understand his position. It is painfully apparent you do not.
@@matthewdyer2926 Matthew since you're a Christian, you ought one very careful in how you talk about me your brother. I disagree with what Dough is saying, but he and you are still my brother. There is no reason to insult my intelligence. Love you brother. I still think he is wrong for the reasons I stated.
@@brba8245 My intention was not to insult your intelligence, but to call into question whether you have actually done the ground work to understand DW’s position before you censure it. It is apparent to me by your statements that you don’t understand his position, but that doesn’t imply you are unintelligent; it implies you are uncharitable.
Since you brought up Christian charity, I would point out it is far more uncharitable for you to misrepresent Wilson’s position and criticize that misrepresentation, than it is for me to point out this is what you’ve done.
@@matthewdyer2926 Ha. it's painfully obvious you did mean to insult brba's intelligence. You guys who always jump to Doug's defense on this issue make me laugh. It's always "you don't understand" or "you don't get it". (Because Doug can NEVER be wrong.) Now, if those non-rubbers-of-neurons dare to disagree with Doug's eschatology they are being "uncharitable." They are "misrepresenting" his position. Blah, Blah, Blah. Then you have the nerve to claim you are merely "pointing out" the sin of "misrepresentation". Rub some of your own neurons together, why don't you.
@@matthewdyer2926..."rub the neurons necessary to actually understand this position."
How is he supposed to interpret this any other way than an insult? Be careful with your speech, friend.
Piper best days has passed. To much over spirituality. Irrelevant for these days. That is why Jordan Peterson had got attention form young christians. Piper, macarthur, Lawson, and others to out of reality and context, living in a bubble. Bubble theology
This was almost exactly what I thought upon reading John's essay.
Doug just put it just a little better though, right? :P
@@TheMcGloneCode as always. It's a pleasure to listen to someone with a command of the English language and a keen logical mind.
@@jessedphillips Watching someone explain the absurdities of Baptist theology based on their unbiblical presuppositions is brain freeze. Is it not time we stop pretending that Baptists are Christians? Isn't it way past time?!
What is a Baptist at its core? Here is how they define themselves:
Mosher, R. C. The Baptist in History. Alberta Lea: Simonson & Whitcomb, 1900.
"They [the Baptist] have contended for the complete supremacy of Christ over all men and all things in his church; for a spiritual church which should be a spiritual power; for the absolute right of every man to absolute liberty of conscience in all things, and for freedom for him, not only from outside oppression but from domination even by his own church." 43
Believing lies is a sin. Notice he is not saying anything regarding thought police; he is only saying that God has given man the right to believe in lies, which itself is a lie.
Mosher continues:
"The first treatise in English was by Leonard Busher in 1614, entitled Religion's Peace, or a Plea for Liberty of Conscience. It pleads "that it may be lawful for every person or persons, yea, Jews, Turks, Pagans and Papists, to write, dispute, confer and reason, print and publish any matter touching any religion either for or against whomsoever;" language which for breadth of liberality cannot be surpassed even in these days." 124
So the Baptists have graduated from promoting sin (believing lies) to advocating and promoting the teaching of lies; which is both a sin and a crime. The Baptists' fear of being prosecuted by the government is so great they couldn't stop there; they had to declare the most radical and insane doctrine known to man:
Nettles, Thomas. By His Grace and for His Glory: A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life. Cape Coral, Fla.: Founders Press, 2006.
"He [Leland] defined liberty of conscience as "the inalienable right that each individual has, of worshipping his God according to the dictates of his conscience, without being prohibited, directed, or controlled therein by human law, either in time, place, or manner." 416
Leland declares man has the inalienable right to idolatry. Well what does that mean? Inalienable means that one cannot be separated from it. How could we not be separated from it? We cannot be separated from it because God has given us this right. That's right, Baptists claim that God has bestowed upon fallen man the right to worship devils. Anyone who has ever read three words of Holy Script would immediately know that that doctrine is bat shit crazy. But crazy can't stop there, their shame (or insanity) must be their pride. Here is a Baptist bragging about his craziness.
Cramp, J. M. Baptist History. London: E. Stock, 1871.
"All demanded and exercised the right of private judgment. Everyone was at liberty to think, believe, profess, and worship, as he pleased, without the interference of priests, kings, councils, popes, or any other earthly power. In a word, they taught that man is responsible, in religion, not to his fellow-man, but to God. So have all Baptists taught, in all ages." 123
And again:
Jeter, Jeremiah Bell. Baptist Principles Reset. Richmond: Religious Herald Co., 1902. 120f, 230f, 298f
"We claim for Baptists, however, not merely that they have been the steadfast friends of religious liberty, but that their distinctive principles necessarily compel them to maintain this position. They cannot be consistently Baptists and not advocates of soul liberty." 123
If you are a Baptist, please repent, turn from your false gods to serve the true and living God. Or as Jesus said: "Repent and Believe."
2Th 2:9-12 KJV - 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
God has sent many strong delusions into the world, but the Baptists' delusions of Liberty of Conscience and Freedom of Religion far exceed that of the Jews, Roman Church, and even that of the Muslim.
Hear it again: "the inalienable right that each individual has, of worshipping his God according to the dictates of his conscience, without being prohibited, directed, or controlled therein by human law, either in time, place, or manner." WOW, a God given right to worship devils!
Now that the masses have accepted their lies for truth and started worshipping devils, the Baptists have become all scared again and concocted another half-baked idea for Church and State relations called Mere Christendom or Christendom 2.0.
Either you're all in for Christ, or you're just going to come across as foolish.
@@jessedphillips GOD'S Great Gift, not for HIM, but also Us! Thanks n Praise to YaH
So, we know Jesus has all authority, and He's King of kings, and that human government is subject to Him alone as His servant. (Rom. 13:4). We also pray, "Come quickly, Lord Jesus." (Rev. 22:20).
So, there's plainly an "already" aspect (King of kings), as well as a "not yet" aspect (come quickly).
From what I can tell, evangelicalism is really good at the "not yet" part. On the other hand, we're poor at applying the "already" part. It takes faith to do that "already" part. Faith without fear. (2 Tim. 1:7). The gates of hell are defensive. All gates are. The magistrates' job is to punish evil and reward good. The Christian's job is to disciple.
