The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics.

[Timtofly]

Notice Christ’s kingdom is viewed here as eternal, not as a temporal reign of 1000 years. The Creed challenges Chiliasm/Pemillennialiasm. It succinctly states: “he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end,” not to reign on earth for a thousand years and then judge.

Judge who? Revelation 20 never states the redeemed are judged after the 1,000 years. In fact all who live in the Millennium are judged and given eternal life, to a kingdom without end. The kingdom started with the death of Abel. It is without end. It only has 3 collection points per Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. The kingdom will never cease, even when creation is handed back to God.

 

[Timtofly]

and that the lion, that is, antichrist, rampant against mankind in the latter days, should be trampled down by Him; and that He should bind “the dragon, that old serpent” and subject him to the power of man, who had been conquered so that all his might should be trodden down.

This does not say "has been trampled", or "has been bound". This is a future point made by Irenaeus.

 

[Timtofly]

So, it is not Rev 20 but Rev 19 that references the defeat of Antichrist, and Rev 20 follows by showing that this time is simultaneous with the binding of Satan for a thousand years. Clearly, IRENAEUS is extending his support for this interpretation when he alludes to the "binding of Satan."

Paul should be accusing Irenaeus of thinking that Revelation 20 is chronologically after Revelation 19. That is exactly what Irenaeus did.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Your attempts at speaking on behalf of the ECFs and explaining away their beliefs have shown themselves to be dangerous and foolish....Your views align closely with the ancient Premil heretics that were wholesale condemned by ancient Amils and Chiliasts.

Now you're trying to call me a heretic? You begin by inferring the Chiliasts and Premils in history get their information from heretics, and then deny you did that. I view their positions as orthodox, and your own views about them as misrepresentative. It's no wonder you slander them and myself. You don't properly recognize their positions. They are not in the least Amil! That is the most ridiculous statement you regularly make!

Finally, nowhere do the early Chiliasts teach the binding of Satan for 1,000 years+ after the second coming as you do.

I will never let you get away with your misrepresentation of their beliefs. If the Chiliasts believed at all in a literal thousand years, then they also believed that during that thousand years Satan is bound. It all comes from the same passage of Scripture, whether you see them comment on it or not.

It would be inconsistent of them to believe in a literal Millennium and not believe in a literal binding of Satan during that time. And as I already showed you, IRENAEUS pointedly said that! You're incorrigible and will not accept the truth even if it stares you in the face.

 

[WPM]

Now you're trying to call me a heretic? You begin by inferring the Chiliasts and Premils in history get their information from heretics, and then deny you did that. I view their positions as orthodox, and your own views about them as misrepresentative. It's no wonder you slander them and myself. You don't properly recognize their positions. They are not in the least Amil! That is the most ridiculous statement you regularly make!



I will never let you get away with your misrepresentation of their beliefs. If the Chiliasts believed at all in a literal thousand years, then they also believed that during that thousand years Satan is bound. It all comes from the same passage of Scripture, whether you see them comment on it or not.

It would be inconsistent of them to believe in a literal Millennium and not believe in a literal binding of Satan during that time. And as I already showed you, IRENAEUS pointedly said that! You're incorrigible and will not accept the truth even if it stares you in the face.

You seem to think, if you fail to produce any evidence but merely keep denying the overwhelming evidential facts it will somehow become a reality. Well, no! That's not how it works. The first principle of evidence is: "he who alleges must prove." You have not proved anything on this thread but your total ignorance of the subject, your lack of objectivity and your ongoing frustration at the historic facts. That is because you have nothing but your own opinions, which have proved, time after time, to be ill-researched, bias and wrong.

I have proved in great detail how the founding fathers of your eschatology were heretics. I have not said or implied you are a heretic. I do not believe that. Stop deliberately misrepresenting what I have said.

 

[WPM]

I will never let you get away with your misrepresentation of their beliefs. If the Chiliasts believed at all in a literal thousand years, then they also believed that during that thousand years Satan is bound. It all comes from the same passage of Scripture, whether you see them comment on it or not.

It would be inconsistent of them to believe in a literal Millennium and not believe in a literal binding of Satan during that time. And as I already showed you, IRENAEUS pointedly said that! You're incorrigible and will not accept the truth even if it stares you in the face.

