Category Archives: Postmillennialism

Why PostMillennialism is the enemy

There was a time when Reformed theologians were PostMillennial.  Charles Hodge was.  Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield was too.  So was John Murry though he didn’t write about it as much.

But we’ve learned better. We now know that PostMillennialism is the enemy.

It is easy to miss this when one thinks about PostMillennialism as hope for the future through confidence in Jesus and his Spirit to overcome the world. That “happy face” of PostMillennialism hides the danger.  The perfidy of PostMillennialism is that hope in the future is a slander regarding the present and the past.

The enmity can be hidden as long as one is confident that the entire plan of the future is nothing more than the spread of one’s own (or one’s community’s) accomplishments to the unwashed masses across the globe.  But eventually one realizes that PostMillennialism cannot be limited in that way.

PostMillennialism is the ultimate doctrine for self-limitation. It means the world is young. It means the world is just beginning. It means that the world is going to change past recognition and be better for it. It means your descendants are going to live in a better place and look back on all you love, believe, and hold dear as barely tolerable–a mixture of some truth and good with a great deal of error and idiocy.

And we cannot have this. We know our children must worship us. They must forever venerate our doctrinal discoveries, our worship practices, our glorious truths and accomplishments. Just as we have faithfully venerated (or so we claim) certain past stages in history as the ultimate perfections that can never be surpassed, so must they continue the adoration. God would never have it otherwise.

Think about how we Evangelical Protestants view the “church fathers.”  About the only one we can tolerate is Augustine of Hippo.  And it is obvious as soon as you read him that he would be lost in confusion if he were to be brought back to earth today.  Both the modern Roman Catholic and Protestant churches would be alien territory.  We appreciate Augustine for his accomplishments but it is highly doubtful that he would understand our appreciation or the way he has helped bring about a new world.  Any sense of accomplishment would almost certainly be drowned out by the fact that this world is not one he could ever have envisioned.

We cannot have this.  If the future will be that alien then it must be evil, and PostMillennialism denies that fundamental fact. We need an eschatology that allows us to adore a particular point in the present and/or recent past and claim it was the most ultimate accomplishment that will ever be seen in human history between Pentecost and the Second Coming.

PostMillennialism does not allow for that confidence.  It claims our world is only half-baked and we are waiting for a better one.  It claims we will develop better theology, better worship, and better culture.  But we already have or had the best. The world is in sin for ever moving on.

The churches that do not know and venerate our heritage are in sin for not learning and venerating our history and our most revered historical periods. We need an eschatology that permits us to look down upon them for not ultimatizing our favored historical events.

The Bible is not sufficient for tomorrow. They need our light that we have safely guarded from the time it shone until now. They need to join with us in longing for the past rather than hoping for a better future.

Time to talk about it

When theological folks dichotomize, they often do it without regard to the reality of time. And this causes no end of trouble.

Given their assumptions about the political dualities of life, the anabaptist impulse to reject infant baptism is a shrewd one, because all these things are connected together. And infant baptism is a statement, among other things, about time. The tangles we get into over visible/invisible church, the City of God/city of man, kingdom of God/kingdom of the devil, heaven/earth all occur because we try to conceive of them all as static realities, and not as categories that exist in various forms of tension or battle over the course of history. Time matters; history matters. An infant you baptize is not the same person who goes to heaven, and yet is very much the same person. There is continuity/discontinuity, and much of it is revealed over time.

Read the rest at When Civilizations Are Baptized in Infancy.

This ends as a stellar response to some people who are 1) mistaken, in my opinion, and 2) acting as if their novel views are the standard of all orthodoxy and they have the right to treat those who disagree with them as unorthodox.

I loved that part.

But really, the words about the importance of time and our historic impulse to not talk about time is really much more profound than that single issue.

Could you even try to more directly contradict the Bible?

“Our task as Christians is not to try through social action or labors or endeavors of one sort or the other to usher in the new heavens and the new earth ourselves. We’re not the agents of that. That’s something God’s going to introduce Himself, at the last day.

via Guy Waters on the Christian’s Task « Heidelblog.

All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and disciple all the 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. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.

If Waters had stuck with “ourselves” he would have slipped through.  But not even agents?  And “usher in” is rather misleading.  Jesus says he’s already done it.  All that is left is growth and mopping up.  He’s now king.  A man is ruling at the right hand of God (new heavens) and the Spirit has been poured out (new earth).  The stone has shattered the empires and is now growing into a mountainPsalm 2 is fulfilled and now all nations are being given over to the Son as the Great Commission spells outPsalm 110 is being fulfilled and God’s enemies are being put under his feet.

What assumptions are being brought to the text that make this anything less than obvious?