So, disciple. Teach the distinction between good and evil, according to Christ's standards, and no other. By doing so, you're obeying by doing good by the proverbial "city" in which you dwell (Jer. 29:7); the proverbial "city" in which you sojourn. (1 Peter 2:11).
And when those in power ask by what authority you tell them what's evil, be like John the Baptist was to Herod or like John Knox was to Catherine --- be ready to give an answer for the hope in you. (1 Peter 3:15). Be ready precisely because you absolutely believe - in your heart - that Christ is Lord, just as Peter instructs in that verse. And you believe because Jesus said He is Lord. And you believe that every single thing Jesus says is absolutely true. Believe, people. Believe Him.
Top comment
Excellent!
Very important point. If it’s okay for a law to be passed only because Christians voted for it in droves because of Christian reasons, how is it not okay for the government to pass Christian laws in general? If the latter is forbidden, then the former must be also, because there is no meaningful separation. So the logical conclusion is either
A. Christians are prohibited from participating in politics, including voting
B. The government should operate according to God’s law.
One or the other. And the first choice is clearly ridiculous
Yep. I guess Daniel shouldn't have worked for two separate governments (Babylonian & Medo-Persian) as a high-ranking bureaucrat, either.
every man is to vote according to their conscience, the USA clearly stipulates it will make no law respecting religion, if your only legal argument is "bible said so" then you are not making an acceptable law and it will deservedly not hold in supreme court, if your only reason for banning christian lawmakers because "bible bad" then you also deserve not to be taken seriously, that said there's a few secular things like life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and peace, order and good government, and a lack of racism, a lack of persecution that are primarily christian in their origins, such as liberties according to john locke formed on the basis of the idea that society would remain christian going forwards, or opposition to the nazis not as a rival totalitarian power like the soviet union, but as a liberational force (thou shalt not murder), that are inextricably linked to the west's development as a civilization and christianity, that we hold sacred, personally I want a society that is liberal and secular in form, but as a practice is predominantly maintained by conservative faithful, I am both conservative and liberal since I hold the western tradition to be valuable, christianity to be valuable, but I can also appreciate the room to grow and to doubt and question without being suppressed by force, and many of the faithful throughout history exist precisely because god entered their lives to aid in the emancipation from sin, and to guide them to a stronger faith, through service, and some of the christian nationalist camp would have jesus be a slave master of the antebellum south style, as a mere rival to satan
@@possumhunter1179 good example, at the present time, tide is on the ebb for christians. Surely we have to comply where biblically reasonable. Should we become a majority then more effect will be possible. In the US you have a republic that flouted biblical law to overthrow the King and some think that that card can be played more than once. Ukraine deposed their president/government, the sun has gone dark, the moon red and the stars have fallen. Rest in faith, we are in God's hands, just like the beloved Daniel
I’d be surprised if there are any Christians in either party. There is no evidence of it. I believe the world is ruled by Luciferians.
Could you please further detail your thoughts on the Civil Rights Movement?
It was mostly a demonic psy op.
We needed a civil rights movement. But we didn't get the one we needed.
@@nathanjames329which one did we need?
Do you mean the makeshift one in 2020 or the real one in the 60s when Christian men were spraying black people with fire hoses?
No that’s all lies.
Thank you for this Doug, or rather the Spirit within you. I appreciate you +1.
“Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done”-it’s a statement, not a request. Acknowledging the inevitable doesn’t help the inevitable happen, it simply makes it easier to accept. God’s Kingdom is the same as His Salvation-established by His works, not ours. Our works are just the ornamentation, like kids’ scribble drawings on a working refrigerator. The kid’s didn’t build the refrigerator even if Dad gives them some credit for helping.
Doug Wilson is a divisive element, therefore he is a puppet of the enemy.
Thanks for showing the inconsistencies in Piper's arguments Doug.
Doug on Christian Nationalism: God wants us to pray that His kingdom come on Earth as it is in heaven; that must mean that he wants us to have a Christian nation. It's clear obvious proof, Duhh.
Doug on Calvinism: THe fact that Jesus and the bible says repeatedly that Jesus desires ALL men to come to Him is not proof that He gives ALL men the ability to come to Him. Really, it's just prescripted and He's just has two separate wills
Doug is the hypocrite here. He has contradictory ideas about God while criticizing others about contradictory ideas on God. It's logical absurdity. He should get the massive plank of wood out of his own eye before throwing righteous stones
@@IconoclastXThe only response I have to your comment is that if you're right about your first point, then Christian nationalism is something only postmills can hope for. Premills would rather say that Christ's Kingdom will only be established at the second coming. They wouldn't pray for His Kingdom to be established in the same kind of way Doug would.
If you're right, I think that the reason Doug is a Christian nationalist is that he is a postmill
The day has come where Piper deserves none of your preliminary obsequiousness.
Brilliant! Bless you🙏
This was posted about half hour ago. You read the original JP article, thought it through, came to your own conclusions, then watched this, thought it through, and came to your own conclusions? Wow.
@@Yesica1993 I thought Doug presented his own position in a thoughtful and respectful manner. Something wrong with that?
@@Yesica1993why’s he have to read the article too?
@@Yesica1993only a few more comments on this channel till you hit 500!
Lame troll.
I once had a leftist pagan comment to me on an online forum that no one should be ALLOWED to vote based on religious principle they hold, that this was somehow prohibited by the Constitution. I was flabbergasted by this statement. But it lets you know what they WANT to do if and when they obtain a critical mass of power.
I have ran into this same idea a lot lately. These people are happy to vote with their religion of Paganism, or Satanism(ect), they just object to Christianity. in other words, their world view allows them to follow their religion (non Christianity), but Christianity should be stopped by the power of government and law. They don't have a basic understanding of what religion is and that everyone follows a religion, whether it be Christ, money, children sacrifice, sexual depravity, body mutilation or any of the other old gods. Example: you are not able to say a prayer or the pledge of allegiance in public schools, but you are able to say the pledge to lgbt. If one religion is prevented to keep it out of public schools then all religions should be kept out of public schools. My main issue right now is that the law isn't being applied equally to all groups, there is a hierarchy of power, of which the LEFT is allowed to do whatever they want but if you have Judeo Christian values you should be shut down immediately(By the full power of the government and the state). That is primarily what concerns me about all these church's staying on the side with the expectation that they won't be pulled into the fight. The LEFT is on a mission to colonize everything we hold dear while forcing us to abandon Christ and acknowledge that their gods are king, just like the Romans did when they conquered people. There is no sideline or safety.
