I rebutted your claims in: One Reason to Reject Amill Doctrine
I will respond as I wish, not as you demand. Amils become accustomed to avoidance, whether their posts are long or short. I wonder why? Amils are attracted to the meat of the Word rather than the milk.
Amills are attracted to the sound of their own voice in an argument is what it comes across as.
What are you talking about?
1 Corinthians 6:2-3 says, “Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?”
Scripture clearly shows us that “the saints will judge the world” and “shall judge angels.” In short, the righteous judge the wicked through their spiritual standing “in Christ.” As “joint-heirs” with the Savior (Romans 8:18), we stand with Him in the judgment. This is a very privileged position.
When does this happen?
When Jesus comes in His glory. Jesus said, in Matthew 19:28, “Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
This fits in with countless passages in Holy Writ that demonstrate that judgment day is an event that occurs on the last day, where the righteous are rewarded and the wicked are banished to the lake of fire. We do not need to import anything else into these. For you to do otherwise is to depict your millennium as one ongoing judgment of natural Israel. This is the opposite to classic Premil that elevates Israel to a favor place in their millennium and shows them restoring their whole old covenant apparatus in the presence of Jesus.
This passage locates “the regeneration” at the second coming “when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory.” Here, they will be judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
I don’t believe this is talking about twelve literal stone judgment seats; it is simply referring to the authority that will be exercised by the redeemed when He appears. Unbelieving Israel will be judged by the redeemed saints of all nations – they are “the regeneration” that join Him “when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory” to judge the nations. Israel is shown to be judged at the second coming. Like every other Christ-rejecting nation, they will be cast into the lake of fire. Only those that love Christ will be saved. This is therefore an allusion to the general judgment which occurs at Christ's coming. The elect will judge the Christ rejecting nations and the twelve tribes of Israel that have rejected Christ since His earthly ministry. This passage is simply identifying the group of people that will “sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” – namely “ye which have followed me, in the regeneration.” This regeneration refers to those who have been changed into Christ's image. This is evidently talking about the elect of all time. It is the elect (both Jew and Gentile) that will judge Christ-rejecting Israel. A future earthly millennial kingdom is not remotely mentioned in this reading.
Barnes in his commentary says re the "regeneration," “the word also means any great change, or a restoration of things to a former state or to a better state. In this sense it is probably used here. It refers to that great revolution-that restoration of order in the universe-that universal new birth which will occur when the dead shall rise, and all human things shall be changed, and a new order of things shall start up out of the ruins of the old, when the Son of man shall come to judgment. The passage, then, should be read, "Ye which have followed me shall, as a reward in the great day of the resurrection of the dead, and of forming the new and eternal order of things-the day of judgment, the regeneration-be signally honored and blessed.”
John Gill writes: “this new dispensation is called the regeneration, and which more manifestly took place after our Lord's resurrection, and ascension, and the pouring down of the Spirit; wherefore the phrase may be connected with the following words, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory in the regeneration; not in the resurrection of the dead, or at the last judgment, but in this new state of things, which now began to appear with another face: for the apostles having a new commission to preach the Gospel to all the world; and being endued with power from on high for such service, in a short time went every where preaching the word, with great success. Gentiles were converted, as well as Jews, and both brought into a Gospel church state.”
Jesus said, in Luke 22:29-30: “I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Luke 22:29-30 is not denoting any particular order but simply two realities that happen when Jesus comes. It is simply reinforcing the fact that we are going to carry authority in the age to come and will enjoy sweet fellowship forever. Again, there is no millennium mentioned or inferred here. You force that into the text.
The righteous witness of the elect will testify against the ungodly on the last day. No one will be without excuse.
The resurrection/judgment are tied together. It obviously takes one to allow the other. For there to be one general judgment then Scripture must also teach one general resurrection. This I believe Scripture does in several places.
I believe there is one physical resurrection day that sees one all-encompassing raising of mankind. However, within that one resurrection there are two distinct categories of rising embodied: (1) unto “life,” and (2) unto “damnation.” Notwithstanding, there is an undoubted order to the general resurrection; the dead in Christ will rise first, etc.
It is at this great concluding event that both the righteous and the wicked will be raised to face the great final judgment. Notwithstanding, there are two aspects to the one all-consummating resurrection day.
Jesus said in Matthew 12:41-42, “The men of Nineveh shall rise [Gr. anistemi Strong’s 450] in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the south shall rise up [Gr. egeiro Strong’s 1453] in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.”
The righteous Old Testament Gentile saint – the queen of the south – is raised at the same time as the wicked Pharisees of Christ’s day to stand before the same judgment seat of Christ.
