Israel

by

Why the Early Church Finally Rejected Premillennialism

doj_roberts_01

By Charles E. Hill

Modern Reformation, Jan/Feb 1996, p. 16

Chiliasm is the ancient name for what today is known as premillennialism, the belief that when Jesus Christ returns he will not execute the last judgment at once, but will first set up on earth a temporary kingdom, where resurrected saints will rule with him over non-resurrected subjects for a thousand years of peace and righteousness.1 To say that the Church “rejected chiliasm” may sound bizarre today, when premillennialism is the best known eschatology in Evangelicalism. Having attached itself to funda-mentalism, chiliasm in its dispensationalist form has been vigorously preached in pulpits, taught in Bible colleges and seminaries, and successfully promoted to the masses through study Bibles, books, pamphlets, charts, and a host of radio and television ministries. To many Christians today, premillennialism is the very mark of Christian orthodoxy. But there was a period of well over a “millennium” (over half of the Church’s history), from at least the early fifth century until the sixteenth, when chiliasm was dormant and practically non-existent. Even through the Reformation and much of the post-Refor-mation period, advocates of chiliasm were usually found among fringe groups like the Münsterites. The Augsburg Confession went out of its way to condemn chiliasm (Art. XVII, “Of Christ’s Return to Judgment”), and John Calvin criticized “the chiliasts, who limited the reign of Christ to a thousand years” (Institutes 3.25.5). It was not until the nineteenth century that chiliasm made a respectable comeback, as a favorite doctrine of Christian teachers who were promoting revival in the face of the deadening effects of encroaching liberalism.

But how are we to view the Church’s earliest period up until the first decisive rejection of chiliasm in the Church? Continue reading →

by

Discerning the Time

approaching-rain-storm-utah-images

Don Fortner

“And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is. And when [ye see] the south wind blow, ye say, There will be heat; and it cometh to pass. [Ye] hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time? Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right? When thou goest with thine adversary to the magistrate, [as thou art] in the way, give diligence that thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and the officer cast thee into prison. I tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the very last mite.” (Luke 12:54-59)

In these verses our Lord Jesus spoke specifically to the common people, the people who heard his doctrine and saw his miracles, those men and women who claimed to believe God, who claimed to be the people of God. Yet, he denounces them in exactly the same way as he had denounced the scribes, the Sadducees and the Pharisees, as hypocrites. Their teachers and preachers were blind men, but willfully blind as well. Both the religious leaders and the people who followed them, our Lord here denounces and rebukes as hypocrites. Continue reading →

by

Eschatology by Ethos: Why the “Optimism” vs. “Pessimism” Paradigm Doesn’t Work

Pessimism-or-optimism-small

Why the “Optimism” vs. “Pessimism” Paradigm Doesn’t Work

Kim Riddlebarger

Anyone familiar with the in-house feud between Reformed postmillenarians and Reformed amillenarians knows that the debate between these two positions is often framed in terms of “optimistic” postmillenarians vs. “pessimistic” amillenarians. Despite the widespread use and apparent utility of these labels, I remain unconvinced that one can formulate a proper and biblical eschatology merely by identifying a position’s distinctive ethos and then choosing the most “optimistic” of the various options.

To avoid being labeled an “eschatological pessimist”—a negative label that postmillenarians have successfully pinned on dispensationalists—a number of Reformed amillenarians self-consciously identify themselves as “optimistic” amillenarians. In making this identification, the optimistic amillenarian attempts to co-opt the attractive rhetoric of cultural progress and transformation used by postmillenarians, while at the same time avoiding the serious exegetical problem associated with postmillennialism—a rather embarrassing shortage of biblical passages in the New Testament that teach such a view.

While I am “optimistic” about the kingdom of God and the progress it will make during the interadvental age (and would likely qualify to be an “optimistic” amillenarian), I’m not so sure an unqualified affirmation of “optimism” is the best way for Reformed amillenarians to respond to those who determine the soundness of one’s eschatological position using the optimism/pessimism paradigm. Here’s why.

No Christian who truly believes that the resurrection of Jesus Christ inaugurates the new creation and guarantees the final victory over Satan and his kingdom at the end of the age wants to be identified as a “pessimist.” No doubt, the New Testament is crystal clear about who wins in the end. God will save his elect, usher in the age to come, consummate his kingdom, raise the dead, judge the world, and make all things new. These truths are certainly reason enough to be optimistic about the eventual outcome of the present course of world history, especially when one considers what Jesus Christ did to secure our redemption from sin’s power and consequence. Through his death and resurrection, Jesus Christ removes the curse and defeats our greatest enemy, which is death. No small thing and a very good reason to be optimistic. Continue reading →

by

The Antichrist

Man of sin anti christs

By Kim Riddlebarger

Perhaps no subject broached by contemporary Bible prophecy teachers engenders more speculation and less sound Biblical exegesis than does the subject of Antichrist. This is certainly due to the mysterious nature of the subject itself, as well as to the fact that no other aspect of Bible prophecy lends itself so nicely to speculation regarding the identification of one specific individual who will become the very personification of evil and the archenemy of Jesus Christ and his gospel.

