25 questions that prove that ancient Chiliasm was a different animal to modern Premil

[WPM]

All Christians believe in the New Covenant, and believe that the Abrahamic Promises are fulfilled in people who follow that New Covenant, both Jew and non-Jew. You prove nothing in this! We agree that Israel and the nations are fulfilled not in the Old Covenant of Law, which applied only to Israel, but rather, in the New Covenant of Christ.

This has nothing to do with whether God's promises are still to be literally fulfilled in the Jewish race and in the nation of Israel. It has nothing to do with your sense of Jerusalem being a purely "spiritual city" in heaven!

You completely bypass the fact that Justin saw Jerusalem as an *earthly reality.* By spiritualizing it as a heavenly reality he did not render Jerusalem *non-earthly!* On the contrary, he views Jerusalem as still earthly, and yet enhanced by its new Christian definition.

Justin saw, as Paul did, a joining of non-Jewish nationals to the spiritualized Israeli nation. Israel did not lose its literal value, as such, for Justin. It just excluded those who failed to live by God's laws, and were thus, cut off, as even the Law indicated. He was reducing the definition of "Israel" to include only Christians in its ultimate form.

Furthermore, "Spiritual Israel" becomes, for Justin, a "nation" of many nations not because it ceased to refer to a literal nationality or race, but because the promises made to Abraham concerned a single people consisting of Abraham's faith, and yet expressed in both literal Israel and many nations. So "Spiritual Israel" did not, for Justin, cease to consist of Natural Israel along with Many Nations. When they have Christian Faith they all become part of "Spiritual Israel" for Justin. But Israel does not stop being literal Israel, assuming we're speaking of Jews with Christian faith.

At this point let me say that Justin's definition of "Spiritual Israel" leans in the direction of Replacement Theology, which I disagree with. However, he does not go so far as to discount Jewish inclusion in this promised Salvation, nor does he go as far as some Amills who may wish to believe the end of the Old Covenant ended literal Israel's hope in the Abrahamic Covenant.

We know that at Jesus' 1st Coming, most of Israel rejected Christianity. So Israel is being viewed by both Paul and Justin in her ideal form, as her call to eventually become a godly nation once again. Justin merely expanded his notion of the nation "Israel" to include Gentile Christians along with Jewish Christians, as the Abrahamic Promise indicated. The point is, "Israel" didn't stop referring to literal physical Israel for Justin, nor did it exclude Jewish People. It was just reduced to Christian Jews, and it was expanded to include other nationalities.

You may very well agree with this? But do you believe that the Abrahamic Promises were being literally fulfilled in Natural Israel, when they will turn to Christianity? No. But Justin apparently felt that a Jewish remnant does maintain hope in such a future reality, though it is less clear that this will result in anything more than Jewish inclusion, as a racial group, in the international Church.

When we read the blessings and curses of the Law, we note that it implied that Israel will at times, as a nation, obey and be blessed, while at other times disobey and be cursed. This has nothing to do with obtaining Salvation under the Law.

Many get sidetracked by the thought that this has to do with individual Salvation--it does not! It has to do with God promising to bless *nations* that obey His laws.

So even though Israel experiences disobedience in the current NT era, it does not imply that individual Jews do not retain these promises of Christian obedience. Neither does it imply that Israel, as a nation, cannot return again to obedience and to blessing. However, if individual Salvation remains active for the individual Jew that embraces Christianity, then God's promises to Israel is still being literally fulfilled for literal Jews!

My main point is that Justin, despite these "spiritual" and "heavenly" references to earthly realities, did not mean by this that they are fulfilled as such as non-earthly entities. I believe it is quite the contrary, since he believed in a literal thousand year Kingdom in earthly Jerusalem. All of your references to "heavenly" or "spiritual" Jerusalem does not successfully refute this!

Nor does Justin's reference to a "spiritualized Israel" mean that God's promises to Abraham were not literally being fulfilled *on earth* through a literal remnant of Israel and through the joining of non-Jewish nationals. On the contrary, his "spiritualized" sense of "Israel" retained its earthly grounding--these things were merely enhanced by their identification with Christianity and the New Covenant.

That is, the literal meaning of Jerusalem and Israel was not being changed substantially with respect to their earthly grounding. Rather, they were simply being reduced to things that fit God's spiritual qualifications as Christian realities. Literal Jews and other nations were to be literally fulfilled in this "Spiritual Israel" in the thousand year Kingdom, though in a sense they already exist. Clearly, for Justin, they are not yet completely fulfilled, and will require a future development. This is *not* Amillennialism!

And if Justin referred to literal Jews, and to literal Israel, despite its "spiritual qualifications and the inclusion of Gentiles with it," then the fulfillment of such in a literal earthly Jerusalem makes more sense.

It is "heavenly" in the sense it is not yet here. It is "spiritual" in the sense it must be Christian. And it is on earth in the sense it must literally fulfill God's promises to Abraham. There must be a literal Jewish People, a literal Israel, and this literal Israel must have joined with it many other Christian nations. Justin's use of the term "Spiritual Israel" to include less than a full Israeli nation and the inclusion of many other nations does not in the least remove his sense of their literal fulfillment on earth. He simply loses faith that these ethnicities can become successful national entities, since Israel had failed at that.

If so, all this must take place *on earth,* because it has not yet been fulfilled in the eyes of Justin. That's why he promises a future Millennial Kingdom, replete with these earthly realities. His "spiritualized" version of "Israel," therefore, is hardly Amillennial, as you propose. On the contrary, the Abrahamic Promises retain their original values. It only introduces the necessity of Christian fulfillment.

Incidentally, you did not provide any quotations from the Church Fathers indicating their view of the Millennium is "goat infested," as you indicated? Why?

What are you trying to say? You are rambling here to say nothing.

None of the early orthodox Church fathers (Amil or Chiliast) before AD70 believed in the Premil belief of a sin-cursed, goat-infested, death-blighted millennial age. You know that! Why are you asking me to prove that there is no evidence for? The burden of proof with you to prove otherwise.

Israel's hope in the Abrahamic Covenant is Christ. The Gentiles hope in the Abrahamic Covenant is Christ. Simple! No Amil denies that. Amils never discount the inclusion of a Jewish remnant in this promised salvation. Where do you get that? You are constantly building a straw man.