This is further impressed in the parallel portion in Luke 11:31, only with an additional example, saying, “The queen of the south shall rise up [Gr. egeiro Strong’s 1453] in the judgment with the men of this generation, and condemn them: for she came from the utmost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here. The men of Nineveh shall rise up [Gr. anistemi Strong’s 450] in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.”
Here, the two main words used throughout the New Testament for resurrection are applied to the general resurrection that occurs on Judgment Day when the Old Testament time saints and wicked join the New Testament saints and wicked at the judgment. Remember the queen of the south and Nineveh are presented as Old Testament Gentile saints that will “rise up in the judgment with” the wicked unbelieving Jews of Christ’s day. There is no prolonged parenthesis period separating the resurrection of the wicked dead and the resurrection of the righteous dead. They both “rise up” at the same time. The Old Testament Gentile city of Nineveh is shown to “rise up in the judgment with” (or meta) the religious Jewish world of Christ’s day and “condemn it.” The Greek word meta (3326) is described in Strong’s concordance as “a primary preposition (often used adverbially); properly, denoting accompaniment; ‘amid’.”
First of all, per Amil there is only the GWTJ once Christ returns, followed by the NHNE. God alone is the one judging everyone at that judgment. God alone is the only one that has everyone's works recorded in books. There is no way in million years that Luke 22:30 has a single thing to do with the GWTJ. How do you apply this to the GWTJ since this is something they do while sitting upon thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel----That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom?
There are other senses to judge in, such as helping making proper decisions for someone. If one has read the OT, and I'm sure you have, the following would be an example of the sense I am meaning.
Exodus 18:13 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.
14 And when Moses' father in law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou doest to the people? why sittest thou thyself alone, and all the people stand by thee from morning unto even?
15 And Moses said unto his father in law, Because the people come unto me to enquire of God:
16 When they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws.
Ignore something like this though, and instead contradict Scripture by not having God alone being the one judging men on judgment day.
Can't you see what you are doing here, though? You have an answer for one thing but not an answer for something else as well, in this case meaning an answer for Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30 and how that supports Amil rather than Premil instead.
Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
So?Where in Barnabas 15:4 did he say (and I quote you): "Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years"?
You obviously have a false translation - one that fits your theology. Here is how it really reads:
It is written concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai, "And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart.” And He says in another place, "If my sons keep the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them.” The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: "And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it.” Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, “He finished in six days.” This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, “Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years.” Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. “And He rested on the seventh day.” This meaneth: when His Son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the-sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day. Moreover, He says, “Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart.” If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves. Further, He says to them, "Your new moons and your Sabbath I cannot endure." Ye perceive how He speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to Me, but that is which I have made, [namely this,] when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead. And when He had manifested Himself, He ascended into the heavens.
The 8th day is reference to the fact His kingdom continues on, as it’s never ending.What you are ignoring is what he said in Barnabas 15:4----saying; Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years.
And since he took the thousand years as literal, he is meaning the DOTL will involve a literal thousand years.
If common sense counts for anything, it is common sense that after 6 comes 7, and after 7 comes 8, and that 7 and 8 are not the same number. It is not common sense that after 6 comes 8 instead. If Barnabas concluded that Jesus rose on the 8th day, and that the Jews take Saturday to be meaning the 7th day, did Barnabas then think Jesus rose on Saturday the 7th day? Or did he actually know how to add correctly, thus he knew 8 comes after 7 and that 7 and 8 are not the same number, thus he was meaning Sunday being the day Jesus rose? In the same way, if there are 6000 years in this age according to Barnabas, and that there is then a 7th day and an 8th day, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Barnabas took the 7th day to be meaning the thousand years in Revelation 20, and that he took the 8th day to be meaning after the great white throne judgment.
So?
If you can’t understand those words, look up sabbath millennium and Barnabas, because he expects a millennium rest after 6,000 years, aka Gods rest for His people, that the sabbath day of rest given to Israel, was also a foreshadow of.
So?
If you can’t understand those words, look up sabbath millennium and Barnabas, because he expects a millennium rest after 6,000 years, aka Gods rest for His people, that the sabbath day of rest given to Israel, was also a foreshadow of.
So?
If you can’t understand those words, look up sabbath millennium and Barnabas, because he expects a millennium rest after 6,000 years, aka Gods rest for His people, that the sabbath day of rest given to Israel, was also a foreshadow of.
The truth about the millennium and the early church being Premil.