“Pin the tail” on the Antichrist is not merely an evangelical fascination. Indeed, such speculation has gone on almost from the beginning of Christianity. Irenaeus (130-200) argued that Antichrist would be a Jewish born, satanically inspired, usurper of God’s true glory, who would appear in the Jerusalem temple in connection with an end-times great apostasy. (1) The Protestant Reformers, of course, universally identified the papacy with the Antichrist, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession (1540) stating that “the papacy will also be a part of the kingdom of Antichrist if it maintains that human rites justify (XV.18).” The Westminster Confession (1647) contends that the Pope is “that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God (XXV.6).” Rome, not to be outdone, has returned the favor, contending that antichristic Protestant “heresies have swept down from the North, where Calvin, Wycliffe, Luther and legions of Protestants are ravaging the flock of Christ.” (2)

But there is no doubt that much of contemporary speculation has taken the concept of identifying the Antichrist to new extremes. One of my favorite possessions is a booklet passed on to me by my grandmother, entitled The Time of Jacob’s Trouble (1939), wherein the author attempts to demonstrate that the revived Germany under Hitler in the pre-World War II years is the supposed last-days ten-nation confederacy predicted in Revelation 13. Of course, the author very deftly demonstrates how Mussolini is the false prophet and how Italian imperialism in Ethiopia is proof that Rome is the great harlot of Revelation 18 and compatriot of the German beast. I can still remember the fear instilled in me as a child, when I heard, one preacher declare that Antichrist was then living somewhere in the Middle East, probably still a child playing stickball in some crowded dusty street, awaiting the day when he would be possessed by the devil and allowed to wreck havoc on the world after the rapture. Continue reading →

by

DISPENSATIONALISM = ASSUMPTION + SENSATIONALISM + CONSPIRACY

GRANT SWART

Dispensationalism is a complicated system of belief about the “last days”, the Jewish nation, the millennium and other related subjects. This system is extremely popular and has been heavily promoted around the world during the last two centuries.  The system of Dispensationalism is built on false assumptions about Scripture and Bible prophecy. If ANY ONE of these assumptions is wrong then the entire system collapses and in essence, NONE of these assumptions can be biblically supported. With reference to my previous post on this subject, what follows is an outline of Dispensational assumptions.   

Assumption One

Dispensationalism assumes God deals differently with people in different time periods called dispensations [hence the name]. Although there is some disagreement among dispensationalists, most agree that there are seven distinct dispensations. The dealings of God with mankind are seen as separate – with perhaps some overlap.

Is God’s plan really broken up into different ways of dealing with people at different times? This is a dangerous assumption to make because it means that God is unpredictable. He has had different unrelated plans in the past and may then have different plans in the future. It also means that salvation in some of these dispensations was possible without the cross. Some people are saved, in this view, simply because of their national heritage. Continue reading →

by

Dispensationalism: Focusing eschatology on assumption and human politics, and reducing Christ’s role in Bible prophecy

Grant Swart

1.

Dispensational Premillenialism sharply focuses the events surrounding the end times, on the so-called “secret” rapture and a perceived forthcoming millennium. At the center of this focus is national Israel, daily events which take place in the Middle-East and in the realm of international politics and, of course, the increasing popularization of any number of future personalities representing the Antichrist. Sensational speculation and enthusiastic debate, motivated mainly by geo-political human affairs and major natural events, are designed to divert attention away from biblical prophecy regarding the end times. The end time is thereby reduced to a small window of time in the future and fragmented and isolated events in recent human history, rather than an ongoing eschatological understanding of biblical prophecy which stretches from Genesis to Revelation.

Some of the most commercially successful books, television shows and even certain reference Bibles, have been remarkably innovative and convincingly sincere in finding ways to support the false assumptions which are necessary to support the  “concept” of dispensational premillenialism in its various forms. Continue reading →

by

The History of Dispensationalism

“My brother, I am a constant reader of my Bible, and I soon found that what I was taught to believe did not always agree with what my Bible said. I came to see that I must either part company with John Darby, or my precious Bible, and I chose to cling to my Bible and part from Mr. Darby.” George Müeller (1805–1898)

I am quite convinced that all the promises to Israél are found, are finding and will find their perfect fulfilment in the Church. It is true that in time past, in my expositions, I gave a definite place to Israél in the purposes of God. I have now come to the conviction, as I have just said, that it is, the new and spiritual Israél that is intended. G. Campbell Morgan (1863-1945)