Well said Pastor Doug!
I hate (strong language intended) seeing all these men I used to respect so highly say such foolish things that only hurt righteous cause.
Piper or Wilson?
Whilst being erudite in some ways, Piper is effeminate and publically weak. He makes conscious decisions to present himself in that way. Compare Voddie 😂
@@johannahornbuckle377 Piper also has accepted antichrist evolution in lieu of sin only after Adam's fall. He basically negates the need of Y'eshua to die.
@@johnwurfel2862 Watching someone explain the absurdities of Baptist theology based on their unbiblical presuppositions is brain freeze. Is it not time we stop pretending that Baptists are Christians? Isn't it way past time?!
What is a Baptist at its core? Here is how they define themselves:
Mosher, R. C. The Baptist in History. Alberta Lea: Simonson & Whitcomb, 1900.
"They [the Baptist] have contended for the complete supremacy of Christ over all men and all things in his church; for a spiritual church which should be a spiritual power; for the absolute right of every man to absolute liberty of conscience in all things, and for freedom for him, not only from outside oppression but from domination even by his own church." 43
Believing lies is a sin. Notice he is not saying anything regarding thought police; he is only saying that God has given man the right to believe in lies, which itself is a lie.
Mosher continues:
"The first treatise in English was by Leonard Busher in 1614, entitled Religion's Peace, or a Plea for Liberty of Conscience. It pleads "that it may be lawful for every person or persons, yea, Jews, Turks, Pagans and Papists, to write, dispute, confer and reason, print and publish any matter touching any religion either for or against whomsoever;" language which for breadth of liberality cannot be surpassed even in these days." 124
So the Baptists have graduated from promoting sin (believing lies) to advocating and promoting the teaching of lies; which is both a sin and a crime. The Baptists' fear of being prosecuted by the government is so great they couldn't stop there; they had to declare the most radical and insane doctrine known to man:
Nettles, Thomas. By His Grace and for His Glory: A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life. Cape Coral, Fla.: Founders Press, 2006.
"He [Leland] defined liberty of conscience as "the inalienable right that each individual has, of worshipping his God according to the dictates of his conscience, without being prohibited, directed, or controlled therein by human law, either in time, place, or manner." 416
Leland declares man has the inalienable right to idolatry. Well what does that mean? Inalienable means that one cannot be separated from it. How could we not be separated from it? We cannot be separated from it because God has given us this right. That's right, Baptists claim that God has bestowed upon fallen man the right to worship devils. Anyone who has ever read three words of Holy Script would immediately know that that doctrine is bat shit crazy. But crazy can't stop there, their shame (or insanity) must be their pride. Here is a Baptist bragging about his craziness.
Cramp, J. M. Baptist History. London: E. Stock, 1871.
"All demanded and exercised the right of private judgment. Everyone was at liberty to think, believe, profess, and worship, as he pleased, without the interference of priests, kings, councils, popes, or any other earthly power. In a word, they taught that man is responsible, in religion, not to his fellow-man, but to God. So have all Baptists taught, in all ages." 123
And again:
Jeter, Jeremiah Bell. Baptist Principles Reset. Richmond: Religious Herald Co., 1902. 120f, 230f, 298f
"We claim for Baptists, however, not merely that they have been the steadfast friends of religious liberty, but that their distinctive principles necessarily compel them to maintain this position. They cannot be consistently Baptists and not advocates of soul liberty." 123
If you are a Baptist, please repent, turn from your false gods to serve the true and living God. Or as Jesus said: "Repent and Believe."
2Th 2:9-12 KJV - 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
God has sent many strong delusions into the world, but the Baptists' delusions of Liberty of Conscience and Freedom of Religion far exceed that of the Jews, Roman Church, and even that of the Muslim.
Hear it again: "the inalienable right that each individual has, of worshipping his God according to the dictates of his conscience, without being prohibited, directed, or controlled therein by human law, either in time, place, or manner." WOW, a God given right to worship devils!
Now that the masses have accepted their lies for truth and started worshipping devils, the Baptists have become all scared again and concocted another half-baked idea for Church and State relations called Mere Christendom or Christendom 2.0.
Either you're all in for Christ, or you're just going to come across as foolish.
@@johnwurfel2862Yeshua has no apostrophe
Thank you Pastor Wilson.
When I read this article by John Piper I was REALLY hoping you would comment on it.
As I read the article I had thought Pastor John was being guilty of "STRAW MAN" arguing... as you alluded to in his attacks on using the sword to advance the cause of Christ... shooting at an enemy who doesn't exist or isn't relevant to the argument. (ha, but you never mentioned "Straw Man" arguing so I wonder if I mis-categorized it).
It seems as usual you did a masterful job of clear thinking and logic to really point out Pastor John's (what seemed to me) frustrating and disappointing inconsistencies, and I was with you 99% of the way.
The 1% I wanted to disagree with (and maybe this is kindergarten level stuff and easily refuted).... was that you said free speech was a right and not a privilege.... I realize, thankfully, our country was founded on the idea that free speech is an inalienable right, thankfully! .... but where in the Bible is it taught that freedom of speech is a *right* from God (EXCEPT, that is, when it comes to preaching the Word and proclaiming the Gospel). Couldn't I just as well claim that anything I wanted to do that didn't violate the word of God was a "right"?
P.S. I think I plan to submit this as a letter to your blog in the hopes you might answer it.
Best regards.
Robert
I stopped listening to Piper when he morally equated Trump’s poor character to abortion.
I expect flaws. That is why I support Trump.
@@webstercat flaws like getting a porn star to spank you with a copy of Forbes magazine with your own face own it?
Do you not read Peter’s epistles because Peter stumbled in betraying Christ and again when he didn’t eat with the Gentiles? Those were great falls… not small trifles! I weirdly don’t agree with Doug Wilson on A LOT buttt the Spirit of God is obviously at work in Him, so I still listen to the voice of my Shepherd when he calls to me through the truth that Doug does say! Hold everything Doug and John say up to the light of the word, discard what doesn’t stand there, and rejoice when the Spirit of God provides food for our souls through HIS good work through them! Just a thought though! There are definitely times to step away from listening to others too!!