The Early Church Fathers were almost exclusively premillennialists and taught an Eschatological Gospel of Both Comings of Jesus. Consider the following testimony from the Fathers. The Epistle of Barnabus, written late first century/early second century and regarded as equal to Scripture by Origen, denotes the Creation Week as a pattern for human history—one day equals one thousand years—six thousand years of history and the Sabbath rest on the seventh day equates to the Millennium (The Epistle of Barnabus 15:4-5). Papias, an early second century Bishop and disciple of John the Apostle, was recorded by Eusebius (the Early Church historian) to have believed that “there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth” (Fragments of Papias VI). Justin Martyr also stated that he was taught his premillennial beliefs from John the Apostle and cited Isaiah 65:17-25, Luke 20:35-36 and Revelation 20:4-6 as references for the Millennium and Psalm 90:4 to support the one day as one thousand years belief (Falls 1965:277).
Theophilus, a second century Bishop of Antioch, spoke of a millennial state which is “intermediate between earth and heaven” (Daley Hope 2003:24). Both Melito, a second century Bishop of Sardis, and Hegesippus maintained a chiliastic position (Remains of the Second and Third Centuries: Melito the Philosopher, Hegesippus, 1 ANF 8:755, 763). The Didache: Teaching of the 12 Apostles addresses the Apostasy, the Rapture of the Saints, the antichrist, the Tribulation, and the Second Advent, drawing on scriptures from Matthew 24; John 5:25; Acts 1:2; 1 Corinthians 15:23, 52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16-18; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8; and Revelation 1:7; 19:11 (The Fathers of the Church, The Didache: Teaching of the 12 Apostles:183-4). Irenaeus, disciple of Polycarp, disciple of John the Apostle, was a definite premillennarian. Irenaeus was also the first to detail prophetic events after the writing of the New Testament and
©Copyright David Hebert, 2009. All rights reserved. 1
The Need for Teaching the Eschatological Gospel of Both Comings of Jesus Christ in the 21st Century . . . .
gave the Church the first system of premillennial interpretation (Ladd 1956:25-26). Tertullian was an avid premillennialist in the late second and early third centuries and wrote much about the millennial kingdom, even as a defense against heresy (Tertullian Part First: The Apology 48).
Early Church historian Sextus Julius Africanus and N. African Bishop Commodianus both wrote about six thousand years of history and the glorious Millennium following (much like The Epistle of Barnabus) around AD 240 (Julius Africanus 3:18:4; Commodianus ANF 4:209, 211-12, 218). Hippolytus, a disciple of Irenaeus, also taught about six thousand years of history, the Second Coming and then a resurrection kingdom of saints (Ladd 1956:30-1). Nepos, a third century Egyptian Bishop, defended chiliasm against the allegorical interpretation of the Millennium (as recorded by Eusebius 7:24).
Third century Father Methodius wrote about the millennial rest after the Tribulation and equated the Millennium to the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles (or Booths). Methodius also vigorously defended the premillennial view against the allegorical view of Origen (Daley Hope 2003:61-3). Victorinus, Latin-speaking Bishop martyred under Diocletian, formed his premillennial beliefs under Papias, Irenaeus and Methodius. He used Revelation 20-21 as his main scriptural text (Daley Hope 2003:65-6). Lactantius, tutor in the courts of Diocletian and Constantine, believed and taught a six thousand year history followed by one thousand years of Christ reigning on earth (Lactantius 7:14, 25). Finally, and according to J. Dwight Pentecost, Cyprian, Severus and the First Ecumenical Council at Nicea (AD 325) are cited as advocates of premillennialism (1980:373-4) - (Hebert 2004b:3-5).
This testimony may best summed up by Ladd: “With one exception [Caius] there is no Church Father before Origen who opposed the millenarian interpretation, and there is no one before Augustine whose extant writings offer a different interpretation of Revelation 20 than that
©Copyright David Hebert, 2009. All rights reserved. 2
The Need for Teaching the Eschatological Gospel of Both Comings of Jesus Christ in the 21st Century . . . .
of a future earthly kingdom consonant with the natural interpretation of the language” (Ladd 1952:23). Add to this the testimony of Justin Martyr (outlined in Section 1.3.3.1 above), the balance of testimony from Daley continued in an essay entitled “Apocalypticism in Early Christian Theology” (2003), and Richard Kyle’s section on “Early Millenarian Movements” (1998:35-40), and there remains conclusive evidence that the Eschatological Gospel of Both Comings of Jesus Christ was a primary doctrinal concern and hope of the Early Church.