Where does Justin or any of the early orthodox Church fathers teach that the Abrahamic Promises are fulfilled in the Jewish race or nation of Israel being ethnically restored to their previous theocratic status? Nowhere. You know that! All we have is your opinions.

Amils (like the early Chiliasts) do not deny that Christ is bringing His redeemed back to a new perfected regenerated earth. But there's a big difference between that and the debacle of a future earth you present.

 

[Randy Kluth]

What are you trying to say? You are rambling here to say nothing.

None of the early orthodox Church fathers (Amil or Chiliast) before AD70 believed in the Premil belief of a sin-cursed, goat-infested, death-blighted millennial age. You know that! Why are you asking me to prove that there is no evidence for? The burden of proof with you to prove otherwise.

Israel's hope in the Abrahamic Covenant is Christ. The Gentiles hope in the Abrahamic Covenant is Christ. Simple! No Amil denies that. Amils never discount the inclusion of a Jewish remnant in this promised salvation. Where do you get that? You are constantly building a straw man.

Where does Justin or any of the early orthodox Church fathers teach that the Abrahamic Promises are fulfilled in the Jewish race or nation of Israel being ethnically restored to their previous theocratic status? Nowhere. You know that! All we have is your opinions.

Amils (like the early Chiliasts) do not deny that Christ is bringing His redeemed back to a new perfected regenerated earth. But there's a big difference between that and the debacle of a future earth you present.

You at first admit your inability to understand my arguments. And then you argue against what you don't understand! If you don't even understand my arguments, you can't say they "say nothing"--you just don't understand the arguments. They are arguments that require precision in the use of language. For example, you have to know what Justin meant by "Spiritual Israel?"

In the hope you really care to understand where I'm coming from, I'll try to explain again. Justin defined the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Promises in a literal way, to necessarily include a Jewish remnant of the nation Israel along with many other nations. And he reduces who this Ideal Israel can be by limiting them as God did, to those who have the faith of Abraham.

This means that for Justin "Spiritual Israel" includes this Jewish Remnant of Israel and other Nations only in the sense that they involve Christians. Non-Christian ethnicities do not fit "Spiritual Israel" for Justin.

Some people exclude the Nation of Israel from the Abrahamic Promise by claiming Israel was eliminated under the Law by failing that Covenant agreement. Some people exclude the Nation of Israel from the Abrahamic Promise by claiming Israel cannot be included as either a nationality or an ethnicity. Others obviously believe the Abrahamic Covenant is fulfilled literally by inclusion of all these ethnicities, including the Jewish ethnicity, only in the sense they now belong to the New Covenant of Christ.

The question is: How can ethnicities be fulfilled in the New Covenant of Christ, including the Jewish ethnicity, if NT teaching excludes nationalities and ethnicities as essential elements in the Church? Well, I've elsewhere argued that racial and national distinctions are not removed from the Church, necessarily, since they are included, necessarily, in the Abrahamic Promises. They only *sound* as if they are excluded when Paul speaks of qualifications for Salvation. These qualifications do *not* depend on ethnic or national background!

So if Israel is literally fulfilling the Abrahamic Promises as necessary ethnicities, then it is likely that Justin believed the same, that a Jewish remnant was fulfilling part of the Abrahamic Promises. They were fulfilling it as they converted to Christ. With this you say you are in agreement.

Where you do *not* agree is that Justin's definition of "Spiritual Israel" is intended to displace racial and national distinctions in the Church. I don't agree with Justin's precise definition of "Spiritual Israel," but I agree with his intention, to suggest that both the Jewish Remnant and many nations are a Christian family fulfilling the Abrahamic Promises. By contrast, I believe "Israel" is the literal physical people descended from Abraham who are destined to be regathered and convert to Christianity. Then, they will join many Christian nations to comprise a single Christian family.

The larger point is that if Justin saw the Abrahamic Promises being literally fulfilled in literal Jews and literal ethnicities, then he saw them as obtaining a future reality on earth in a process not yet complete--one that requires a change in politics on earth. The kingdoms of this world will become the Kingdom of Christ. And Satan will be bound. In that way, these literal peoples will obtain their full potential and thus fulfill what has not yet been completed right here on earth.

Your failure to provide what you claimed is noted. You've claimed Premillennialists view the Millennial Age as "goat-infested, etc." You've repeated this over and over, as if repeating it makes it true. And yet you're utterly unable to verify where you get this information from. At best, you take something Premills believe, and twist it to mean something worse and different. This is called "misrepresentation." And no, it is *your responsibility* to back up your own negative claims. You're copping out by claiming it is my responsibility. I'm not the one claiming to represent Premills here. You are!

 

[WPM]

You at first admit your inability to understand my arguments. And then you argue against what you don't understand! If you don't even understand my arguments, you can't say they "say nothing"--you just don't understand the arguments. They are arguments that require precision in the use of language. For example, you have to know what Justin meant by "Spiritual Israel?"

In the hope you really care to understand where I'm coming from, I'll try to explain again. Justin defined the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Promises in a literal way, to necessarily include a Jewish remnant of the nation Israel along with many other nations. And he reduces who this Ideal Israel can be by limiting them as God did, to those who have the faith of Abraham.

This means that for Justin "Spiritual Israel" includes this Jewish Remnant of Israel and other Nations only in the sense that they involve Christians. Non-Christian ethnicities do not fit "Spiritual Israel" for Justin.

Some people exclude the Nation of Israel from the Abrahamic Promise by claiming Israel was eliminated under the Law by failing that Covenant agreement. Some people exclude the Nation of Israel from the Abrahamic Promise by claiming Israel cannot be included as either a nationality or an ethnicity. Others obviously believe the Abrahamic Covenant is fulfilled literally by inclusion of all these ethnicities, including the Jewish ethnicity, only in the sense they now belong to the New Covenant of Christ.

The question is: How can ethnicities be fulfilled in the New Covenant of Christ, including the Jewish ethnicity, if NT teaching excludes nationalities and ethnicities as essential elements in the Church? Well, I've elsewhere argued that racial and national distinctions are not removed from the Church, necessarily, since they are included, necessarily, in the Abrahamic Promises. They only *sound* as if they are excluded when Paul speaks of qualifications for Salvation. These qualifications do *not* depend on ethnic or national background!