The reason why you cannot find any support for some of the strange aspects of the teaching of the early Chiliasts in Revelation 20 is because they took their support on a future thousand years from apostate Judaism. Papias is widely accepted by historians as the first orthodox Chiliast.

Irenaeus quotes Papias:

"The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand branches, and on each branch again ten thousand twigs, and on each twig ten thousand clusters, and on each cluster ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed shall yield five-and-twenty measures of wine. And when any of the saints shall have taken hold of one of their clusters, another shall cry, I am a better cluster; take me, bless the Lord through me. Likewise also a grain of wheat shall produce ten thousand heads, and every head shall have ten thousand grains, and every grain ten pounds of fine flour, bright and clean, and the other fruits, seeds and the grass shall produce in similar proportions, and all the animals, using these fruits which are products of the soil, shall become in their turn peaceable and harmonious, obedient to man in all subjection" (Against All Heresies, 5:33).

Whilst Irenaeus does his best to connect Papias’ beliefs to Christ and the apostles it is clear that his teaching is from another source. In regard to the source of his teaching, most Bible students will know that the instruction that the vines will produce ten thousand shoots, on ten thousand branches, on ten thousand twigs, on ten thousand clusters, with ten thousand grapes is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

Eusebius contends: “Papias himself, in the preface to his discourses, certainly does not declare that he himself was a hearer and eye-witness of the holy Apostles, but he shows, by the language which he uses, that he received the matters of the faith from those who were their friends.”

The fact is: his teaching was derived from the traditions of Jewish apocalyptic literature. Whilst the Apocalypse of Baruch seems to be the main source, other commentators see the influence of the Book of Enoch and the Jewish oral tradition that eventually found its way into the writings of the Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sanhedrin (Folio 97a). These were very popular Jewish influences at the time of the early church.

The Apocalypse of Baruch

In the Apocalypse of Baruch (Point 29:3-5) we find that “it shall come to pass when all is accomplished that was to come to pass in those parts, that the Messiah shall then begin to be revealed …The earth also shall yield its fruit ten-thousandfold and on each vine there shall be a thousand branches, and each branch shall produce a thousand clusters, and each cluster produce a thousand grapes, and each grape produce a cor of wine.”

The connection can hardly be disputed by the objective student. His teaching is clearly extra-biblical – belonging to apostate Judaism. .

George L. Murray states: “Papias did not receive them [his millennial beliefs] from John, but from the Apocalypse of Baruch, a Jewish book, antedating the advent of Christ. The only variation is that where Baruch says a thousand Papias says ten thousand, for he might have reasoned that one was as near the truth as the other. This is sufficient to prove to anyone who will accept proofs that the outstanding premillenarian of the early church actually borrowed his theories from Jewish fables.”

Philip Schaff says in his History of the Christian Church (Volume 2, Chapter 12): “Papias … entertained quaint and extravagant notions of the happiness of the millennial reign, for which he appealed to apostolic tradition. He put into the mouth of Christ himself a highly figurative description of the more than tropical fertility of that period, which is preserved and approved by Irenaeus, but sounds very apocryphal.”

Eusebius describes this teaching as an “unwritten tradition” containing “certain strange parables and teachings of the Saviour, and some other more mythical things.” It is certainly not Bible-based.

Historic Premillennialist G. E. Ladd concedes that the language of Papias and that found in the Apocalypse of Baruch are "words so similar that some sort of interdependence must exist." Ladd concludes "some early Christians elaborated the Christian doctrine of the millennium in light of a similar Jewish doctrine."

Papias had some other bizarre theories that surely put a question mark over the veracity of his claims. One such assertion was: Judas walked about in this world a sad example of impiety; for his body having swollen to such an extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed sort. Other traditions which Papias received and which Quasten judges "fabulous" include: the murder of James the brother of John by the Jews, the raising to life of the mother of Manaimus, and the swallowing of poison with no ill effects by Justus Barsabbas.

Papias could be considered the father of Chiliasm but we should note he nowhere describes mortals, the wicked, death, disease, decay and sin surviving Christ’s appearing and continuing on for another thousand years. Jerome outlines Papias’ belief that “the Lord will reign in the flesh with the saints.” Please note it is the saints only. There is no reference to the nations surviving or the devil been bound during a future millennium and then released a thousand years after the second coming to create havoc on the earth.