Dispensationalism is a device of the enemy, designed to rob the children of no small part of that bread which their heavenly Father has provided for their souls; a device wherein the wily serpent appears as an angel of light, feigning to “make the Bible a new book” by simplifying much in it which perplexes the spiritually unlearned. It is sad to see how widely successful the devil has been by means of this subtle innovation. A. W. Pink(1886-1952)

It is mortifying to remember that I not only held and taught these novelties myself, but that I even enjoyed a complacent sense of superiority because thereof, and regarded with feelings of pity and contempt those who had not received the “new light” and were unacquainted with this up-to-date method of “rightly dividing the word of truth.” For I fully believed what an advertising circular says in presenting “Twelve Reasons why you should use THE SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE,” namely, that: “First, the Scofield Bible outlines the Scriptures from the standpoint of DISPENSATIONAL TRUTH, and there can be no adequate understanding or rightly dividing of the Word of God except from the standpoint of dispensational truth.”

What a slur is this upon the spiritual understanding of the ten thousands of men, “mighty in the Scriptures,” whom God gave as teachers to His people during all the Christian centuries before “dispensational truth” (or dispensational error), was discovered! And what an affront to the thousands of men of God of our own day, workmen that need not to be ashamed, who have never accepted the newly invented system! Yet I was among those who eagerly embraced it (upon human authority solely, for there is none other) and who earnestly pressed it upon my fellow Christians. I am deeply thankful, however, that the time came (it was just ten years ago) when the inconsistencies and self contradictions of the system itself, and above all, the impossibility of reconciling its main positions with the plain statements of the Word of God, became so glaringly evident that I could not do otherwise than renounce it. Philip Mauro (1859-1952) Continue reading →

by

More Dangers on The Sacred Name Movement/Hebrew Roots Movement

The Sacred Name Movement

part 1/4

(A general overview of this movement)

Abbreviation SNM

Every so often a new movement comes to the forefront to challenge the historic Christian Churches teaching. Sometimes this can be good. If it is based on the truth, it can prompt us to a new understanding of the word. Sometimes it can be benign and be harmless as a challenge that goes nowhere … other times it can be just plain bogus.

None have been more bogus or ridiculous than the sacred name movement which has spiritual elitism written all over it. While there are some well intentioned people in this movement, there are also those who are prompted by pride to show how wrong and unsaved the Church is.

This movement is about using Gods correct name, restoring it and giving a revelation to people that are supposedly in darkness. (This first article is an overview and basic introduction to the movement.)

This movement is diversified and has approximately 10,000- to the most 50,000 people involved. Although we cannot be fully accurate on their membership these are the current numbers. There are assemblies range from a few to the largest of 200-250 members. Few Jewish believers are involved in this movement to their dismay since they lay claim to restoring the Hebrew name of the almighty. There are Messianic congregations that do use the Hebrew names but they do not make it an issue of salvation as those in the Sacred name movement do. Many in the SNM are involved in a metaphysical new age slant of the Bible and an added practice of  legalism. So from what I can see this movement has its own leaven to purge before they able to go to the Churches of Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha Mashiach) and tell them what to do. It’s amazing that so few have such a loud voice on the subject of the name.

With absolutely no proof historically or scholastically for their claims, they put down the name of Jesus calling it pagan and categorize all Christians that do not speak his correct Hebrew name as following and calling on a pagan God. While the Jehovah’s Witnesses have tried to do the same thing, the sacred name movement is further down the same shaky road. This movement’s claim is the Hebrew pronunciation of Yashua as his correct  (in Hebrew ) and only name to be pronounced. The questions we need to ask is first is this true and if so, is God as legalistic as they present him. Because they are saying that Yahweh’s view is “if you didn’t pronounce my name right so I’m not going to save you.” The implication is that from the beginning of the Jewish/Gentile Church up until now, has been incorrect and unsaved. Continue reading →

by

Houses Built on Sand

By Prof. Johan Malan, Mossel Bay, South Africa (August 2011)

A house built on sand is a house without a proper foundation – it is bound to collapse when it is battered by heavy storms, despite its solid appearance above the ground. The same principle applies to individuals and nations: without a sound spiritual and moral foundation they are heading for disaster when afflicted by the storms of life (cf. Matt. 7:24-27). Jesus Christ is the only true foundation that offers lasting stability against all the storms which are incessantly unleashed from an evil world: “For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11).