So if Israel is literally fulfilling the Abrahamic Promises as necessary ethnicities, then it is likely that Justin believed the same, that a Jewish remnant was fulfilling part of the Abrahamic Promises. They were fulfilling it as they converted to Christ. With this you say you are in agreement.

Where you do *not* agree is that Justin's definition of "Spiritual Israel" is intended to displace racial and national distinctions in the Church. I don't agree with Justin's precise definition of "Spiritual Israel," but I agree with his intention, to suggest that both the Jewish Remnant and many nations are a Christian family fulfilling the Abrahamic Promises. By contrast, I believe "Israel" is the literal physical people descended from Abraham who are destined to be regathered and convert to Christianity. Then, they will join many Christian nations to comprise a single Christian family.

The larger point is that if Justin saw the Abrahamic Promises being literally fulfilled in literal Jews and literal ethnicities, then he saw them as obtaining a future reality on earth in a process not yet complete--one that requires a change in politics on earth. The kingdoms of this world will become the Kingdom of Christ. And Satan will be bound. In that way, these literal peoples will obtain their full potential and thus fulfill what has not yet been completed right here on earth.

Your failure to provide what you claimed is noted. You've claimed Premillennialists view the Millennial Age as "goat-infested, etc." You've repeated this over and over, as if repeating it makes it true. And yet you're utterly unable to verify where you get this information from. At best, you take something Premills believe, and twist it to mean something worse and different. This is called "misrepresentation." And no, it is *your responsibility* to back up your own negative claims. You're copping out by claiming it is my responsibility. I'm not the one claiming to represent Premills here. You are!

It is you that has invented this theory of theocratic nations inheriting the future earth. This can be found nowhere in the Bible. Justin doesn't teach this. None of the early Church fathers taught this. Where is your evidence? Are you close? You're so besotted with your own beliefs that you force it in everywhere it does not belong. He simply teaches Jews and Gentiles becoming one and inhabiting the New Jerusalem that populates the perfect and glorified new earth - thus (in Justin's mind) fulfilling the Abrahamic covenant and being labeled "spiritual Israel." This is classic Amil.

We all agree that "Israel" is "the literal physical people descended from Abraham who are destined to be regathered and convert to Christianity" (to whatever degree that God ordains). That proves nothing.

Amils and early Chiliasts were indeed on the same page on most end time subjects. Early Chiliasm was a completely different animal to modern Premil. It was more akin to Amil on most of its view of the character of the age to come. Amillennialists and Chiliasts remained united in their perfect and pristine expectation of the approaching age, not the ugly sin-curse goat-infested death-blighted future millennium you promote.

Your beliefs are sourced with the early heretics and the Pharisees.

 

[Randy Kluth]

It is you that has invented this theory of theocratic nations inheriting the future earth. This can be found nowhere in the Bible. Justin doesn't teach this. None of the early Church fathers taught this. Where is your evidence? Are you close? You're so besotted with your own beliefs that you force it in everywhere it does not belong. He simply teaches Jews and Gentiles becoming one and inhabiting the New Jerusalem that populates the perfect and glorified new earth - thus (in Justin's mind) fulfilling the Abrahamic covenant and being labeled "spiritual Israel." This is classic Amil.

We all agree that "Israel" is "the literal physical people descended from Abraham who are destined to be regathered and convert to Christianity" (to whatever degree that God ordains). That proves nothing.

Amils and early Chiliasts were indeed on the same page on most end time subjects. Early Chiliasm was a completely different animal to modern Premil. It was more akin to Amil on most of its view of the character of the age to come. Amillennialists and Chiliasts remained united in their perfect and pristine expectation of the approaching age, not the ugly sin-curse goat-infested death-blighted future millennium you promote.

Your beliefs are sourced with the early heretics and the Pharisees.

It is telling that 1) you changed the subject to my belief in the coming Theocracy, the future Kingdom of God, and that 2) you still haven't provide one single quote from the early Chiliasts saying the Millennial Age will be "goat-infested," etc.

Clearly, you're misrepresenting Premillennialism, whether ancient Chiliasts or Modern Premillennialists. You can't be trusted if you can't focus on the subject at hand and provide the relevant proofs, instead demanding that I prove otherwise.

But you're the one who is making the false claims that you can't or won't try to prove. So, the guy knowledgeable on the Church Fathers has no quotes? That's very telling!

One more thing. Where ancient Chiliasts agree with most Christians on biblical doctrine does not make them Amillennialists! It makes them Premillennialists in agreement with other Christians on standard Christian doctrines! Modern Premillennialists believe in those same standard Christian doctrines!

 

[WPM]

It is telling that 1) you changed the subject to my belief in the coming Theocracy, the future Kingdom of God, and that 2) you still haven't provide one single quote from the early Chiliasts saying the Millennial Age will be "goat-infested," etc.

LOL. Hello! Think about what you are saying!!!! This demolishes your claims on the ECFs believing what you believe. This is what you believe. But it was not what the ECFs believed. Why are you asking me to prove something I do not believe the ECFs believed? I never read anything more ridiculous in my life. You are clearly not getting it!

Clearly, you're misrepresenting Premillennialism, whether ancient Chiliasts or Modern Premillennialists. You can't be trusted if you can't focus on the subject at hand and provide the relevant proofs, instead demanding that I prove otherwise.

But you're the one who is making the false claims that you can't or won't try to prove. So, the guy knowledgeable on the Church Fathers has no quotes? That's very telling!

One more thing. Where ancient Chiliasts agree with most Christians on biblical doctrine does not make them Amillennialists! It makes them Premillennialists in agreement with other Christians on standard Christian doctrines! Modern Premillennialists believe in those same standard Christian doctrines!

You have been unable to answer one single question i have presented. Have a look what this Op is actually about, before running your mouth off.

1. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief of Satan being cast down from heaven at the second coming?
2. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief of the binding of Satan at the second coming?
3. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that the wicked survive the second coming of the Lord?
4. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that Satan survives the second coming?
5. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 240 teach the Premil belief that Satan is cast into the bottomless pit for 1000 years after the second coming?
6. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that the wicked populate a future millennial earth?
7. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 240 teach the Premil belief that the curse continues unabated on a future millennial earth?
8. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 240 teach the Premil belief that mortals will populate future millennial earth?
9. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that marriage and procreation continue on on a future millennial earth?
10. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that sin continues on in a future millennial earth?
11. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that death continues on in a future millennial earth?
12. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that corruption continues unabated on in a future millennial earth?
13. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that Jesus will rule over his enemies for a thousand years after the second coming?
14. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that the saints rule over mortal humanity for a thousand years?
15. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that the glorified Church will rule in the Millennial era, causing all on earth to submit to the rule of Christ at that time?
16. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief of the restoring of Israel back to her old covenant theocratic status in a future millennium?
17. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief of Israel retaking her ancient borders in a future millennium?
18. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 240 teach the Premil belief that Satan will be released from the bottomless pit 1000 years after the second coming?
19. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that there will be a revival of Satanism 1,000 years+ after the second coming as the wicked in their billions overrun the Premil millennium as the sand of the sea?
20. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that Jesus and the glorified saints will be surrounded by billions of wicked mortals led by Satan 1,000 years+ after the second coming?
21. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that Jesus and the glorified saints will be surrounded by billions of wicked mortals led by Satan 1,000 years+ after the second coming?
22. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that there will be a second (or 3rd for Pretribbers) rapture when the first earth flees away 1,000 years+ after the second coming?
23. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that there will be a second glorification when the first earth flees away 1,000 years+ after the second coming?
24. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that there will be 2 last days periods?
25. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief that there will be 2 new heavens and new earths one with sin, sinners and corruption in it and the other perfect?

 

[Timtofly]

Where do modern theologians exist who teach these points?

 

[Randy Kluth]

LOL. Hello! Think about what you are saying!!!! This demolishes your claims on the ECFs believing what you believe. This is what you believe. But it was not what the ECFs believed. Are you asking me to prove something I do not believe the ECFs believed. You are clearly not getting it!
You have been unable to answer one single question i have presented. Have a look what this Op is actually about, before running your mouth off.

I'm just asking you to quote *any* Premill, Chiliast or otherwise, who have believed the Millennial Age is "goat-infested." I personally believe the Chiliasts believed the same thing as Modern Premills in the sense that mortals will inhabit that age, while the glorified Church will rule over them. Having mortals in the Millennial Age is not defined by any Premill as "goat-infested." Please provide the quote, or stop making the claim.

 

[WPM]

I'm just asking you to quote *any* Premill, Chiliast or otherwise, who have believed the Millennial Age is "goat-infested." I personally believe the Chiliasts believed the same thing as Modern Premills in the sense that mortals will inhabit that age, while the glorified Church will rule over them. Having mortals in the Millennial Age is not defined by any Premill as "goat-infested." Please provide the quote, or stop making the claim.

Do you believe the goats refer to the godly or the ungodly?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Do you believe the goats refer to the godly or the ungodly?

Goats represented rulers under the Law of Moses--spiritual leaders. In some contexts, they seem to refer to the rebellious, as opposed to sheep, the less unruly. It's context that defines how a word is used. How a word is used once, or even many times, does not govern how it is *always* used other places in the Scriptures.

In our context, we're talking about your reference to Modern Premills supposedly teaching "goat-infested" society in the Millennial Age. What you're indicating is that Modern Premills believe the thousand year period is marked by gross sin, because in the end there are millions of rebels fighting against God's city, together with the Devil.

But I've asked you to quote the Church Fathers or anybody who finds mortals in the Millennial Age are to be characterized as "goat-infested?" I understand that you think early Chiliasts are different from Modern Premills in *not* seeing the Millennial Age as infested by "goats." But you have provided no proof that *any Premill* believes this!

What both ancient Chiliasts and Modern Premills would agree on is that mortals exist in the Millennial Age. There may be Chiliasts who are an exception, but for the most part, their belief in the literal Millennium stems not just from Rev 20, but also from the OT Prophets, who depicted Israel restored to their literal land, feasting, and resisting sin.

I do believe, therefore, that *all* Premills, including ancient Chiliasts, largely believed that the glorified Church will rule over a mortal world in which sin is restrained until the very end of that period. And so, I've wanted you to produce proof that mortality for Modern Premills is somehow different from mortality for ancient Chiliasts?

Of course, you want to believe the ancient Chiliasts did not believe in mortality in the Millennium at all. You think that an absence of detail on this argues for their being Amillennialists who believed mortality ends at the 2nd Coming. Well, that is illogical from my pov, since as I said they based their Millennial beliefs on the OT depiction of Israel inheriting their land as mortals. And later, Chiliasts like Lactantius made it clear that that's what he believed, not indicating his belief was any different from Chiliasts who went before.

Where is this "goat-infested" world, depicted by Premills, ancient or modern, brother?

Isa 65.20 Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

 

[WPM]

Goats represented rulers under the Law of Moses--spiritual leaders. In some contexts, they seem to refer to the rebellious, as opposed to sheep, the less unruly. It's context that defines how a word is used. How a word is used once, or even many times, does not govern how it is *always* used other places in the Scriptures.

In our context, we're talking about your reference to Modern Premills supposedly teaching "goat-infested" society in the Millennial Age. What you're indicating is that Modern Premills believe the thousand year period is marked by gross sin, because in the end there are millions of rebels fighting against God's city, together with the Devil.

But I've asked you to quote the Church Fathers or anybody who finds mortals in the Millennial Age are to be characterized as "goat-infested?" I understand that you think early Chiliasts are different from Modern Premills in *not* seeing the Millennial Age as infested by "goats." But you have provided no proof that *any Premill* believes this!

What both ancient Chiliasts and Modern Premills would agree on is that mortals exist in the Millennial Age. There may be Chiliasts who are an exception, but for the most part, their belief in the literal Millennium stems not just from Rev 20, but also from the OT Prophets, who depicted Israel restored to their literal land, feasting, and resisting sin.

I do believe, therefore, that *all* Premills, including ancient Chiliasts, largely believed that the glorified Church will rule over a mortal world in which sin is restrained until the very end of that period. And so, I've wanted you to produce proof that mortality for Modern Premills is somehow different from mortality for ancient Chiliasts?