So here we have indisputable irrefutable proof that the origins of Chiliasm are not found in Holy Writ or Rev 20 but in apostate Judaism.

Premillennialist Alan Patrick Boyd, a graduate student at Dallas Theological Seminary began a challenging undertaking, writing a masters thesis (the eschatology of the post-apostolic fathers) whose goal was to establish the prophetic faith of the early Church fathers. His professor, Dr. Charles Ryrie of Dallas Seminary fame had boldly written "Premillennialism is the historic faith of the Church."

"...he (Papias) was the first orthodox chiliast" (pg. 52).

"First of all, as with the modern system, Papias believed in a literal millennial rule of Christ on earth. Secondly, however, there are no further similarities between the systems...it seems safe to assume that his chiliasm was of a markedly different character than the modern variety" (pg. 62).

"...although Papias and Justin Martyr did believe in a Millennial kingdom, the 1,000 years is the only basic similarity with the modern system" (pg. 89).

 

[Randy Kluth]

The reason why you cannot find any support for some of the strange aspects of the teaching of the early Chiliasts in Revelation 20 is because they took their support on a future thousand years from apostate Judaism.

That shares a sentiment with antiSemitism, to claim that because something is from Judaism, its current state of apostasy renders all of its teachings illegitimate. Jesus, however, said the opposite.

Matt 23.Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

So you reject the Prophets' presentation of what I call "the Jewish Hope" simply because Judaism taught it? No wonder you're Amil--Amil dismissed all hope that God's promise to Abraham, concerning Israel, would finally be fulfilled, resulting in Israel's ultimate restoration as a nation. What Amil basically did was exchange the "Jewish Hope" for the Hope of a newly-defined "Israel," the International Church.

Acts 1.6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

Clearly, Jesus indicated that *at the proper time* Israel would be restored as a godly kingdom. But you join Amil teaching which reverses Jesus' teaching, and is based on unbelief in the promises of God.

Rom 11.1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means!...
26 and in this way all Israel will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob."

Irenaeus quotes Papias:

"The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand branches, and on each branch again ten thousand twigs, and on each twig ten thousand clusters, and on each cluster ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed shall yield five-and-twenty measures of wine. And when any of the saints shall have taken hold of one of their clusters, another shall cry, I am a better cluster; take me, bless the Lord through me. Likewise also a grain of wheat shall produce ten thousand heads, and every head shall have ten thousand grains, and every grain ten pounds of fine flour, bright and clean, and the other fruits, seeds and the grass shall produce in similar proportions, and all the animals, using these fruits which are products of the soil, shall become in their turn peaceable and harmonious, obedient to man in all subjection" (Against All Heresies, 5:33).

Whilst Irenaeus does his best to connect Papias’ beliefs to Christ and the apostles it is clear that his teaching is from another source. In regard to the source of his teaching, most Bible students will know that the instruction that the vines will produce ten thousand shoots, on ten thousand branches, on ten thousand twigs, on ten thousand clusters, with ten thousand grapes is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

It doesn't matter where Papias got his statement from, even though we likely know it was from Jewish sources. The point is, it was based on the "Jewish Hope" of a Kingdom in which Israel would never again be destroyed. That certainly didn't apply to the Church!

According to the Prophets, the Messianic Age was to be one of great blessing. Focusing on what Papias is quoting is a complete distraction from this. The plain fact is that you reject Jewish Prophecy of Israel's final restoration.

Amos 9.8 “Surely the eyes of the Sovereign Lord
are on the sinful kingdom.
I will destroy it
from the face of the earth.
Yet I will not totally destroy
the descendants of Jacob,”
declares the Lord...
13 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when the reaper will be overtaken by the plowman
and the planter by the one treading grapes.
New wine will drip from the mountains
and flow from all the hills,
14 and I will bring my people Israel back from exile.
“They will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them.
They will plant vineyards and drink their wine;
they will make gardens and eat their fruit.
15 I will plant Israel in their own land,
never again to be uprooted
from the land I have given them,”
says the Lord your God.

The Church was not scattered across the face of the earth--Israel was! And it is Israel, the physical nation, that will be restored, after it has suffered much destruction and a long exile. Then Israel will enter into a period of great blessing. If Jewish sources indicated this, it was likely based on prophecies like this, which clearly is biblical!

