eschatology – Iron Ink

Postmillennialism vis-a-vis Amillennialism … Foundational Differences Teased Out

“It is right for you to realise, and to take as the sum of what we have already stated, and to marvel at exceedingly; namely, that since the Saviour has come among us, idolatry not only has no longer increased, but what there was is diminishing and gradually coming to an end: and not only does the wisdom of the Greeks no longer advance , but what there was is fading away. … And to sum the matter up: behold how the Saviour’s doctrine is everywhere increasing, while all idolatry and everything opposed to the faith of Christ is daily dwindling, and losing power, and falling. … For as, when the sun is come, darkness no longer prevails, but if any be still left anywhere it is driven away; so, now that the divine Appearing of the Word of God is come, the darkness of the idols prevails no more, and all parts of the world in every direction are illumined by His teaching.”

Athanasius, AD 296-372
Incarnation

“…the kingdom of God on earth is not confined to the mere ecclesiastical sphere, but aims at absolute universality, and extends its supreme reign over every department of human life….It follows that it is the duty of every loyal subject to endeavor to bring all human society, social and political, as well as ecclesiastical, into obedience to its law of righteousness.”

A.A. Hodge, Evangelical Theology: Lectures on Doctrine
(Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, [1890] 1990), 283

“It would be easy to show that at our present rate of progress the kingdoms of this world never could become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ. Indeed, many in the Church are giving up the idea of it except on the occasion of the advent of Christ, which, as it chimes in with our own idleness, is likely to be a popular doctrine. I myself believe that King Jesus will reign, and the idols be utterly abolished; but I expect the same power which turned the world upside down once will still continue to do it. The Holy Ghost would never suffer the imputation to rest upon His holy name that He was not able to convert the world.”

~ Charles Haddon Spurgeon

As Amill eschatology believes that the Kingdom of God is exactly identified with the Church and only with the Church it is inevitable that Amills will diminish the necessity for Christianity to conquer in every area of life outside and beyond the Church. After all, for the Amillennial types, if the Kingdom of God is not inclusive of any area outside the Church and the Kingdom is only synonymous with and for “the Church,” there is no need to conquer those other arenas / areas that for the Amillenialist are “non-Kingdom” arenas.

What I mean is this: As the Amils are always leaning towards identifying the Kingdom of God only with the Church — thus drawing a bright line demarcating between Kingdom/Church activity and non-Kingdom/Church activity — the consequence is that the “consistent with their eschatology” Amils will always chide anybody in the Christian faith who sees the Kingdom as being an arena that is expansive beyond the Church so as in include arenas as education, jurisprudence, just war theory, politics, economics, etc.

Postmils, to the contrary, believing that the Kingdom is not identified as exclusively with the Church and believe thus that the Kingdom of God extends beyond the Church and so will do just the opposite of the Amill and emphasize the necessity that the Church, being the armory of God’s Kingdom, must seek to conquer every arena of human existence. The Postmills believing this then will, unlike their Amill counterparts, address these different various issues from the pulpit. This leaves their Amill counterparts apoplectic.

The fact that this analysis is accurate is seen especially in the writings of David Van Drunen, who I believe has drawn out the most consistently the errant implications of the Amil eschatology. Van Drunen writes in his “Living in God’s Two Kingdoms”;

“God is not redeeming the cultural activities and institutions of this world, but is preserving them through the covenant he made with all living creatures through Noah in Gen. 8:20 – 9:19.”

Van Drunen continues writing;

“God is redeeming a people for himself, by virtue of the covenant made with Abraham and brought to glorious fulfillment in the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, who has completed Adam’s original task once and for all” (p. 15). As VanDrunen explains, “redemption is not ‘creation regained’ but ‘re-creation gained’” (p. 26).

When one follows this reasoning closely one realizes that for R2K Amillennialism the intent of Biblical Christianity is to preserve culture so that individuals alone, as extracted from their cultural context, might be redeemed. Individuals are redeemed while their cultural context by definition is unredeemable. If Van Drunen were a linguist he would say that God intends to redeem the text while leaving the context to experience soul sleep. This is consistent Amillennialism and because of this Amillennial “theologians” will go spastic in condemning Postmillennialists for preaching on subject matter that in their Amillennial worldview does not particularize the need for the individual as an individual to be redeemed.