Daniel [R]2[K]

In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar had dreams; his spirit was troubled, and his sleep left him. Then the king commanded that the magicians, the enchanters, the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans be summoned to tell the king his dreams. So they came in and stood before the king. And the king said to them, “I had a dream, and my spirit is troubled to know the dream.” Then the Chaldeans said to the king in Aramaic, “O king, live forever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation.” The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, “The word from me is firm: if you do not make known to me the dream and its interpretation, you shall be torn limb from limb, and your houses shall be laid in ruins. But if you show the dream and its interpretation, you shall receive from me gifts and rewards and great honor. Therefore show me the dream and its interpretation.” They answered a second time and said, “Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show its interpretation.” The king answered and said, “I know with certainty that you are trying to gain time, because you see that the word from me is firm— if you do not make the dream known to me, there is but one sentence for you. You have agreed to speak lying and corrupt words before me till the times change. Therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that you can show me its interpretation.” The Chaldeans answered the king and said, “There is not a man on earth who can meet the king’s demand, for no great and powerful king has asked such a thing of any magician or enchanter or Chaldean. The thing that the king asks is difficult, and no one can show it to the king except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh.”

Because of this the king was angry and very furious, and commanded that all the wise men of Babylon be destroyed. So the decree went out, and the wise men were about to be killed; and they sought Daniel and his companions, to kill them. Then Daniel replied with prudence and discretion to Arioch, the captain of the king’s guard, who had gone out to kill the wise men of Babylon. He declared to Arioch, the king’s captain, “Why is the decree of the king so urgent?” Then Arioch made the matter known to Daniel. And Daniel went in and requested the king to appoint him a time, that he might show the interpretation to the king.

Then Daniel went to his house and made the matter known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions, and told them to seek mercy from the God of heaven concerning this mystery, so that Daniel and his companions might not be destroyed with the rest of the wise men of Babylon. Then the mystery was revealed to Daniel in a vision of the night. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said:

“Blessed be the name of God forever and ever,
to whom belong wisdom and might.
He changes times and seasons;
he removes kings and sets up kings;
he gives wisdom to the wise
and knowledge to those who have understanding;
he reveals deep and hidden things;
he knows what is in the darkness,
and the light dwells with him.
To you, O God of my fathers,
I give thanks and praise,
for you have given me wisdom and might,
and have now made known to me what we asked of you,
for you have made known to us the king’s matter.”

Therefore Daniel went in to Arioch, whom the king had appointed to destroy the wise men of Babylon. He went and said thus to him: “Do not destroy the wise men of Babylon; bring me in before the king, and I will show the king the interpretation.”

Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste and said thus to him: “I have found among the exiles from Judah a man who will make known to the king the interpretation.” The king declared to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, “Are you able to make known to me the dream that I have seen and its interpretation?” Daniel answered the king and said, “No wise men, enchanters, magicians, or astrologers can show to the king the mystery that the king has asked, but there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries, and he has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will be in the latter days. Your dream and the visions of your head as you lay in bed are these: To you, O king, as you lay in bed came thoughts of what would be after this, and he who reveals mysteries made known to you what is to be. But as for me, this mystery has been revealed to me, not because of any wisdom that I have more than all the living, but in order that the interpretation may be made known to the king, and that you may know the thoughts of your mind.

“You saw, O king, and behold, a great image. This image, mighty and of exceeding brightness, stood before you, and its appearance was frightening. The head of this image was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its middle and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay. As you looked, a stone was cut out by no human hand, and it landed on the image’s  feet of iron and clay, and yet it somehow passed through them like a spiritual rock that was there in some sense and yet left the image untouched. Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, all together continued on into other kingdoms according to common grace principles. But the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth in a spiritual way like a ghost mountain that left the historical physical world unaffected.

“This was the dream. Now we will tell the king its interpretation. You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the children of man, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the heavens, making you rule over them all—you are the head of gold. Another kingdom inferior to you shall arise after you, and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth. And there shall be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron, because iron breaks to pieces and shatters all things. And like iron that crushes, it shall break and crush all these. And as you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom, but some of the firmness of iron shall be in it, just as you saw iron mixed with the soft clay. And as the toes of the feet were partly iron and partly clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly brittle. As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay. And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall leave in place all these kingdoms and they will rise and fall according to common grace having nothing to do with this spiritual kingdom, and it shall stand forever, just as you saw that a stone was cut from a mountain by no human hand, and that it left undamaged the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold. A great God has made known to the king what shall be after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation sure.”

Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face and paid homage to Daniel, and commanded that an offering and incense be offered up to him. The king answered and said to Daniel, “Truly, your God is God of gods and Lord of a spiritual kingdom that leaves earthly kings autonomous, and a revealer of mysteries, for you have been able to reveal this mystery.” Then the king gave Daniel high honors and many great gifts, and made him a chaplain for the remnant of Israelites in the whole province of Babylon and a spiritual guide for the wise men of Babylon who wanted counseling or to join a Bible study when they were between assemblies. Daniel made a request of the king, and he appointed Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego over other chapels in the province of Babylon. But Daniel remained at the king’s court.

The USA *alone* is not Israel

I think there is probably plenty to object to in the event, but this entry is confused.

Every nation is Israel now.  If God judged Ninevah and then had mercy when they repented, all nations now are much more under the judgment of God and also much more assured of mercy if they repent.

(Of course, it is true that no nation is now Israel in one sense, but it was also true that it would have been blasphemous for Ninevah to imitate God’s law by building a temple.  But the basic promise to save the repentant applied to Ninevah and it much more applies to any nation in the new covenant age.)