Eusebius contends: “Papias himself, in the preface to his discourses, certainly does not declare that he himself was a hearer and eye-witness of the holy Apostles, but he shows, by the language which he uses, that he received the matters of the faith from those who were their friends.”

Eusebius wished, as an Amil, to discount the message of Premil.

The connection can hardly be disputed by the objective student. His teaching is clearly extra-biblical – belonging to apostate Judaism...

Quoting extra-biblical material from Jewish Literature can be valid or invalid, depending on whether the material subscribes to biblical truth. In this case, the Jewish Hope is true and biblical. It is based on the Abrahamic Covenant which obviously is biblical and true.

George L. Murray states: “Papias did not receive them [his millennial beliefs] from John, but from the Apocalypse of Baruch, a Jewish book, antedating the advent of Christ. ...

Papias could be considered the father of Chiliasm but we should note he nowhere describes mortals, the wicked, death, disease, decay and sin surviving Christ’s appearing and continuing on for another thousand years. Jerome outlines Papias’ belief that “the Lord will reign in the flesh with the saints.” Please note it is the saints only. There is no reference to the nations surviving or the devil been bound during a future millennium and then released a thousand years after the second coming to create havoc on the earth.

This is purely an argument from silence, which has no merit whatsoever. We know the glorified Church will rule on earth during the Millennium.. But rule over who? I should think Papias viewed the rule of the Church as secondary to the fact they rule at all? Focusing on mortals during the Millennium hardly has value in comparison to what Papias would hope the current Church wishes to prepare for?

There was likely little wish to speculate on the details of the Millennium, but instead to focus on the hope of glory for the Church, as the Bible itself focuses on. Jesus said that future speculation must take 2nd place to present ministry. Is it any wonder the early Chliasts didn't write books like "Left Behind?"

Denouncing Papias' character and questioning his material is purely a distraction. And it isn't really even very Christian. You may question these things, but to do that to delegitimize his contributions in Christian history is not very respectable. The early Amils wished to do this, and I don't think that was very "Christian" either. They had a right to their opinion, but no right whatsoever to try to tarnish someone's reputation simply because they disagreed with his eschatology!

But you've picked up on this yourself. This is your entire style, to try to diminish others who have a different eschatology than you, insulting them and claiming they are heretical. You're disgusting.

 

[Timtofly]

The reason why you cannot find any support for some of the strange aspects of the teaching of the early Chiliasts in Revelation 20 is because they took their support on a future thousand years from apostate Judaism. Papias is widely accepted by historians as the first orthodox Chiliast.

Irenaeus quotes Papias:

"The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand branches, and on each branch again ten thousand twigs, and on each twig ten thousand clusters, and on each cluster ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed shall yield five-and-twenty measures of wine. And when any of the saints shall have taken hold of one of their clusters, another shall cry, I am a better cluster; take me, bless the Lord through me. Likewise also a grain of wheat shall produce ten thousand heads, and every head shall have ten thousand grains, and every grain ten pounds of fine flour, bright and clean, and the other fruits, seeds and the grass shall produce in similar proportions, and all the animals, using these fruits which are products of the soil, shall become in their turn peaceable and harmonious, obedient to man in all subjection" (Against All Heresies, 5:33).

Whilst Irenaeus does his best to connect Papias’ beliefs to Christ and the apostles it is clear that his teaching is from another source. In regard to the source of his teaching, most Bible students will know that the instruction that the vines will produce ten thousand shoots, on ten thousand branches, on ten thousand twigs, on ten thousand clusters, with ten thousand grapes is nowhere to be found in the Bible.

Eusebius contends: “Papias himself, in the preface to his discourses, certainly does not declare that he himself was a hearer and eye-witness of the holy Apostles, but he shows, by the language which he uses, that he received the matters of the faith from those who were their friends.”

The fact is: his teaching was derived from the traditions of Jewish apocalyptic literature. Whilst the Apocalypse of Baruch seems to be the main source, other commentators see the influence of the Book of Enoch and the Jewish oral tradition that eventually found its way into the writings of the Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Sanhedrin (Folio 97a). These were very popular Jewish influences at the time of the early church.