This thus creates a ever growing hostility between consistent Amills and consistent Postmills. In this hostility the Amils will forever be accusing the Postmills of diluting the Christian message since, as the Amills believe, the Postmills major on the minors and the Postmills will forever rightly accuse the Amills of being cowardly pietists who love them some retreat and who are characterized in preaching a Christianity that redeems the text (individual) while leaving the context (culture) unaffected.

This explanation also sheds light on the fact that Amillennialism Christianity and Postmillennialism Christianity create very different types of character and personalities in people. People who are decidedly Postmil are typically going to be type “A” personalities who have a thirst to conquer while people who are decidedly type “B” personalities will be content to be passive and retiring — except when attacking postmillennialists and their eschatology. Amills typically refuse to fight unless it is to fight those (postmills) who never tire of fighting for the honor of Christ.

McAtee Engages Rev. Chris Gordon on Eschatology

One problem with Amillennialism is that it ignores that with the victory of Christ over the Cross and with His Ascension Christ has brought in the age to come so that it is rolling back this present wicked age. Amillennial eschatology is old covenant eschatology inasmuch as it is front loaded with the “not yet” (this present wicked age) while ignoring that we are, because of Christ’s victory, living in the “now” ( age to come). For the Amill everything, practically speaking, is still yet to come. The Victory of Christ is only a “Spiritual Victory,” and does NOT impact planet earth except so as to save a person here or there. The Amill insists that planet earth will always be under the tutelage of the evil one until Christ visibly returns to conquer a previously untamed Satan.

Amillennialism (along with Full Preterism) are a Gnostic. Both relegate Christ’s Ascension and Victory and rule to a spiritual realm and deny any impact on culture, nations, lifespan, disease, sin, etc. All the blessings of Isaiah 65 and 66 (end of war, poverty, disease, long life) are spiritualized and relegated to the realm of paradise and the departed saints. Such eschatology is defeatist.

“The problem with postmillennialism in American today is just that, it’s just too American. To wait eagerly for the second coming and the destruction of all enemies, doesn’t make us pessimists and defeatists with regard to Christ’s victory, it drives us to live in confident hope that Christ’s kingdom victory will soon be realized in glory when he returns on the clouds of heaven.”

Rev. Chris Gordon

And the problem with Amillennialism is that it’s just too masochistic. They long for defeat. They relish the thought of seeing the Kingdom of Christ beaten back. They spend so much time eagerly waiting for the second coming and the destruction of all God’s enemies that they refuse to fight now. Why fight if it is ordained that Christ will not visibly reign over His enemies until He returns? If Christ has promised that He will not visibly reign over His enemies until He returns then per Amillennialism, the postmills are absolutely in disobedience to God’s Word in expecting Christ to have the victory in space and time.

Gordon insists that the Postmill vision detract from preaching the Cross. He apparently assumes that preaching the Cross and preaching the visible victory of Christ and His Kingdom are mutually contradictory.

Amillennialism makes certain that Christianity will forever be in the catacombs or cowering against the might of the State or masochistically enjoying some defeat at the hands of some anti-Christ somewhere.

Next, the whole crap about postmill being “too American” is just beyond silly given that the Reformed Church up until the creation of Westminster was, in its majority report, postmillennial in its eschatology. Postmillennialism is stamped all over the writings of the Puritans and the Southern Presbyterians. Postmill advocates of varying proclivities include such notables as OT Allis, Athanasius, Augustine, Greg Bahnsen, John Calvin, RL Dabney, Jonathan Edwards, Eusebius, AA Hodge, Charles Hodge, J Marcellus Kik, J Gresham Machen, Iain Murray, John Murray, Gary North, John Owen, RJ Rushdoony, WGT Shedd, Augustus Strong, JH Thornwell, and BB Warfield. I wonder if Gordon notices all the non-American names here?

I loathe militant and pessimistic Amillennials. They are a absolute hindrance to the march of the Kingdom.

Gordon, being on a roll, continued,

“If we were witnessing widespread repentance in America and people falling at the feet of Jesus, then I might be able to take the current popularity of postmillennialism more seriously, but it strikes me as odd that in the midst of the sweeping moral revolution that characterizes our time, all of the sudden the idea of a golden age breaking into America is finding great approbation in certain quarters of the American church. What gives? Championing postmillennialism and dominion victory at a moment in history when the church is on the brink of serious persecution feels more like a desperation cry and a last-ditch effort to save an incompatible eschatology with life in America.”