(Not equating Piper’s words to Peter’s as an apostle just trying to emphasize the point that God uses flawed men!)
If a man of Trump's exact personality/character were an Old Testament king of Israel or Judah, do not you think the Bible would have said of him, "and he did evil in the sight of the LORD"?
@@ead630 it’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a philanderer with a golden toilet to enter the kingdom of god. Matthew 19:24
Right, because your apostate following secluded in a bunker in Idaho, automatically means you're actively engaging with the world and making a biblical impact and you are the subject matter expert! 😆
This will always be an ongoing debate because neither side can say with absoluteness which view of the Kingdom is correct. All sides will say they use Scripture as their justification for what they believe, so what is the layman to do?
Doug is a Post Millennialist, John to the best of my knowledge Pre, and others A, and so round and round we go.
I remember my time serving in the British Military and in being educated in the principles of war we were told the 1st principle of the 10 is ‘Selection and Maintenance of the aim’ and that the other 9 are always to remain subservient to it and that aim should be simple and unambiguous.
Now in theological terms I think Jesus does that in Matt 28:19-20. It is simple and unambiguous. And it is clear by Paul in Romans that this should always be the main thrust because he says there in 11:25 there is “the fullness of the Gentiles to come in.” It is clear from that statement that regardless whether we build the kingdom now or it is to come at some other time, or it exists now in spiritual form is neither here nor there. The Churches main purpose in good times or bad is to preach the Gospel and to bring in the Gentiles. These debates have forgotten the first principle, yes great if we have a Christian legislature but that was not Jesus’s stated aim, fine it could be a result of the spread of the gospel but as stated earthly Christian government, and I will grant that I would prefer it, but it is still not Christ’s given directive or aim to His Church, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in through the preaching of the Gospel is and we have no right to change Christ’s war aim against Satan. Just think of all the wasted oxygen in airing our opinions, time writing and other resources of these ministers on these secondary issues, I am sure these are the works that will go up in smoke at the Bema seat of Christ, and He will point out where all that oxygen, time, resources could have been used in clothing the naked, feeding the poor, visiting those in prison and preaching the good news. It is not going to be “oh, well done Doug or John or anybody else, your view of the millennium and my governmental rule on Earth was the correct one, never mind the the unreached you could have reached with better utilisation of the time and resources I gave you on earth.”
Christian government or no Christian government does not affect the prime mandate given to the Church. Paul preached where the powers that be gave him liberality and where he was in prison. To focus our attention on secondary issues sucks the oxygen out what we are meant to be doing and if we did that in military operations it would not lead to our success in war but our failure in it. As then in the physical so in the spiritual.
When I say failure in it, I do not mean Christ will fail but we will fail the generation he has place us in to effect and call and the mantle will have to be taken up by the next.
John Piper is NOT prolife. He said that being against Trump was more important than life and freedom. It was his way of signaling to his followers that only a vote for Biden was acceptable.
Piper won't even defend his own wife from a physical attack
how do you know that?
@@danamo5601 He advises against owning a gun for self-defense. He doesn't say definitively one way or the other if he would defend her. I guess she will just have to see if any protective instincts kick in.
When asked if he would defend his family(I think the question was specifically about his daughter)he once said “probably.” Really,probably!! How about “absolutely!”
Also,I would ask him how he would defend them against a strong intruder if he doesn’t own a gun. If you don’t take care of your family you are worse than an infidel ( I Tim. 5:8)
keeping a gun in the home increases the likelihood of death by homicide, injury or death by accidental discharge, and suicide. You're no safer with a firearm at home.
@@saundracoffelt1932 the context of that passage is only referring to physical needs not self-defense. Totally projecting and twisting scripture to say what you want.
The implication you are making is that one must be willing to kill someone in self-defense otherwise you can’t adequately defend your family which is false. That passage does not say that whatsoever.
Jesus calls us to love our enemies. We don’t disobey a command to fulfill another.
Face it guys ------- John Piper has his seat at the cool kids' table and he is not giving it up. This revered spot in the Junior High lunch room is obviously more important to Piper than the appointment of good judges that would defend the unborn, allow men to own tools to defend their families, forbid the sexual mutilation of children, and treat the freedom of religion as a right rather than a privilege.
Dr John Piper, can we revisit your assertion that life and freedom aren’t as important as being against the man God used to save millions of babies? Sun Tzu said that a wicked ruler will see his nation burned to the ground to rule over the ashes. Sun Tzu must have seen the dystopian future that is being ushered in by the Democrats, at the behest of pastors like yourself.
If men be wicked with religion, how will they be without it? -- Franklin
Piper has some good ideas but he has bad applications and he is weak on current issues that require critical thinking and being hated by the world.
The KINGdom is Dangerous to all evil and Glorious to all Good. Therefore, Repent and Trust The KING; Kiss The SON lest you Perish. Blessed are all who Trust in HIM.
Pastors like Piper are the reason the church has let the culture fall apart.
A firey hot take, but... I agree 🤷♀️
They loved Esau
Can you expound on that, how has he done this?
@@Freed98 Peitism
Some of the most famous heretics of our day have gotten the blessing of archbishop Piper. The man has no discernment.
Pretty much no Calvinists have discernment. They're all just argumentative philosophers at their core, and their grasp of scripture is wanting.
confess that Christ is lord and believe in your heart that it was God who raised him up then you will be saved.
Is Joe Rigney still enamored with Piper?
Remember: John Piper says that life and freedom must be subordinated to Trump-disdain. Seriously.
It is good to see Doug Wilson ascendant (and Piper, hopefully, descendant).
Piper is a hardcore egalitarian. Hard pass on him.
Does the bible talk about inalienable rights?
Good one Doug. Piper has been off culturally since he practically endorsed Biden. I wouldn’t go to Piper for directions to the local Walmart.
He did what?
I would not be willing to defend Piper or Wilson in this area. One has gone woke and one wants another Christian dictatorship.
@@Bibleguy89-uu3nr I guess the woke clown show is preferred over a Christian nation that was founded in 1776.
@@navigatorsway We need to prevent both. Doug does not want what you think he wants, these guys want to uproot the constitution and start over. Have you read wolfes book?
"Practically endorsed Biden" is a deeply unjust characterization of what actually happened
Boulder Crew gets a shout-out!