The Apocalypse of Baruch

In the Apocalypse of Baruch (Point 29:3-5) we find that “it shall come to pass when all is accomplished that was to come to pass in those parts, that the Messiah shall then begin to be revealed …The earth also shall yield its fruit ten-thousandfold and on each vine there shall be a thousand branches, and each branch shall produce a thousand clusters, and each cluster produce a thousand grapes, and each grape produce a cor of wine.”

The connection can hardly be disputed by the objective student. His teaching is clearly extra-biblical – belonging to apostate Judaism. .

George L. Murray states: “Papias did not receive them [his millennial beliefs] from John, but from the Apocalypse of Baruch, a Jewish book, antedating the advent of Christ. The only variation is that where Baruch says a thousand Papias says ten thousand, for he might have reasoned that one was as near the truth as the other. This is sufficient to prove to anyone who will accept proofs that the outstanding premillenarian of the early church actually borrowed his theories from Jewish fables.”

Philip Schaff says in his History of the Christian Church (Volume 2, Chapter 12): “Papias … entertained quaint and extravagant notions of the happiness of the millennial reign, for which he appealed to apostolic tradition. He put into the mouth of Christ himself a highly figurative description of the more than tropical fertility of that period, which is preserved and approved by Irenaeus, but sounds very apocryphal.”

Eusebius describes this teaching as an “unwritten tradition” containing “certain strange parables and teachings of the Saviour, and some other more mythical things.” It is certainly not Bible-based.

Historic Premillennialist G. E. Ladd concedes that the language of Papias and that found in the Apocalypse of Baruch are "words so similar that some sort of interdependence must exist." Ladd concludes "some early Christians elaborated the Christian doctrine of the millennium in light of a similar Jewish doctrine."

Papias had some other bizarre theories that surely put a question mark over the veracity of his claims. One such assertion was: Judas walked about in this world a sad example of impiety; for his body having swollen to such an extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed sort. Other traditions which Papias received and which Quasten judges "fabulous" include: the murder of James the brother of John by the Jews, the raising to life of the mother of Manaimus, and the swallowing of poison with no ill effects by Justus Barsabbas.

Papias could be considered the father of Chiliasm but we should note he nowhere describes mortals, the wicked, death, disease, decay and sin surviving Christ’s appearing and continuing on for another thousand years. Jerome outlines Papias’ belief that “the Lord will reign in the flesh with the saints.” Please note it is the saints only. There is no reference to the nations surviving or the devil been bound during a future millennium and then released a thousand years after the second coming to create havoc on the earth.

So here we have indisputable irrefutable proof that the origins of Chiliasm are not found in Holy Writ or Rev 20 but in apostate Judaism.

Premillennialist Alan Patrick Boyd, a graduate student at Dallas Theological Seminary began a challenging undertaking, writing a masters thesis (the eschatology of the post-apostolic fathers) whose goal was to establish the prophetic faith of the early Church fathers. His professor, Dr. Charles Ryrie of Dallas Seminary fame had boldly written "Premillennialism is the historic faith of the Church."

"...he (Papias) was the first orthodox chiliast" (pg. 52).

"First of all, as with the modern system, Papias believed in a literal millennial rule of Christ on earth. Secondly, however, there are no further similarities between the systems...it seems safe to assume that his chiliasm was of a markedly different character than the modern variety" (pg. 62).

"...although Papias and Justin Martyr did believe in a Millennial kingdom, the 1,000 years is the only basic similarity with the modern system" (pg. 89).

Are you implying that Revelation 20 is an added heretical teaching that should be exumed from God's Word?

You cannot change the words, but you certainly twist the meanings yourself worse than your alleged heretic Papias. Where do you assume these people at the end come from? Surely they don't pop out of sheol as that would be unbiblical, not found in Scripture any where.

Amil is just as heretical by changing the meaning of Revelation 20, to expunge it from God's Word through figurative means, and added human opinion.

No human is forcing 1,000 years into the text. It is already there in black and white. Yet Amil forcefully remove those words by explaining them away. They have to teach others their implied doctrinal stance, convincing them to believe the same way they do. That is the title of a current thread, no? 22 reasons to "abandon Revelation 20 as written". Except you have to be sneaky and blame pre-mill for your own opinions of the chapter.