Rev. Chris Gordon

R2K Fanboy

I can see Gordon that you would have concluded that Christianity was not true were you alive to see Jesus crucified because at that moment it was hardly self-evident that Jesus Christ was/is Lord of Lords and King of Kings.

Per your reasoning, the crucifixion of Jesus Christ would have proven that the claims of Christ were NOT true. Is that the way you come to truth Rev. Gordon? “Well, if it is popular, then of course it must be true and if it is unpopular, well, then, obviously it is not true.”

Do you always judge what is and is not true based on the circumstances of any given particular moment?

But, you know what Gordon … you’re right. Let’s us just surrender and ask for our amillennial bullet in the nape of the neck right now and be done with contending for Christ and His Kingdom. After all, we are going to lose anyway.

And for the trilogy Gordon adds;

“Postmillennialism has, as of recent, become the rage in online discourse and in popular books like Stephen Wolfe’s “Christian Nationalism.” This has been curious to me as a pastor in the Reformed tradition due to the fact that most Christians recognize that we have come to the end of Christendom in America.”

Rev. Chris Gordon

Really Chrissie?

Most Christians recognize that we have come to the end of Christendom in America? Even were that true, how does that alone prove that postmillennialism shouldn’t be advocated for in books? Oh, and is it your habit to come to truth by counting noses? Do you always reason in such a way; “Most Christians recognize that governments schools are good for their children therefore governments schools are good for their children?” This is a very odd way for clergy to assess truth… or maybe not so odd given the quality of our current clergy?

And Gordon, did you slip there by implying that at one time America was Christian? After all, Christendom in America can’t end unless it at one time Christendom in America really did exist. But you can’t mean that because R2K does not believe that Christendom as a category is even possible.

Finally, Pastor, did you take a poll so as to know that “most Christians recognize that we have come to an end of Christendom in America?”

The Centrality Of Eschatology

Pertaining to eschatology, another reason eschatology is so important is that one cannot understand the individual pieces of the puzzle unless first has a template by which to read the individual puzzle piece. It is the box that has the whole on it that allows us to understand the many parts in the box we will be putting together.

In the same way we will understand no historical incidents (the individual puzzle pieces) correctly unless we have a proper eschatology that gives us a template by which to read the individual pieces (the box top picture that is needed to know about the puzzle pieces).

People (Christians) who have wildly varying eschatologies are trying to use the pieces from the same puzzle to make wildly varying realities — and all in the name of the same Christ. So, at the end of the day their respective eschatologies are giving them very very different Christianities — indeed one is tempted to say different faiths.

As Christians we can not lean into life at all properly without a right eschatology. “Christians” who have a wrong eschatology are, more often than not, at cross purposes from those with a correct eschatology (post-millennialism) and so are pouring water on each other’s fire. To be perfectly candid I don’t want amillennialism or dispensationalism or premillennialism or full Preterism to succeed or grow because those eschatologies detract from God’s glory and end up creating a finished puzzle that does not correspond to God’s reality. I suspect if those other eschatological schools were honest they would likewise admit that they do not desire my eschatology/theology to succeed for the same reasons.

The thing is that a person runs all their theology through their eschatology so that eschatology is before all considerations and not after. One does not do all their theology and say, “therefore my eschatology.” One does all their eschatology ands says “therefore the rest of my theology.” As such eschatology is both prolegomena and last things at the same time.

Our eschatology tells us how the Bible holds together and the way we understand how the Bible holds together tells how we understand all reality holds together. When you tell me a person’s eschatology, you tell me not only what kind of Christian I can expect to be working with but you also tell me what kind of human being I can expect to be working with.

In the beginning was the eschatology, and the eschatology was with God and the eschatology was God. This is so because God had the end in mind when He began the beginning and so everything He began He put the end of the matter in that beginning so that the end that he planned from the beginning would have a beginning that would end at the end planned from the beginning.

Eschatology is everything.

Get your eschatology wrong and all else will suffer. Get your eschatology right and all else will fall into place.

The Macro Flow Of Scripture As Reason For Optimistic Eschatology

he (The Lord) says:
“It is too small a thing for you to be my servant
    to restore the tribes of Jacob
    and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
    that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.”