God has used nations to rise against nation...
Amen! Praying for you, yours and our “One Nation Under God.” Blessings and Godspeed! 👍🏻🙏🏻⚔️✝️📖⛪️🇺🇸📜🗽⚔️🫡🪖 “When the righteous increase, the people are glad, But when a wicked man rules, people groan.” (Proverbs 29:2 LSB)
“The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.” - Jerry Falwell Sr.
“It was for freedom that Christ set us free. Therefore, stand firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.” (Galatians 5:1 LSB)
“Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature.” - Benjamin Franklin
“For in Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.” (Colossians 1:16-17 LSB)
“Directly in front of me, the monument to a monumental man, George Washington, father of our country. A man of humility who came to greatness reluctantly. He led America out of revolutionary victory into infant nationhood. Off to one side, the stately memorial to Thomas Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence flames with his eloquence. And then, beyond the Reflecting Pool, the dignified columns of the Lincoln Memorial. Whoever would understand in his heart the meaning of America will find it in the life of Abraham Lincoln.
Beyond those monuments to heroism is the Potomac River, and on the far shore the sloping hills of Arlington National Cemetery, with its row upon row of simple white markers bearing crosses or Stars of David. They add up to only a tiny fraction of the price that has been paid for our freedom.
Each one of those markers is a monument to the kind of hero I spoke of earlier. Their lives ended in places called Belleau Wood, The Argonne, Omaha Beach, Salerno, and halfway around the world on Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Pork Chop Hill, the Chosin Reservoir, and in a hundred rice paddies and jungles of a place called Vietnam.
Under one such marker lies a young man, Martin Treptow, who left his job in a small town barbershop in 1917 to go to France with the famed Rainbow Division. There, on the western front, he was killed trying to carry a message between battalions under heavy artillery fire.
We're told that on his body was found a diary. On the flyleaf under the heading, 'My Pledge,’ he had written these words: 'America must win this war. Therefore I will work, I will save, I will sacrifice, I will endure, I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the issue of the whole struggle depended on me alone.’
The crisis we are facing today does not require of us the kind of sacrifice that Martin Treptow and so many thousands of others were called upon to make. It does require, however, our best effort and our willingness to believe in ourselves and to believe in our capacity to perform great deeds, to believe that together with God's help we can and will resolve the problems which now confront us.
And after all, why shouldn't we believe that? We are Americans.
God bless you, and thank you.” - Ronald Reagan’s Inaugural Address 1981
Well said.
Doesn't Christ reiterate ".. but NOW is my kingdom not from hence" (John 18:36). Jesus' kingdom is VERY MUCH of this planet, just not yet...
John Piper character is suspicious toward the USA at this time from my perspective but I hope whatever desiring God characters are doing is very helpful, intelligent, and wise and not primarily very safe as it is somewhat tempting to perceive, if he really is exiting and giving orders for prayer for him outside of this country it is tempting to think people may want to follow him or to be similar if that is as it appears, and we certainly could all run away and there certainly is work to do for the Christian faith outside of the USA, it is timely more necessary within the USA than ever before, but that is certainly a safer strategy to exit probably seriously but we have to survive and we have to inspire massive fear/love of God irregularities on legal levels we do actually need Muslims and Jews here more than anyone needs the mormon/LDS business to exist at all.
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant, and hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; and it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel: then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die. At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death. The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.
Deuteronomy 17:2-7
Very thoughtful.
What do bud light and piper have in common?? they both won’t admit they’re wrong. 😂
piper needs to stop talking about christianity and civil government, ugh...
People still listen to/read Piper despite his him already destroying most of his credibility?
Kingdom of God is not political physical party, or implementing law of Moses into all governments. It is in the Spirit now in church and it is just small reflection of future glory. But you need to be born again and when you are born again, you know the peace of God, joy of God (Romans 14:17) and righteousness. You cannot see kingdom of God if you are not born again. Then all you will do is to act like pharisees, trying to force your politics on others and calling it kingdom of God. What and idiotic movement - christian nationalism. Let blind lead the blind, after year or two, you will be another dead movement.
Wilson knows that the only successful way nations will be christianized by "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you."
What do you think happens when true disciples multiply like after Pentacost and start applying obedience in the government as well?
Things like the Scottish Covenanters, founding of the explicitly Christian chartered American colonies, and the Kingdom of Hawai`i Constitution of 1840.
He said don't wish for the day of the Lord though. Don't hurry it because its a terrible thing too
Amen
The reasons to leave minnesota just keep piling up.
lol!!!
amen~~!!!!!
Well said Pastor Doug. I enjoyed Pastor John’s essay but it was flat.
You will probably laugh at this, but I just want to say I am enjoying your teaching, but I wish you would take a breath and slow down.
He’s got no time to lose really
I have long thought he should write them and have someone else read them.
@YSLRD If you prefer to read at your own pace, you can find the articles on his blog.
You can adjust the RUclips settings to 0.75 Playback Speed, which will give you more time to think.
Bro talks to slow, I have to listen at 2x and since he's post-mill and has no urgency to share the gospel and only spread "christendom" he's got all the time in the world...
John piper is not strong on political theology, whereas Doug is one of the best
Doug on Christian Nationalism: God wants us to pray that His kingdom come on Earth as it is in heaven; that must mean that he wants us to have a Christian nation. It's clear obvious proof, Duhh.
Doug on Calvinism: THe fact that Jesus and the bible says repeatedly that Jesus desires ALL men to come to Him is not proof that He gives ALL men the ability to come to Him. Really, it's just prescripted and He's just has two separate wills
Doug is the hypocrite here. He has contradictory ideas about God while criticizing others about contradictory ideas on God. It's logical absurdity.
Dougis like most theonomists is strong on the political and weak on the theology.
Has Piper ever responded to Doug? This isn’t the first time Doug has reacted to pipers position publicly.
He’s busy calling unbelievers to repent and believe in Jesus.
Slow down, please. You are speaking entirely too fast.
Uncle John, we know you have better than that. :)
Hahaha!! Best title!
Straight Fire BOYZ!!!
👀
John Piper is joy to the body of Christ in years past. I'm not sure exactly where he stands presently. There was a red flag on the field when he spoke in the affirmative on covid vaccines. Praying the Lord convicts us all quickly unto repentance as we are in error. That His body maybe found waiting with extra oil for our lamps as we serve our King.