 

[WPM]

That shares a sentiment with antiSemitism, to claim that because something is from Judaism, its current state of apostasy renders all of its teachings illegitimate. Jesus, however, said the opposite.

Matt 23.Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

So you reject the Prophets' presentation of what I call "the Jewish Hope" simply because Judaism taught it? No wonder you're Amil--Amil dismissed all hope that God's promise to Abraham, concerning Israel, would finally be fulfilled, resulting in Israel's ultimate restoration as a nation. What Amil basically did was exchange the "Jewish Hope" for the Hope of a newly-defined "Israel," the International Church.

Acts 1.6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

The ironic thing is: in keeping with the early Amillennialists, many of the early Chiliasts emphasized the New Testament heavenly spiritual hope rather than an earthly carnal one, as most contemporary Premillennialists promote. They spiritualized the fulfillment of Israel's hope, relating it to the Church, the Promised Land being Christ, and (in doing so) expose the faulty Premil literalist obsession.

Chiliast Methodius (Bishop of Olympus, Asia Minor) denounces the materialistic approach of the apostate Jews (which sadly many Premillennialists advocate today):

[T]he Jews, fluttering about the bare letter of Scripture, like drones about the leaves of herbs, but not about flowers and fruits as the bee, fully believe that these words and ordinances were spoken concerning such a tabernacle as they erect; as if God delighted in those trivial adornments which they, preparing, fabricate from trees, not perceiving the wealth of good things to come; whereas these things, being like air and phantom shadows, foretell the resurrection and the putting up of our tabernacle that had fallen upon the earth, which at length, in the seventh thousand of years, resuming again immortal, we shall celebrate the great feast of true tabernacles in the new and indissoluble creation, the fruits of the earth having been gathered in, and men no longer begetting and begotten, but God resting from the works of creation (Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 9:1).​

Methodius concludes, showing the feast of tabernacles to be a type of an incorruptible future millennial age:

Wherefore let it shame the Jews that they do not perceive the deep things of the Scriptures, thinking that nothing else than outward things are contained in the law and the prophets; for they, intent upon things earthly, have in greater esteem the riches of the world than the wealth which is of the soul (Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 9:1).​

Tertullian wrote in Against Marcion Book III (Chapter 24):

As for the restoration of Judæa, however, which even the Jews themselves, induced by the names of places and countries, hope for just as it is described, it would be tedious to state at length how the figurative interpretation is spiritually applicable to Christ and His church, and to the character and fruits thereof … At present, too, it would be superfluous for this reason, that our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, 'let down from heaven,' which the apostle also calls 'our mother from above;' and, while declaring that our citizenship, is in heaven, he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven … We say that this city has been provided by God for receiving the saints on their resurrection, and refreshing them with the abundance of all really spiritual blessings, as a recompense for those which in the world we have either despised or lost; since it is both just and God-worthy that His servants should have their joy in the place where they have also suffered affliction for His name’s sake.​

Tertullian (160 – 220 AD) said in Against Marcion, Book IV, Chapter 38:

You see how pertinent it was to the case in point. Because the question concerned the next world, and He was going to declare that no one marries there, He opens the way by laying down the principles that here, where there is death, there is also marriage. But they whom God shall account worthy of the possession of that world and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; forasmuch as they cannot die any more, since they become equal to the angels, being made the children of God and of the resurrection.​

Tertullian wrote in On the Resurrection of the Flesh (Chapter 26):

In Isaiah, “‘Ye shall eat the good of the land’, the expression means the blessings which await the flesh when in the kingdom of God it shall be renewed, and made like the angels, and waiting to obtain the things ‘which neither eye hath seen, nor ear heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man’ … You will reckon, (I suppose) onions and truffles among earth's bounties, since the Lord declares that ‘man shall not live on bread alone!’ In this way the Jews lose heavenly blessings, by confining their hopes to earthly ones, being ignorant of the promise of heavenly bread, and of the oil of God’s unction, and the wine of the Spirit, and of that water of life which has its vigour from the vine of Christ. On exactly the same principle, they consider the special soil of Judæa to be that very holy land, which ought rather to be interpreted of the Lord’s flesh, which, in all those who put on Christ, is thenceforward the holy land; holy indeed by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, truly flowing with milk and honey by the sweetness of His assurance, truly Judæan by reason of the friendship of God.​