Of course, you want to believe the ancient Chiliasts did not believe in mortality in the Millennium at all. You think that an absence of detail on this argues for their being Amillennialists who believed mortality ends at the 2nd Coming. Well, that is illogical from my pov, since as I said they based their Millennial beliefs on the OT depiction of Israel inheriting their land as mortals. And later, Chiliasts like Lactantius made it clear that that's what he believed, not indicating his belief was any different from Chiliasts who went before.

Where is this "goat-infested" world, depicted by Premills, ancient or modern, brother?

Isa 65.20 Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

Stop avoiding the subject.

Are there wicked mortal humans in your supposed future millennium?

Anyway, what happens to the righteous when Jesus appears? What happens to the wicked when He appears? In Matthew 25:33 Christ (the king) sets “the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.” He then sentences them, and eternally separates them. The sheep are the believers, the goats are the unbelievers. Jesus confirms this in this final sentencing of all mankind in Matthew 25:34, 41&46, declaring: “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world … then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels … and these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”

The terms “the sheep,” “them on his right hand,” “ye blessed” and “the righteous” are seen to be synonymous in this parable. The wicked on the other hand are simply deemed “the goats,” “them on the left hand” or “ye cursed.” The righteous are seen in Matthew 25:31-45 to “inherit the kingdom” and “life eternal” whereas the wicked are cast “into everlasting fire” and receive “everlasting punishment” (Matthew 25:46). The designations and sentences can only relate to the saved and the unsaved. They could not be clearer. There are no exceptions or other groups additional to these two diametrically opposing groupings.

This is the final separation of the wicked from the redeemed of God. It is the climactic assignment of eternal destinies. All mankind is found embodied in one of these two unique groupings. There are no ‘nearly saved or ‘semi-saved’ people or ‘nearly lost’ or ‘semi-lost’ people on this day. One is either clothed with Christ’s robes of righteousness or eternally saved or he is He is clothed with his own filthy rags of righteousness and eternally lost. No one inherits the kingdom through national identity.

 

[WPM]

Goats represented rulers under the Law of Moses--spiritual leaders. In some contexts, they seem to refer to the rebellious, as opposed to sheep, the less unruly. It's context that defines how a word is used. How a word is used once, or even many times, does not govern how it is *always* used other places in the Scriptures.

In our context, we're talking about your reference to Modern Premills supposedly teaching "goat-infested" society in the Millennial Age. What you're indicating is that Modern Premills believe the thousand year period is marked by gross sin, because in the end there are millions of rebels fighting against God's city, together with the Devil.

But I've asked you to quote the Church Fathers or anybody who finds mortals in the Millennial Age are to be characterized as "goat-infested?" I understand that you think early Chiliasts are different from Modern Premills in *not* seeing the Millennial Age as infested by "goats." But you have provided no proof that *any Premill* believes this!

What both ancient Chiliasts and Modern Premills would agree on is that mortals exist in the Millennial Age. There may be Chiliasts who are an exception, but for the most part, their belief in the literal Millennium stems not just from Rev 20, but also from the OT Prophets, who depicted Israel restored to their literal land, feasting, and resisting sin.

I do believe, therefore, that *all* Premills, including ancient Chiliasts, largely believed that the glorified Church will rule over a mortal world in which sin is restrained until the very end of that period. And so, I've wanted you to produce proof that mortality for Modern Premills is somehow different from mortality for ancient Chiliasts?

Of course, you want to believe the ancient Chiliasts did not believe in mortality in the Millennium at all. You think that an absence of detail on this argues for their being Amillennialists who believed mortality ends at the 2nd Coming. Well, that is illogical from my pov, since as I said they based their Millennial beliefs on the OT depiction of Israel inheriting their land as mortals. And later, Chiliasts like Lactantius made it clear that that's what he believed, not indicating his belief was any different from Chiliasts who went before.

Where is this "goat-infested" world, depicted by Premills, ancient or modern, brother?

Isa 65.20 Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

It is so frustrating debating with someone who has zero evidence and presents his own faulty biased opinions as the historic evidence. That is ridiculous. Notwithstanding, your tactics only serve to reinforce the thesis i have been presenting for years. It exposes your error.

1. Give us hard quotes of ancient Chiliasts teaching that mortals exist in "the Millennial Age" prior to AD270?
2. Give us hard quotes of ancient Chiliasts teaching that "the glorified Church will rule over a mortal world in which sin is restrained until the very end of that period"?

If you cannot produce hard historic data then stop spreading misinformation and lies.

 

[WPM]

you want to believe the ancient Chiliasts did not believe in mortality in the Millennium at all. You think that an absence of detail on this argues for their being Amillennialists who believed mortality ends at the 2nd Coming. Well, that is illogical from my pov, since as I said they based their Millennial beliefs on the OT depiction of Israel inheriting their land as mortals. And later, Chiliasts like Lactantius made it clear that that's what he believed, not indicating his belief was any different from Chiliasts who went before.

Where is this "goat-infested" world, depicted by Premills, ancient or modern, brother?

Isa 65.20 Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

This is not historic evidence. Hello! This is more of your faulty bias opinions of an OT passage. Can you not see that you are totally bereft of hard evidence to support your claims?

You keep applying this to some imaginary future millennium when there is no mention in the text. This is typical Premil. They are constantly adding to Scripture. It is expressly talking about the NHNE that comes when Jesus appears.

After talking about the righteous and their eternal bliss the prophet then turns to the awful fate of the wicked. Isaiah 65:20 says: “the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.”

The Hebrew literally reads:

וְהַ֣חֹוטֶ֔א בֶּן־מֵאָ֥ה שָׁנָ֖ה יְקֻלָּֽל׃
wªhachowTe ben- mee'aah shaanaah yªqulaa
the sinner an hundred years old [shall be] accursed

The Hebrew literally reads:

וְהַ֣חֹוטֶ֔א בֶּן־מֵאָ֥ה שָׁנָ֖ה יְקֻלָּֽל׃
wªhachowTe ben- mee'aah šā-nāh yªqulaa
the sinner an hundred years old [shall be] accursed

וְהַ֣חוֹטֶ֔א
wªhachowTe
the sinner

בֶּן־
ben-
Old

מֵאָ֥ה
mee'aah
an hundred

שָׁנָ֖ה
šā-nāh
years

יְקֻלָּֽל׃
yªqulaa
Cursed

The Hebrew word yªqulaa simply means “is accursed.”
The Hebrew word wªhachowTe simply means "sinner."