I don't know how close an eye you have kept on him of late, but he is today as great a Bible teacher as he ever was. The controversies and headaches of 2020/21 should not define a man
Thank you for the consistency.
DW conflates the Church and Christian Citizens here. The State is comprised of and advised by its citizens. Where there is a majority of Christian citizens, the more the state will reflect Christian morality. That morality will affect all kninds of matters and laws. But the "Church" as if there is a Protestant Pope or King does not exist. Local churches may appeal, protest and seek protection. But the weapons of the Churches Militant are Spiritual not Civil/Carnal/Penal. Piper and Wilson fail to maintain the clear distincitons between the Church, the State and the Christian Citizen.
Wilson advocates Kuyperian Sphere Sovereignty and frequency states that the State deals with crimes and the Church with sins. He consistently draws clear biblically defined lines of authority and function between the family, church, and magistrate. You are obviously unfamiliar with his copiously presented position.
One may ask, which second coming? Sarcasm intended.
Sarcasm intended for what? What does that even mean?
Haha I get you! Maybe the 2nd 2nd Coming...which is the 3rd Coming?
I know there are many John Piper fans out there, and I’m not by any way saying that he is not a brother in Christ however, I have never been a fan of John Piper. He comes off to emotional and effeminate to me. I just don’t trust pastors who are over-emotional.
Yeah, totally agree.
I know what you mean. He writes very well but I do not like hearing him speak.
The prophets and the puritans preached their hearts out and plead with people to repent! I don’t trust a pastor who isn’t moved by the beauty of the Gospel, the devastation of sin, the hopelessness of man apart from Christ’s mercy, and the glories of what he accomplished! They often peer longer at what is eternal and it affects them as it should anyone who beholds God by faith in Christ! It is our shame that we aren’t moved much by the Gospel! We should be undone by it and then greatly strengthened and emboldened to march out in faith in Christ!
100%
@@christophertaylor9100 Me neither!
In my understanding there isn't enough time in this present age for the post millennial posited eventual reality to become a realized reality.
If you think that, then you need to watch Isaac Arthur. Not because he’s a Christian or postmillennial, but because he will show you how society will naturally develop if the lord tarries for hundreds, thousands, or millions of years
What a collision of worlds! Post millennial theology and isaac arthur futurism
Not in your time maybe, but what about 3 5 10 50 100 generations after you?
@@cosmictreason2242We know how society will develop if The Lord tarries, because it's already described in the Pauline epistles, the general epistles of Peter and the Revelation of Christ.
There isn't. The sun is setting on the sixth day of fallen man's work, and the Sabbath of the Millennial Reign is imminent. Even orthodox Jews mark the years as 5780 or something close.
The 4th commandment means so much more than just having a weekly day of rest and worship.
The bigger problem passage for post-millennials trying to equate the millennium to the kingdom is in their favorite chapter 1 Corinthians 15 but further down where he says flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom. It's in the context of resurrection. Real physical resurrection, not spiritualized. The resurrection must happen before the millennium before the full kingdom can be inherited. Which is why earlier Paul says everything must happen and its order, Christ must come first and then the resurrection. You cannot put the millennium before the resurrection which cannot come before the second bodily return of Jesus.
As a historic pre-millennialist I am completely on board with the message of victory and optimism. I fight against the escapism of secret rapture dispies. But we cannot twist scripture and ignore the clear sequence that we are given across multiple passages and multiple authors that say it's Christ's return, Resurrection, then the gathering, then the reigning with him. We can be building a kingdom but we will not reign over it with him until he comes to put all things under his foot. There is an ellipsis there that PMs refuse to accept between his coming and his handing it over.
I'm not really following along.
_"The bigger problem passage for post-millennials trying to equate the millennium to the kingdom is in their favorite chapter 1 Corinthians 15 but further down where he says flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom."_
Isn't that a problem for premil, as they posit a flesh and blood kingdom on earth just like all the kingdoms of the world, except Jesus will physically be the king?
_"It's in the context of resurrection. Real physical resurrection, not spiritualized."_
Well, yes and also no. Both kinds of resurection, spiritual and physical are in view in this chapter.
Verses 12-41 speak of the physical resurrection with the timeline of (v. 23ff): first Christ as the first fruits, then _at his coming_ those who belong to Christ, then comes the end when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father." The delivery explicitly happens at "the end" and so the bit about Christ reigning until all his enemies are under his feet is what is happening between Christs resurrection, where he said just before his assentation that all authority on heaven and on earth had been given to him, to "the end" when the last enemy, death, is destroyed. So there isn't a lot of room for multiple resurrections like premil requires.
But Verses 35-41 start talking about both physical bodies and spiritual bodies, so to dismiss the spiritual as you do is to stray outside the Bible to impose your own framework on Paul's words. Verses 42-54 are quite explicit about a spiritual resurrection: "It is sown a *natural* body; it is raised a *spiritual* body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body." And he contrasts this in a similar way as his other writings, like Romans 5-6: "Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual."
What seems consistent throughout his writings is that for Paul there are two resurrections, but they are different. They aren't two physical resurrections from the dead, there is only one and that happens at "the end". But there is also a Spiritual Resurrection where we who were dead in our sins are raised up in Christ and made spiritually alive, and this is called regeneration and sacramentally related to baptism.
_"You cannot put the millennium before the resurrection which cannot come before the second bodily return of Jesus."_
"then at his coming those who belong to Christ, then comes the end". Christ comes, resurrection, end. That's the Biblical timeline with no room to insert 1000 year sequence. There is room between Christ's resurrection and his second coming.
_"But we cannot twist scripture and ignore the clear sequence that we are given across multiple passages and multiple authors that say it's Christ's return"_
Exactly. Christ's return is at the end, not 1000 years before the end. There is one physical resurrection of the dead, not multiple. In Rev 20: 6, it's those who experience the first resurrection (regeneration) that escape the second death, it isn't only the martyrs such that all other Christians are sent to the lake of fire. The premil timeline does not work.
_"Resurrection, then the gathering, then the reigning with him."_
But that's not what it says, rather its Christ comes, resurrection, end.