Isaiah 49:6

The movement of Scripture seems to require a postmillennial eschatology. Think about it. The Old Covenant moves from the Universal to the Particular after the fall. After the fall God’s salvation design is eventually particularized to one people (Israel), though the purpose of that one people is to be a witness to the nations of how great a God they have. From there the failure of Israel, like the failure of mankind prior to the flood, means an even more progressive reduction moving to “the remnant” (Not all of Israel was ever all of Israel) and then finally God’s salvation design culminates in the election of Jesus Christ to be God’s representative for Redemption of His people.

However, with the resurrection of Christ we find a progressive advance of redemption. What had been, prior to the arrival of Christ, a redemptive movement of the many to the one, with the resurrection the redemptive energy reverses and is now from the one to the many. We are still looking at election and representation, but the further salvific development unfolds so that from the center reached in the resurrection of Christ the way no longer leads from the many to the One but rather, as seen in the incorporating of the Nations, the movement in Redemption is progressively advancing from the one to the many. Consistently traced out this pattern and trajectory requires a belief in postmillennialism.

To argue that the post-resurrection and ascension of Christ means a narrowing of the potency of the soteriological impact of God’s design of salvation is counter-intuitive to the eschatological flow communicated and demonstrated in revelation.

Maybe Warfield’s “Universal Postmillennialism” was correct?

Eschatological Observations From A Partial Preterist Reading

Eschatological Observation #1

Mt. 24:30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the land will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Daniel 7:13
“I was watching in the night visions,

And behold, One like the Son of Man,

Coming with the clouds of heaven!

He came to the Ancient of Days,

And they brought Him near before Him.

Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom,

That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.

His dominion is an everlasting dominion,

Which shall not pass away,

And His kingdom the one

Which shall not be destroyed.

Isaiah 19:1

Behold, the Lord rides on a swift cloud,

And will come into Egypt;

The idols of Egypt will [b]totter at His presence,

And the heart of Egypt will melt in its midst.

When we read Mt. 24:30 in light of the Daniel and Isaiah passages above cited we can only conclude that the reason that the Son of Man can come on the clouds of heaven is that He first ascended into the heavens upon the clouds where he was invested with dominion, authority, and a Kingdom.

Having been invested with such authority the mediatorial King Jesus now judges Israel in AD 70 bringing the Great Tribulation.

Those in rebellion in AD 70 do not literally see Jesus on the clouds but rather in the context of the judgment wrought against Israel in AD 70 as combined with the prophetic language in the OT regarding God’s judgment Israel is seeing Christ in those very judgments that are characteristic of AD 70.

Eschatological Observation #2

Isaiah 11:6 Then there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as was not like it before, nor shall be like it again.

Joel 2:2

A day of darkness and gloominess,

A day of clouds and thick darkness,

Like the morning clouds spread over the mountains.

A people come, great and strong,

The like of whom has never been;

Nor will there ever be any such after them,

Even for many successive generations.

Ezekiel 5:9 And I will do among you what I have never done, and the like of which I will never do again, because of all your abominations.

Matthew 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

The first three OT passages provide commentary for the Mt. 24 passage. In Mt. 24 Jesus is using similar prophetic language to what we find in the OT to communicate the coming just and ruthless judgment of God upon a people for their disobedience and rebellion. Never was there a greater disobedience and rebellion that deserved the greatest tribulation of all time then the disobedience and rebellion of the Jews rejecting their Messiah. This Great Tribulation then, occurred in AD 70 in Jesus’ judgment against Jerusalem.

Eschatological Observation #3

Matthew 24:21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.

The reason for the greatness of this great tribulation is not found in the sheer body count number as if this great tribulation will outstrip every previous tribulation in terms of the number dead. The greatness of this great tribulation Jesus speaks of is related to a change of epoch.

The partial Preterist believes that the only tribulation that could have ever been considered great in the way Jesus uses “Great” is because salvation history is affected by the tribulation that occurred in 70 AD in Jesus’ judgment visitation upon apostate Jerusalem. With the destruction of the temple in AD 70 the Old Covenant officially passes away, the in-between time is completed, Israel is served her divorce papers, and the fig tree is forever uprooted. This is the “great” that is found in the idea of the “Great-tribulation.” However, if it is body count that you want Josephus tells us that the count was between 1-1.5 million deaths. Plus he describes all kinds of cruelties by the Roman armies that also contribute to the idea of the “great” in the “great tribulation.”

So… the great tribulation that Jesus speaks of in Mt. 24, Luke 21, and Mk. 13 was future to them but is past to us.