There is no mention here of the word “death” or “die” in the Hebrew!

The inclusion of the phrase “Accursed an hundred years old sinner” is simply a solemn reminder to the reader that the fate of the unbeliever is starkly different to that being depicted for the believer on the new earth. In the midst of his joy at the revelation of the new earth the Old Testament prophet compares the bliss, blessing and perfection of the glorified new earth and the horror of the fate of the wicked in hell. The solemn thought is: the eternal horror and hopelessness that will be the lot of the wicked is not just for a short time, it is forever. There is no sense that the wicked are on the new earth here. Isaiah is not describing more of the same as Premil teaches. The new earth is not a repeat or rehash of this corruptible age. This must be forced into the text.

The writer is simply making a comparison (in the midst of his joy at the thought of the new earth) between the bliss and perfection of the glorified new earth and the horror of the fate of the wicked in the lake of fire. There is no sense that the wicked are on the earth here.

The sinner will indeed be accursed in eternity. Throughout Scripture God concentrates on the elect, and often attaches a postscript in regard to the wicked. That is all we are looking at in the phrase: “sinner old hundred years is cursed.” Their condition is eternally sealed and irreversible - it is hopeless.

There is no record of death on the new earth for the elect in the original Hebrew; only for the wicked who are experiencing eternal wrath in the Lake of Fire. Here is a notable difference between Amil and Premil, Amils believe the wicked are all judged when Jesus comes and banished into a lost eternity, Premil on the other hand (amazingly) rewards the wicked at the end (especially those who fight against Jerusalem at the end) by allowing them to inherit the new earth. The gorge between these two views couldn't be further.

 

[WPM]

Chiliasts like Lactantius made it clear that that's what he believed, not indicating his belief was any different from Chiliasts who went before.

You can paper over the pagan source of Lactantius' teaching all you want but it exposes the dubious origin of ancient Premil. Apart from the heretic Cerinthus, Lactantius (c.240-340) seems to be the only early writer that held to any of the beliefs (outside of the existence of a 1,000 years) that modern Premils do today, albeit he based his theology on the manuscripts of the Sibyl prophetesses’. I find it strange that you are comfortable with promoting such a dubious source.

Let us look at the full un-doctored quote from Lactantius (apart from a small portion removed at the end because of longevity).

as the Sibyl testifies and says:--

"For then there shall be confusion of mortals throughout the whole earth, when the Almighty Himself shall come on His judgment-seat to judge the souls of the quick and dead, and all the world."

But He, when He shall have destroyed unrighteousness, and executed His great judgment, and shall have recalled to life the righteous, who have lived from the beginning, will be engaged among men a thousand years, and will rule them with most just command.

Which the Sibyl proclaims in another place, as she utters her inspired predictions:--

"Hear me, ye mortals; an everlasting King reigns."

Then they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during those thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy, and beloved by God; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges.[1] But the nations shall not be entirely extinguished, but some shall be left as a victory for God, that they may be the occasion of triumph to the righteous, and may be subjected to perpetual slavery. About the same time also the prince of the devils, who is the contriver of all evils, shall be bound with chains, and shall be imprisoned during the thousand years of the heavenly rule in which righteousness shall reign in the world, so that he may contrive no evil against the people of God. After His coming the righteous shall be collected from all the earth, and the judgment being completed, the sacred city shall be planted in the middle of the earth, in which God Himself the builder may dwell together with the righteous, bearing rule in it.

And the Sibyl marks out this city when she says:--

"And the city which God made this He made more brilliant than the stars, and sun, and moon."

Then that darkness will be taken away from the world with which the heaven will be overspread and darkened, and the moon will receive the brightness of the sun, nor will it be further diminished: but the sun will become seven times brighter than it now is; and the earth will open its fruitfulness, and bring forth most abundant fruits of its own accord; the rocky mountains shall drop with honey; streams of wine shall run down, and rivers flow with milk: in short, the world itself shall rejoice, and all nature exult, being rescued and set free from the dominion of evil and impiety, and guilt and error. Throughout this time beasts shall not be nourished by blood, nor birds by prey; but all things shall be peaceful and tranquil. Lions and calves shall stand together at the manger, the wolf shall not carry off the sheep, the hound shall not hunt for prey; hawks and eagles shall not injure; the infant shall play with serpents.

In short, those things shall then come to pass which the poets spoke of as being done in the reign of Saturnus.

Whose error arose from this source,--that the prophets bring forward and speak of many future events as already accomplished. For visions were brought before their eyes by the divine Spirit, and they saw these things, as it were, done and completed in their own sight. And when fame had gradually spread abroad their predictions, since those who were uninstructed in the mysteries[2] of religion did not know why they were spoken, they thought that all those things were already fulfilled in the ancient ages, which evidently could not be accomplished and fulfilled under the reign of a man.[3] But when, after the destruction of impious religions and the suppression of guilt, the earth shall be subject to God,--

"The sailor[4] himself also shall renounce the sea, nor shall the naval pine Barter merchandise; all lands shall produce all things. The ground shall not endure the harrow, nor the vineyard the pruning hook; The sturdy ploughman also shall loose the bulls from the yoke. The plain shall by degrees grow yellow with soft ears of corn, The blushing grape shall hang on the uncultivated brambles, And hard oaks shall distil the dewy honey. Nor shall the wool learn to counterfeit various colours; But the ram himself in the meadows shall change his fleece, Now for a sweetly blushing purple, now for saffron dye; Scarlet of its own accord shall cover the lambs as they feed. The goats of themselves shall bring back home their udders distended with milk; Nor shall the herds dread huge lions."[5]

Which things the poet foretold according to the verses of the Cumaean Sibyl. But the Erythraean thus speaks:--

"But wolves shall not contend with lambs on the mountains, and lynxes shall eat grass with kids; boars shall feed with calves, and with all flocks; and the carnivorous lion shall eat chaff at the manger, and serpents shall sleep with infants deprived of their mothers."

And in another place, speaking of the fruitfulness of all things:--

"And then shall God give great joy to men; for the earth, and the trees, and the numberless flocks of the earth shall give to men the true fruit of the vine, and sweet honey, and white milk, and corn, which is the best of all things to mortals."

And another in the same manner:--

"The sacred land of the pious only will produce all these things, the stream of honey from the rock and from the fountain, and the milk of ambrosia will flow for all the just."