The following Patristic writings on both advents/comings of Jesus also serve to bolster this conclusion: Tertullian in Chapter 7 of Book 3 of The Five Books Against Marcion (ANF 3:326-7); Origen in Chapter 29 of Book 2 of Origen Against Celsus (ANF 4:443); Hippolytus in sections 1, 2 and 21 of Appendix to the Works of Hippolytus: A Discourse by the most blessed Hippolytus, bishop and martyr, on the end of the world, and on the Antichrist, and on the second coming of our lord Jesus Christ (ANF 5:242, 247); Gregory Thaumaturgus in Sections 6, 15, 17, and 18 of Part 2 of A Sectional Confession of Faith (ANF 6:42, 44, 45); Chapter 69 of Recognitions of Clement Book 1 of the Pseudo-Clementine Literature (ANF 8:95); and Augustine in relation to resurrection in Chapters 15 and 19 of Book 1 of Contents of Christian Doctrine: Containing a General View of the Subjects Treated in Holy Scripture (NPNF 1-2:526-7). This hope of the Eschatological Gospel was also perpetuated in the Early Church through the Sacraments of Holy Communion and Baptism (as a sign of fulfilling the Great Commission) and the celebration of the Christian Festivals of the church year (liturgical calendar).
During Holy Communion, the Words of Institution were repeated, as cited by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:26: “For as often as you eat the bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes” [emphasis added]. The Lord’s Prayer was also recited, which includes “Thy kingdom come . . . For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever. Amen”
it is not illegal - I an not selling it.nor presenting it as my own, and there’s no copyright warning on that website.You are posting verbatim copyrighted info. This is illegal. This need reported. There is no personal study in any of these posts. You are copying other peoples stuff and posting them full. As a writer, you are only allowed to post exerts to be legal. You are not doing that.
It
it is not illegal - I an not selling it.nor presenting it as my own, and there’s no copyright warning on that website.
Where in Barnabas 15:4 did he say (and I quote you): "Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years"?
You obviously have a false translation - one that fits your theology. Here is how it really reads:
The Epistle of Barnabas (translation J.B. Lightfoot) ---that was the translation I was quoting from. If that is a false translation, they probably shouldn't be including it at the link. I assumed they were providing accurate translations, or at least close to accurate anyway.
Here is an interesting read if you haven't already read it. It's somewhat lengthy though. Starting at the page labeled in the document---159, is pretty much focusing on the Millennial Ages Theory in chapter 15 of his epistle.
------------------------------
SABBATH IN BARNABAS I59
the six creation days as representing 1000 years each, "He
meaneth this, that in six thousand years the Lord shall bring
all things to an endJJ (15: 4). These six days are followed by
the Sabbath, which apparently represents another millen-
nium commencing "when His Son shall come (15: 5). Then
comes the eighth day, "which is the beginning of another
world (15 : 8). This millennia1 ages idea was not original
with the author, for it is found in the intertestamental
Jewish literature. The earliest reference to it is found in the
Book of Jubilees, which dates from well before Christian
times. 26 The day-millennium equation is stated there as
follows,
And he [Adam] lacked seventy years of one thousand years; for
one thousand years are as one day in the testimony of the heavens
and therefore was it written concerning the tree of knowledge:
"On the day that ye eat thereof ye shall die." For this reason he did
not complete the years of this day; for he died during it.
It remained for a later work to expand this principle into a
complete system, as i t is in the Epistle of Barnabas. This next
step is found in the Book of the Secrets of Enoch (Slavonic),
And I blessed the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, on which
he rested from all his works, And I appointed the eighth day also,
that the eighth day should be the first-created after my work, that
the first seven revolve in the form of the seven thousand, and that
at the beginning of the eighth thousand there should be a time of
not-counting, endless, with neither years nor months nor weeks
nor days nor hours.
https://www.andrews.edu/library/car/cardigital/Periodicals/AUSS/1966-2/1966-2-04.pdf
I do not typically go to outside links as i cannot question them. Thanks any way. If you have any points you want to make then please do.
It should at least be pretty obvious from that little bit I provided from that pdf, that Barnabas clearly and undeniably concluded that the thousand years are after the 2nd coming, and that he was using sources outside of the Bible, such as Enoch, in order to come to some of those conclusions. But deny it all you want and continue to insist he took the 7th and 8th day to mean the same day. That quote from the book of Enoch I provided, assuming Barnabas relied on that for some of what he concluded, where it appears he obviously did, makes it crystal clear that to Barnabas the 7th day is to be 1000 years in length as well, where only the 8th day was meaning the beginning of a new age to him, a never ending age. That makes him a chiliast then, not an Amil instead, like I and others have been saying all along.
It should at least be pretty obvious from that little bit I provided from that pdf, that Barnabas clearly and undeniably concluded that the thousand years are after the 2nd coming, and that he was using sources outside of the Bible, such as Enoch, in order to come to some of those conclusions. But deny it all you want and continue to insist he took the 7th and 8th day to mean the same day. That quote from the book of Enoch I provided, assuming Barnabas relied on that for some of what he concluded, where it appears he obviously did, makes it crystal clear that to Barnabas the 7th day is to be 1000 years in length as well, where only the 8th day was meaning the beginning of a new age to him, a never ending age. That makes him a chiliast then, not an Amil instead, like I and others have been saying all along.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?