_"We can be building a kingdom but we will not reign over it with him until he comes to put all things under his foot."_
That's not what it says, it says he reigns until it is all put under his feet. He is king right now and he is growing his kingdom right now through the power of the gospel. The gospel is a powerful weapon that is capable of bringing down whole nations and transforming them to the glory of Christ.
_"There is an ellipsis there that PMs refuse to accept between his coming and his handing it over."_
Where? There is no room in Paul's timeline to add one, you have to do what you explicitly say we must not do: _"But we cannot twist scripture and ignore the clear sequence that we are given across multiple passages and multiple authors..."_ Premil requires to insert ellipsis that aren't there, violating your own principle.
@@oracleoftroy I'll start by alleviating your concern about my use of the term spiritualized. I did not mean to imply the resurrection is not both physical and spiritual. The point was those who make the resurrection only spiritual and neglect a bodily resurrection. The referenced section in 1st Corinthians 15 draws many comparisons between our current bodies and our future resurrected bodies. Incorruptible versus corruptible and so on. The physical kingdom I look forward to in the millennium will be with a heavenly body. But it will still be with a new body just as Christ had a new body as the first fruits in his resurrection.
The chapter does not speak of both kinds of resurrections as if they are different it speaks of one resurrection that is both.
The major issue that continues to come up in your response is your demand that "then the end" they both immediate and the end as you want to define it and yet never actually did define it.
First, the term "then" does not indicate immediacy. It's just indicates sequence. There is lots of room to insert things. In fact even post-millennialists need to make a little room there to insert things.
If you keep reading in verse 24 you see the end is when the son hands over the kingdom, And he hands over the kingdom when all powers and authorities are abolished. And then we see that the last to be abolished is death. Meaning death needs to be abolished before he can hand over the kingdom. Which means that needs to happen sometime between the resurrection and the end, whatever that means to you.
Unless of course we can understand "the end" as a much broader umbrella that encompasses all of these things, including possibly the millennium.
Imagine if we read the previous verse with the same demand for a mediacy that you are reading into verse 24.
"Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming." Well that must mean that the resurrection and therefore his coming must happen right after the firstfruits of Christ's resurrection, right? Clearly not. And yet you are demanding that of the very next sentence.
When I say we cannot twist it confuse the sequence I am not demanding immediacy. I am just saying that the overall sequence of eschatology one day we will know is ABCDEF (if we imagine each letter is one of these events).
Some passages only contain A and B. Other passage is d&e. Yeah another passage is BC and f, and another is a b and e.
These are not contradictions they just are not all intended to talk about all of it. But when we overlay all of the passages according to the analogy of faith, we see that there is a consistent sequence.
Just today I was listening to Joel Webbon speak on the post-millennial view of the rapture. He connected, I think correctly, the parable of the 10 virgins rushing to meet the bridegroom to the rapture that is the gathering of the saints at the second coming. But here's the problem, they are gathering to enter into the wedding feast. The same wedding feast that is referenced in Revelation 19 and 20. The millennium is the wedding feast. How can we be in the millennium now when both the millennium and the wedding feast are to be when the groom collects his bride? That would demand we the resurrected with heavenly bodies, not our current earthly flesh and blood but a new incorruptible flesh. But we cannot inherit that Kingdom, at least not that fullness and completed version, until the second coming and resurrection.
These are the kind of sequence issues I'm speaking of.
Fact remains we could agree on 90% of things, same for pastor Wilson, or pastor Joel, especially when it comes to optimistic eschatology and rejecting escapism, but this insistence on identifying the current age's kingdom with the millennium is misguided.
Verse 24 says then the end and then it describes it. And it describes it as Jesus putting all things under his feet and then handing it to the Father. To me that is precisely what happens during the revelation 20 millennium. He comes defeats his enemies rules the earth for a time, and Satan is released and there is a final battle. That is the final abolishing of powers and then we have the leak of fire which is the second death and the final defeat of death. Then the kingdom is handed over to the Father, our heavenly home that Jesus had gone to prepare for us, because remember the millennium was just the wedding feast it wasn't home, descends, the New Jerusalem.
There are several points of disagreement all coming from a totally different interpretation of God’s role for government.
What in all the teachings of Christ in regards to teaching about the kingdom of God ever involved the sword or force of any kind?! He even told disciples if a town did not accept the message then they were to shake the dust off their feet and go on to the next town. The kingdom of God was never accompanied with force of any kind nor was it ever taught.
To turn the great commission into a mandate to rule and subdue the world is ridiculous.
It is simply a call to evangelize people of all nations and teach those you evangelize to obey his commands.
Romans 12 explicitly says we are “never”to avenge (judge)! he has set up government to do the avenging (judging)Romans 13. He uses the same word “ekdikeo(s)”.
No where does Christ, Paul nor any other apostle say we have any part in serving in government.
...and your Calvinism teaches that God instructs Christians to preach to ALL people even though some of them are unelect and predestined to hell. If you're going to criticize Piper based on this seeming contradiction; then you should take a look in the mirror at your theology. God both wants all people to come to Him while also giving them a nature such that they can't come. Calvinism is such a ridiculous doctrine that even overt heretics like Mormons can point out how absurd it is and completely win a debate with a reformed scholar. Because the idea that God is the author of evil is far more ridiculous than anything Mormons have ever said. This happened to Jeff Durbin in his debate with a Mormon. Lol.
Jesus says that no one can come to Him unless the Father draws him (unless it is granted by the Father).
Dead men can't do anything. Everyone is dead in trespasses & sin. If you believe that salvation is by God's grace alone then maybe take a moment, take a break from railing against Calvinism for a bit & rethink your own position. Calvinism is simply the doctrines of grace from the teachings of scripture. If you don't believe that salvation is from God alone & not man then seek God & seek what He says in His Word because you are speaking nonsense.
Well we know that there will be disbelief after Christ's return because the scipture says so! the 1000 years of Revelation has to mean exactly what it says because (1) it states "a thousand years" not just once not just twice if you're a somewhat poor of vision not just three times if you're mentally challenged but SIX TIMES! (2) rev 20 contrasts the "thousand years" with an indefinite period namely "after that he must be released for a little while". It's at this point that we realize that Wilson plays fast and loose with scripture as much as Piper does. (3)"satan will be released from his prison and will come out to deceive the nations"
That' one way to view Rev. 20 but not the only way.