Jesus is “the ruler of the kings of the earth” (note this is from Revelation 1.5 but it gives Jesus’s present title, not a future prophecy).  He is the Davidic king who rules the all kingdoms, not just one.

When Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s vision, he doesn’t say that a trans-dimensional rock falls to the earth in a different reality so that it leaves the kingdoms of the world unaffected in a common grace realm.  He says the rock shatters the image into dust and then grows into a mountain that fills and waters the whole earth.

Once only Israel was Israel, but now Jesus says to go and disciple all the nations because he has been given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28.18-20).

So, yes, the church is institutionally distinct, but it remains the case that all nations need to repent and believe the Gospel and trust God to save them.

Q. 191. What do we pray for in the second petition?
A. In the second petition (which is, Thy kingdom come), acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the fullness of the Gentiles brought in; the church furnished with all gospel officers and ordinances, purged from corruption, countenanced and maintained by the civil magistrate; that the ordinances of Christ may be purely dispensed, and made effectual to the converting of those that are yet in their sins, and the confirming, comforting, and building up of those that are already converted: that Christ would rule in our hearts here, and hasten the time of his second coming, and our reigning with him forever: and that he would be pleased so to exercise the kingdom of his power in all the world, as may best conduce to these ends.

B. B. Warfield on the Golden Age

There is a “golden age” before the Church – at least an age relatively golden gradually ripening to higher and higher glories as the Church more and more conquers the world and all the evil of the world; and ultimately an age absolutely golden when the perfected Church is filled with the glory of the Lord in the new earth and under the new heavens.

“The Millennium and the Apocalypse,” p. 664.

Shoveling diamonds out of the way to dig up a concret block

Passage: Romans 5.12-21 (ESV Bible Online).

Is there anything more frustrating than watching Amillennialists make this passage about imputation while ignoring the glorious promise of the triumph of grace in world history?

(This is not to say that we can’t learn anything about imputation from the things that Paul mentions incidentally along the way.)

Therefore, just as sin came into the world…

Passage: Romans 5 (ESV Bible Online).

Commentators agonize over why Paul says, “Therefore…” in Romans 5.12.

But surely the reason is in 5.1-11.  We were justified when death and sin were at their high point, when we were “weak” and “still sinners.”  And we can be sure that we will move from victory to victory, even through tribulation, from this point on.

So in 5.12, Paul is saying, Therefore this means that Christ’s obedience is bringing about a righteousness much greater than the condemnation from Adam’s disobedience.  Paul is “standing back,” so to speak, and showing that the victory we have been given and can expect in 5.1-11, means that sin and death and condemnation are defeated early and overwhelmingly in the course of human history.

Yes, it is all about how postmillennialism is true.

How does his life save us from wrath?

From Romans 5:

9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.

N. T. Wright admits the two-stage structure of Paul’s argument here, but then refers back to propitiation in Romans 3 to explain how we are saved from wrath.  This essentially destroys the “much more” in Paul’s argument.  Schreiner refers to the intercession of Christ mentioned in Romans 8.

Romans 8, however, mentions many things, and the distance between the mention of intercession and this passage leaves me unconvinced that Paul can only be thinking of the intercession.

(Sidenote: Many times the way I hear Protestants describe justification leaves me wondering if the fact of Christ’s ongoing intercession is a challenge rather than a blessing–much as I remember seminary students wondering why Christ needs to continue to forgive us.)

The promise that God will “much more” save us from wrath by the new life of Christ is followed immediately by a promise of abounding grace that outstrips the condemnation that results from Adam, and then a description of how the new life of Christ empower our new obedience (Romans 6).  This abounding and new obedience stands in stark contrast to the description of how the world is going to Hell in a handbasket (Romans 1.18-3.20).  God has responded to sin in the nations by giving over the nations to more sin.  This downward spiral has now been reversed.  Now that Jesus has shed his blood as a propitiation for sin, God can, through the new life of Christ, bring the nations to new obedience.  The world movement from wrath to wrath has been replaced with an even more powerful dynamic from obedience to holiness.

Outlines that impose order rather than find it in Romans.

Typical outlines of Paul say he is still dealing with or discussing justification in Romans 5.  Then he “turns” to sanctification in Romans 6.

But Romans 6 is simply an elaboration and application of what Paul says at the beginning of Romans 5.  “More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.”  In Romans 6 we find these sufferings have to do with the death and resurrection of Christ giving us new obedence, and then the Role of the Spirit is again visited in Romans 8.

Paul is not building successive stories in a structure, but circling around and revisiting the same concepts over and over in order to help us grow in our understanding.

And though Romans 5.12ff presupposes federal headship, and thus can be used to prove imputation (much better than Romans 4.5, for what it is worth), Paul is obviously not trying to prove such or arguing for it.  He’s arguing for what we now call Postmillennialism.  He is promising that the glory and salvation to come now that Christ has died and risen will far exceed the horrors of sin and death.

That is what Paul says.  Just as we “rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us,” so we rejoice that

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

A last point: it does not follow from the fact that Paul believes in both justification and sanctification, and that he distinguishes them, that he must only deal with them in stages in a letter which are exclusively devoted to one or the other.