Therefore men will live a most tranquil life, abounding with resources, and will reign together with God; and the kings of the nations shall come from the ends of the earth with gifts and offerings, to adore and honour the great King, whose name shall be renowned and venerated by all the nations which shall be trader heaven, and by the kings who shall rule on earth.

"These are the things which are spoken of by the prophets as about to happen hereafter: but I have not considered it necessary to bring forward their testimonies and words, since it would be an endless task; nor would the limits of my book receive so great a multitude of subjects, since so many with one breath speak similar things; and at the same time, lest weariness should be occasioned to the readers if I should heap together things collected and transferred froth all; moreover, that I might confirm those very things which I said, not by my own writings, but in an especial manner by the writings of others, and might show that not only among us, but even with those very persons who revile us, the truth is preserved,[1] which they refuse to acknowledge.[2] But he who wishes to know these things more accurately may draw from the fountain itself, and he will know more things worthy of admiration than we have comprised in these books …

which the Sibyls say shall come to pass

 

[Randy Kluth]

You can paper over the pagan source of Lactantius' teaching all you want but it exposes the dubious origin of ancient Premil. Apart from the heretic Cerinthus, Lactantius (c.240-340) seems to be the only early writer that held to any of the beliefs (outside of the existence of a 1,000 years) that modern Premils do today, albeit he based his theology on the manuscripts of the Sibyl prophetesses’. I find it strange that you are comfortable with promoting such a dubious source.

Nobody was asking for yet another of your complaints that Lactantius refers to the Sibyl prophetesses. As I shared before, Lactantius loved to quote contemporary sources, while at the same time referring to the Scriptures as the "fountain." Using extra-biblical sources to substantiate biblical truth is reasonable in some cases. But you wish to distract from the point, that Lactantius believed in a mortal Millennium presided over by the glorified saints. In fact, his reference to extra-biblical sources to substantiate biblical truth makes it more likely that he considered earlier Chiliasts, and did not indicate his own views were contrary to theirs. At least as far as I know.

Furthermore, where does his view of mortal humanity during the Millennium indicate a "goat-infested world?"

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is not historic evidence. Hello! This is more of your faulty bias opinions of an OT passage. Can you not see that you are totally bereft of hard evidence to support your claims?

You keep applying this to some imaginary future millennium when there is no mention in the text. This is typical Premil. They are constantly adding to Scripture. It is expressly talking about the NHNE that comes when Jesus appears.

After talking about the righteous and their eternal bliss the prophet then turns to the awful fate of the wicked. Isaiah 65:20 says: “the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.”

I'm aware that Amillennialists have a different explanation for Isa 65.20, and I wasn't asking for it. My point was that the ancient Chiliasts and Modern Premills *base their view of a literal Millennium on the OT Prophets, who spoke of the Hope of Israel, the Jewish Hope.* You turn this into another opportunity for you to give your Amill take on what these Chiliasts viewed as a mortal Millennium.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Is there wicked mortal humans in your supposed future millennium?

Anyway, what happens to the righteous when Jesus appears? What happens to the wicked when He appears? In Matthew 25:33 Christ (the king) sets “the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.” He then sentences them, and eternally separates them. The sheep are the believers, the goats are the unbelievers. Jesus confirms this in this final sentencing of all mankind in Matthew 25:34, 41&46, declaring: “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world … then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels … and these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”

The terms “the sheep,” “them on his right hand,” “ye blessed” and “the righteous” are seen to be synonymous in this parable. The wicked on the other hand are simply deemed “the goats,” “them on the left hand” or “ye cursed.” The righteous are seen in Matthew 25:31-45 to “inherit the kingdom” and “life eternal” whereas the wicked are cast “into everlasting fire” and receive “everlasting punishment” (Matthew 25:46). The designations and sentences can only relate to the saved and the unsaved. They could not be clearer. There are no exceptions or other groups additional to these two diametrically opposing groupings.

This is the final separation of the wicked from the redeemed of God. It is the climactic assignment of eternal destinies. All mankind is found embodied in one of these two unique groupings. There are no ‘nearly saved or ‘semi-saved’ people or ‘nearly lost’ or ‘semi-lost’ people on this day. One is either clothed with Christ’s robes of righteousness or eternally saved or he is He is clothed with his own filthy rags of righteousness and eternally lost. No one inherits the kingdom through national identity.

You've turned this into yet another Amill vs. Premill opportunity. I asked you for proof the Premills believe in a "goat-infested world." You have provided nothing. Instead, you digress, or change the subject.

I'm fully aware that Amill and Premill view these passages differently. My point is that your depiction of Modern Premills as believing in a sin-filled world is not accurate, and you've utterly failed to provide a single reference substantiating that.

Lactantius clearly believed in a mortal Millennial world, and you haven't proven he saw this as "goat-infested" either. You're a complete failure in this regard, which means your only recourse is to completely distort the question and obscure the answer.

 

[Randy Kluth]

It is so frustrating debating with someone who has zero evidence and presents his own faulty biased opinions as the historic evidence. That is ridiculous. Notwithstanding, your tactics only serve to reinforce the thesis i have been presenting for years. It exposes your error.

1. Give us hard quotes of ancient Chiliasts teaching that mortals exist in "the Millennial Age" prior to AD270?
2. Give us hard quotes of ancient Chiliasts teaching that "the glorified Church will rule over a mortal world in which sin is restrained until the very end of that period"?

If you cannot produce hard historic data then stop spreading misinformation and lies.

An argument from silence does not substantiate your "theories!" I've given you my evidence, or even proof. I cite Lactantius because you wish to cut him off. But he stands as evidence of what Chiliasts before him believed, since he did not produce his own views in a vacuum. I showed you that Justin rested his beliefs in the literal Milllennium based on the OT Prophets, who spoke of a mortal humanity in that time period. Amills would disagree with his interpretation of these biblical passages, but the point is, he based his *own beliefs* on it as depicting the Millennium, and in those very passages he believed in the population was mortal.

Beyond that, I don't know the Church Fathers well enough to know everything they may have said on the subject. But even if there is very little, I would have to say they believed in the literal interpretation of the Revelation and especially Rev 20. If so, then the multitude who rebel at the end of a literal Millennium for the Chiliasts meant that people in the Millennial age sinned and rebelled against God for a short time at the end of that period.