@@Mind_of_MATT it's not 'one way' but it is what it is. Now, if you want to argue that *despite* the 6 occurrences of 'thousand years' and the contrast with an indefinite period and the statement that during that 1000 years he's 'imprisoned' it doesn't mean a plain literal 1000 years to come then you can do so. However, I can't see the difference between that position and just calling God a liar or the scriptures untrustworthy
@@stephenglasse2743 I'm not going to pretend I have the correct interpretation of Revelation 20 because I'm not sure. Saying that I don't know for sure what it means is not calling God a liar or His Word untrustworthy. Revelation is full of symbolism & you have to admit that parsing it is not the easiest thing to do. In Rev. 20, that one chapter alone we have ... a Key, an Abyss, a Chain, a Dragon , a Thousand Years & more. It explains the symbol of the Dragon, it's Satan, so right off the bat we have symbolism. John's first vision in Rev is full of symbolism, but those symbols were explained more clearly. My position, until God chooses to enlighten me further, is to take the 1,000 years as symbolic, just like the Dragon & the key, etc. I just admit that the passage isn't as clear to me as others in the Bible so I'm not being dogmatic about it but I do now heavily lean toward the 1,000 years being symbolic of the gospel period we are now in because Christ is reigning on the throne in heaven now. This is compatible with Satan being released for a short time, for a brief rebellion in the future. I previously held to it being a literal 1,000 years. I give much leeway here to my Brothers in Christ.
@@Mind_of_MATT I can't understand your reasoning at all. Apparently we can just ignore the repitition of '1000 years' and its contrast with an indefinite period and the obvious fact that satan is not bound (objective reality + Peter: satan prowls around like a roaring lion) because of one truth ie Christ is reigning in heaven a truth not even relevant to the promise of the millenium since then he's reigning on earth. The symbolic view is nothing but unbelief and rebellion.
@@stephenglasse2743 You don't see any symbolism in Rev 20? You don't think it's possible that Satan may be bound in regard to deceiving the nations (as it says right there in the chapter)? Do you not think it's possible that Satan could be released at the end of this age for a quick rebellion? You think the interpretation is that obvious? All I can say is that I'm glad you have it all figured out but let your brothers have time to catch up & give them room to disagree with you about symbols in Rev & about a millennium that's in one chapter of a very symbolic book of the Bible. God's grace be with you my friend.
Suppose. Suppose. Suppose. All that supposing. And another podcast is in the bag.
Suppose you didn't understand because you assumed and presupposed your own bias.
@@YTTraveler777 2:09 Suppose. 2:17 Suppose. 2:19 Suppose. 2:22 Suppose. That's a whole lot of supposing. By the way, it doesn't bother me the least little bit that post-mil's have their own presuppositions. Let the winds of eschatology blow.
Just a wolf in sheep’s clothing
My dear Elder you talk really fast
Christian Nationalism after the second coming is not what I have heard any Christian Nationalist talk about. Everyone I hear talking about Christian Nationalism is also post-millennial. I would also say that the Bible is pretty clear that there will be unbelief between the second coming and the new heavens and Earth.
Christian nationalist only talk about how the laws of a nation were a majority of people claim to be chrisitan should be based on what the Bible says.
Not a single one of them have ever said that people should be forced into conversion. Because they all understand those people forced by the sword wouldn't actually be Christians.
Wait what? You believe that *after* Christ’s second coming, there will be unbelief?!
How do you explain this verse with your view?
“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.”
1 Corinthians 15:22-26 ESV
_I would also say that the Bible is pretty clear that there will be unbelief between the second coming and the new heavens and earth._
This is only "clear" if you hold to a premillenial eschatology.
I can't speak for the posties here since I'm amill, but I don't believe there will be unbelief when Christ returns at the end of the age and ushers in the age to come. There are only those two ages. We are in the first one now, in what is a sort of overlapping of the ages after Christ's resurrection. The age to come is the eternal state after Christ's return and the general judgment. There is no room for a millennium between the two, and no wicked men inhabit the earth in the age to come.
@sarahd5341 that’s talking about the kingdom of God being built out during this very age, and then at the end Christ delivers it to the Father who ends death itself, then there is heaven, new earth, etc
Piper believes in revised sovereignty, which means that, not only is God The Highest in rank and authority, but that He makes everything happen by His decree before and even after the world has been made, and that no person has a will. He believes in free will as a revisionist would, aka: self determination. You can have a prison full of people but those people wont be able to escape, but they can be presented things from the guards and the prisoners still think that it would be good. does that mean, that because they have a way of reasoning, that they have no free will? No. Pipe though, has his own, revisionist sovereignty of God belief. this revision on the definition of sovereignty, makes God out to be all controlling, and so, in light of that, because God controls everything, every person doesnt have nor can have, rights. But the truth of God's Word,. is that everybody has a free will, but, because they live in an imperfect body, then their free will gets directed by those carnal and sinful desires, and even worse, as a sinner, their desires are even more amplified and so they abuse it.
74 & full time in ministry at one time. Always amazed at how many of my fellow Christians don’t believe in Lucifer. He has plenty of followers & workers actively working in all governments since the beginning. But we reduce him to pointed tail & pitchfork.
@@webstercat I was being terrorized by demons from a very young age. You're never the same after something like that. God turned it around to where I know where the source of problems in our world originate from. Since then I no longer am having to go see doctors and physicians, because I know the truth.
A big reason, which people won't admit, is that they don't want there to exist Satan, because they want everything to be natural and them not have to use the weapons that God gave us. People also don't want to truly get into God's Word and read through the Bible, because it would make their understanding and perception work and they wouldn't be able to live life on autopilot
@@dominiclapinta8537 Really concerning stuff.. You believe you were 'terrorized by demons' as a child and then God showed you 'the source of problems in our world' and now you don't have to see 'doctors and physicians' anymore?! Religion is not a substitute for healthcare. Do you go to the dentist at least??
I doubt this is what Piper believes. Also scripture teaches the opposite of your post. Everyone is dead in their sin, fully corrupt.
Just read Romans.
@@Mind_of_MATT no it does not. John Piper believes that everything that happens has either been, foreordained/allowed/permitted, etc, by the sovereign council of God and nothing can stay His hand from doing it. Dead in sin does not mean that they weren't made in the image of like as of God.
Taco Bell and Doug.