The unpleasant fact about our present situation is that, despite a small minority of evangelical Christians, we are essentially living in a post-Christian world which has rejected the only true foundation. Politicians are the architects of a nation’s ideological foundation and they, as well as the electorate who agree with them and have elected them to positions of authority, must take the responsibility when things go horribly wrong. Everywhere in the world problems are rapidly mounting and they sure spell disaster. We already find ourselves in a situation in which most countries are heading for a major collapse in all spheres of public life – political, social, economic, moral, as well as religious. The signs of a dramatic breakdown are there for all to see.

Continue reading →

by

What is the Hebrew Roots movement?

I found this on gotquestions website and think we should be aware of this another stream of deception in present in the churches today.

Answer: The premise of the Hebrew Roots movement is the belief that the Church has veered far from the true teachings and Hebrew concepts of the Bible. The movement maintains that Christianity has been indoctrinated with the culture and beliefs of Greek and Roman philosophy and that ultimately biblical Christianity, taught in churches today, has been corrupted with a pagan imitation of the New Testament gospels.

Those of the Hebrew Roots belief hold to the teaching that Christ’s death on the cross did not end the Mosaic Covenant, but instead renewed it, expanded its message, and wrote it on the hearts of His true followers. They teach that the understanding of the New Testament can only come from a Hebrew perspective and that the teachings of the Apostle Paul are not understood clearly or taught correctly by Christian pastors today. Many affirm the existence of an original Hebrew-language New Testament and, in some cases, denigrate the existing New Testament text written in Greek. This becomes a subtle attack on the reliability of the text of our Bible. If the Greek text is unreliable and has been corrupted, as is charged by some, the Church no longer has a standard of truth.

Continue reading →

by

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 5 – 8 of 8

by Phil Johnson – Grace to You

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 5

. . . and why every Christian is a Calvinist of sorts.

Part V: Why this issue is really a lot simpler than most people think

At the end of the previous post, I described how even in my Arminian days, I affirmed an awful lot of truth about the sovereignty of God: I would have affirmed with no reservation whatsoever that God is God; that He does all His good pleasure; that no one can make Him do otherwise; that He is in control and in charge no matter how much noise evildoers try to make; and not only is He in charge, He is working all things out for my good and His glory. As a matter of fact, my confidence in the promise of Romans 8:28 was what motivated my prayer life.

That’s Calvinism. If you believe those things, you have affirmed the heart of Calvinism, even if you call yourself an Arminian. Those are the basic truths of Calvinism, and if you already believe those things, you are functioning with Calvinist presuppositions.

In fact, the truths of Calvinism so much permeate the heart of the gospel message, that even if you think you are a committed and consistent proponent of Arminianism, if you truly affirm the gospel you have already conceded the principle points of Calvinism anyway.

Continue reading →

by

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 1-4 of 8

by Phil Johnson – Grace to You

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 1

. . and why every Christian is a Calvinist of sorts.  


Part I: Is Arminianism damnable heresy?

I love the doctrines of grace and don’t shy away from the label “Calvinist.” I believe in the sovereignty of God. I’m convinced Scripture teaches that God is completely sovereign not only in salvation (effectually calling and granting faith to those whom He chooses); but also in every detail of the outworking of Providence. “Whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified” (Romans 8:30). And He makes “all things work together for good to those who love God, [i.e.,] to those who are the called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28). Quite simply, He “works all things according to the counsel of His will” (Ephesians 1:11).

That’s what people commonly mean when they speak of “Calvinism.” When I accept that label, I am not pledging allegiance to the man John Calvin. I am not affirming everything he taught, and I’m not condoning everything he did. I’m convinced Calvin was a godly man and one of the finest biblical expositors and theological minds ever, but he wasn’t always right. As a matter of fact, my own convictions are baptistic, so I am by no means one of Calvin’s devoted followers. In other words, when I accept the label “Calvinist,” it’s only for convenience’s sake. I’m not saying “I am of Calvin” in the Corinthian sense.

Continue reading →

by

Let us not only think of ourselves

J.C. Ryle

Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: Luke volume 1,

[Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1986], 257. {Luke 8:16-21}

Let us not only think of ourselves. Let us also think of others. There are millions in the world who have no spiritual light at all. They are without God, without Christ, and without hope. (Eph. 2:12) Can we do nothing for them? There are thousands around us who are unconverted and dead in sins, seeing nothing and knowing nothing right. Can we do nothing for them?

Continue reading →

by

Faith in the Storm

From a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon entitled “Wrecked But Not Reckless,”

delivered June 9, 1872.

There are many young believers who get into such a squall, and do not know what to make of it. They say, “Why, had I been a child of God I could not have drifted into this frightful tempest.” How sayest thou so? Did not David go through it? He said, “All thy waves and thy billows have gone over me.” You must be very little acquainted with the history of the people of God if you think that they are strangers to these conflicts.

Continue reading →

by

Cracking the “Code” of Preterism

Article removed by Admin