These are solid proofs that the Chiliasts all believed in a mortal population during the Millennial Age. But this age is not depicted, by the Bible or by the Chiliasts, nor even by Modern Premills, as a "goat-infested world."

 

[Randy Kluth]

Here is the answer from WPM to my question.

My Post 182:
"Your failure to provide what you claimed is noted. You've claimed Premillennialists view the Millennial Age as "goat-infested, etc." You've repeated this over and over, as if repeating it makes it true. And yet you're utterly unable to verify where you get this information from. At best, you take something Premills believe, and twist it to mean something worse and different. This is called "misrepresentation." And no, it is *your responsibility* to back up your own negative claims. You're copping out by claiming it is my responsibility. I'm not the one claiming to represent Premills here. You are!"

WPM Post 183: unable to answer

My Post 184: "Clearly, you're misrepresenting Premillennialism, whether ancient Chiliasts or Modern Premillennialists. You can't be trusted if you can't focus on the subject at hand and provide the relevant proofs, instead demanding that I prove otherwise.
But you're the one who is making the false claims that you can't or won't try to prove. So, the guy knowledgeable on the Church Fathers has no quotes? That's very telling!"

Your Post 185: unable to answer

My Post 187: "I'm just asking you to quote *any* Premill, Chiliast or otherwise, who have believed the Millennial Age is "goat-infested." "

Your Post 188: unable to answer

My Post 189: "Where is this "goat-infested" world, depicted by Premills, ancient or modern, brother?"

Your Post 190: No quotations provided

My Post 194: Concerning Lactantius, an ancient Chiliast: "Furthermore, where does his view of mortal humanity during the Millennium indicate a "goat-infested world?" "

My Post 197: I explain the evidences I have for believing most all of the early Chiliasts, including Lactantius, believed in a mortal world, and yet did not depict the mortal world as "goat-infested." How did any of their biblical references to the Millennial Age indicate it would be "goat-infested?" Right!--none of them do that! Neither do Modern Premills believe that their Millennial world is "goat-infested," simply because the population of the world is mortal!

Why would Modern Premills teach a mortal world that is "goat-infested" when the early Chiliasts did not, and yet still believed in the same Millennial prophecies? None of their Millennial prophecies from the Bible taught a "goat-infested world!" But those same Millennial prophecies taught a mortal world during the Millennial Period, or the Kingdom Age.

 

[WPM]

Here is the answer from WPM to my question.

My Post 182:
"Your failure to provide what you claimed is noted. You've claimed Premillennialists view the Millennial Age as "goat-infested, etc." You've repeated this over and over, as if repeating it makes it true. And yet you're utterly unable to verify where you get this information from. At best, you take something Premills believe, and twist it to mean something worse and different. This is called "misrepresentation." And no, it is *your responsibility* to back up your own negative claims. You're copping out by claiming it is my responsibility. I'm not the one claiming to represent Premills here. You are!"

WPM Post 183: unable to answer

My Post 184: "Clearly, you're misrepresenting Premillennialism, whether ancient Chiliasts or Modern Premillennialists. You can't be trusted if you can't focus on the subject at hand and provide the relevant proofs, instead demanding that I prove otherwise.
But you're the one who is making the false claims that you can't or won't try to prove. So, the guy knowledgeable on the Church Fathers has no quotes? That's very telling!"

Your Post 185: unable to answer

My Post 187: "I'm just asking you to quote *any* Premill, Chiliast or otherwise, who have believed the Millennial Age is "goat-infested." "

Your Post 188: unable to answer

My Post 189: "Where is this "goat-infested" world, depicted by Premills, ancient or modern, brother?"

Your Post 190: No quotations provided

My Post 194: Concerning Lactantius, an ancient Chiliast: "Furthermore, where does his view of mortal humanity during the Millennium indicate a "goat-infested world?" "

My Post 197: I explain the evidences I have for believing most all of the early Chiliasts, including Lactantius, believed in a mortal world, and yet did not depict the mortal world as "goat-infested." How did any of their biblical references to the Millennial Age indicate it would be "goat-infested?" Right!--none of them do that! Neither do Modern Premills believe that their Millennial world is "goat-infested," simply because the population of the world is mortal!

Why would Modern Premills teach a mortal world that is "goat-infested" when the early Chiliasts did not, and yet still believed in the same Millennial prophecies? None of their Millennial prophecies from the Bible taught a "goat-infested world!" But those same Millennial prophecies taught a mortal world during the Millennial Period, or the Kingdom Age.

More avoidance.

1. Give us hard quotes of ancient Chiliasts teaching prior to AD270 that mortals exist in "the Millennial Age"?
2. Give us hard quotes of ancient Chiliasts teaching that "the glorified Church will rule over a mortal world in which sin is restrained until the very end of that period"?

 

[WPM]

An argument from silence does not substantiate your "theories!" I've given you my evidence, or even proof. I cite Lactantius because you wish to cut him off. But he stands as evidence of what Chiliasts before him believed, since he did not produce his own views in a vacuum. I showed you that Justin rested his beliefs in the literal Milllennium based on the OT Prophets, who spoke of a mortal humanity in that time period. Amills would disagree with his interpretation of these biblical passages, but the point is, he based his *own beliefs* on it as depicting the Millennium, and in those very passages he believed in the population was mortal.

Beyond that, I don't know the Church Fathers well enough to know everything they may have said on the subject. But even if there is very little, I would have to say they believed in the literal interpretation of the Revelation and especially Rev 20. If so, then the multitude who rebel at the end of a literal Millennium for the Chiliasts meant that people in the Millennial age sinned and rebelled against God for a short time at the end of that period.

These are solid proofs that the Chiliasts all believed in a mortal population during the Millennial Age. But this age is not depicted, by the Bible or by the Chiliasts, nor even by Modern Premills, as a "goat-infested world."

I will take this as an admission that you recognize that Premil has no advocates for the 1st 240 years after the cross until Lactantius, who (notably) relied mainly upon the heretics for his beliefs. This has been my thesis all along. You provide no hard quotes from Justin because you have nothing. You do indeed argue from silence. You foist your mistaken opinion of Isaiah 65 upon him.

I know this is not easy to accept. But it is factual.