Even Barnabas (who you wrongly claim was Premil) teaches The Epistle of Barnabas (Chapter 6):

[T]he prophet proclaimed, “Enter ye into the land flowing with milk and honey, and have dominion over it.” … We, then, are they whom He has led into the good land. What, then, mean milk and honey? This, that as the infant is kept alive first by honey, and then by milk, so also we, being quickened and kept alive by the faith of the promise and by the word, shall live ruling over the earth.​

Barnabas spiritualises the Old Testament land promises in a manner that would cause modern premillennialists to go cross-eyed. This is a classic Amillennial approach to the fulfilment of Old Testament prophesies in a New Testament context. He also applies the promises made to natural Israel in the Old Testament to the New Testament church today.

J. Lebreton aptly remarks, “not indeed to the deep thought of the Church, but, at least, to the danger which Judaism constituted for it, and the Church’s reaction to the danger.”

Barnabas continues in Chapter XVI:

Let us inquire, then, if there still is a temple of God. There is—where He himself declared He would make and finish it. For it is written, “And it shall come to pass, when the week is completed, the temple of God shall be built in glory in the name of the Lord.” I find, therefore, that a temple does exist. Learn, then, how it shall be built in the name of the Lord. Before we believed in God, the habitation of our heart was corrupt and weak, as being indeed like a temple made with hands. For it was full of idolatry, and was a habitation of demons, through our doing such things as were opposed to [the will of] God. But it shall be built, observe ye, in the name of the Lord, in order that the temple of the Lord may be built in glory. How? Learn [as follows]. Having received the forgiveness of sins, and placed our trust in the name of the Lord, we have become new creatures, formed again from the beginning. Wherefore in our habitation God truly dwells in us. How? His word of faith; His calling of promise; the wisdom of the statutes; the commands of the doctrine; He himself prophesying in us; He himself dwelling in us … This is the spiritual temple built for the Lord.​

This means that at an extremely early date, even perhaps overlapping with the writings of the Apostle John, there are those in the church who have replaced Israel entirely with the Church in terms of future blessings. As Diprose notes, ―Barnabas shows little respect for Old Testament institutions. For example, in chapter XVI, 7 a temple made with hands is likened to a habitation of demons, full of idolatry. The writing as a whole, manifests the latent presupposition that the Church, the true heir of the promises, occupies the place that Israel had always been unworthy of occupying. Obviously, to these kinds of Christians there can be no chiliastic hopes involving a restored national Israel, temple, and Jerusalem.

 

[WPM]

That shares a sentiment with antiSemitism, to claim that because something is from Judaism, its current state of apostasy renders all of its teachings illegitimate. Jesus, however, said the opposite.

Matt 23.Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

So you reject the Prophets' presentation of what I call "the Jewish Hope" simply because Judaism taught it? No wonder you're Amil--Amil dismissed all hope that God's promise to Abraham, concerning Israel, would finally be fulfilled, resulting in Israel's ultimate restoration as a nation. What Amil basically did was exchange the "Jewish Hope" for the Hope of a newly-defined "Israel," the International Church.

As I have repeatedly shown: Amils stand in concert with the ancient Chiliast ECFs in their belief that the Church today is true Israel. The ancient old covenant arrangement that you promote has been eternally abolished. We stand in agreement with these early writers on most matters.

Justin
Asia Minor (now Turkey)
(AD 100-166)

Letter to Diognetus, Chapter 4:

As far as their meticulous attention to food, their superstition in regard to the Sabbaths, their boasting about circumcision, and their whims about fasting and the new moons—which are utterly ridiculous and unworthy of attention—I don't think you need to learn anything from me.

To glory in the circumcision of the flesh as a proof of election—as though because of it they are especially loved by God—how can this not be a subject of ridicule?​

Dialogue with Trypho, 11:

And by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt’. If, therefore, God proclaimed a new covenant which was to be instituted, and this for a light of the nations, we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of Him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and abide by their confession even unto death, and maintain piety. Moreover, by the works and by the attendant miracles, it is possible for all to understand that He is the new law, and the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for the good things of God. For the true spiritual Israel, and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ, as shall be demonstrated while we proceed.​

Justin explains that those in Christ are spiritual Israel and the true offspring of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah. The new covenant is an ongoing arrangement from the cross and man’s only hope of salvation.

Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 24:

Justin: Now, sirs, it is possible for us to show how the eighth day possessed a certain mysterious import, which the seventh day did not possess, and which was promulgated by God through these rites. But lest I appear now to diverge to other subjects, understand what I say: the blood of that circumcision is obsolete, and we trust in the blood of salvation; there is now another covenant, and another law has gone forth from Zion. Jesus Christ circumcises all who will—as was declared above—with knives of stone; that they may be a righteous nation, a people keeping faith, holding to the truth, and maintaining peace. Come then with me, all who fear God, who wish to see the good of Jerusalem. Come, let us go to the light of the Lord; for He has liberated His people, the house of Jacob. Come, all nations; let us gather ourselves together at Jerusalem, no longer plagued by war for the sins of her people. 'For I was manifest to them that sought Me not; I was found of them that asked not for Me;' He exclaims by Isaiah: 'I said, Behold Me, unto nations which were not called by My name. I have spread out My hands all the day unto a disobedient and gainsaying people, which walked in a way that was not good, but after their own sins. It is a people that provokes Me to my face.'​

Jerusalem is here spiritualized and is the abode of the elect of God throughout the nations.

Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 125:

Justin: I wish, sirs, to learn from you what is the force of the name Israel…

The name Israel signifies this, A man who overcomes power; for Isra is a man overcoming, and El is power. And that Christ would act so when He became man was foretold by the mystery of Jacob's wrestling with Him who appeared to him, in that He ministered to the will of the Father, yet nevertheless is God, in that He is the first-begotten of all creatures. For when He became man, as I previously remarked, the devil came to Him—i.e., that power which is called the serpent and Satan—tempting Him, and striving to effect His downfall by asking Him to worship him. But He destroyed and overthrew the devil, having proved him to be wicked, in that he asked to be worshipped as God, contrary to the Scripture; who is an apostate from the will of God. For He answers him, 'It is written, You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve.' Then, overcome and convicted, the devil departed at that time. But since our Christ was to be numbed, i.e., by pain and experience of suffering, He made a previous intimation of this by touching Jacob's thigh, and causing it to shrink. But Israel was His name from the beginning, to which He altered the name of the blessed Jacob when He blessed him with His own name, proclaiming thereby that all who through Him have fled for refuge to the Father, constitute the blessed Israel. But you, having understood none of this, and not being prepared to understand, since you are the children of Jacob after the fleshly seed, expect that you shall be assuredly saved. But that you deceive yourselves in such matters, I have proved by many words.​

Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 134:

Jacob was called Israel; and Israel has been demonstrated to be the Christ, who is, and is called, Jesus.​

Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 135:

As, therefore, Christ is the Israel and the Jacob, even so we, who have been quarried out from the bowels of Christ, are the true Israelitic race. … understand, therefore, that the seed of Jacob now referred to is something else, and not, as may be supposed, spoken of your people (the Jewish people) … it is necessary for us here to observe that there are two seeds of Judah, and two races, as there are two houses of Jacob: the one begotten by blood and flesh, the other by faith and the Spirit.​

 

[WPM]

That shares a sentiment with antiSemitism, to claim that because something is from Judaism, its current state of apostasy renders all of its teachings illegitimate. Jesus, however, said the opposite.

Matt 23.Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

So you reject the Prophets' presentation of what I call "the Jewish Hope" simply because Judaism taught it? No wonder you're Amil--Amil dismissed all hope that God's promise to Abraham, concerning Israel, would finally be fulfilled, resulting in Israel's ultimate restoration as a nation. What Amil basically did was exchange the "Jewish Hope" for the Hope of a newly-defined "Israel," the International Church.

Hippolytus
Rome, Italy
(AD 170 – 236)

On the End of the World:

3. Isaiah as our first witness, inasmuch as he instructs us in the times of the consummation. What, then, does he say? Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence: the daughter of Zion shall be left as a cottage in a vineyard, and as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city. You see, beloved, the prophet's illumination, whereby he announced that time so many generations before. For it is not of the Jews that he spoke this word of old, nor of the city of Zion, but of the Church. For all the prophets have declared Sion to be the bride brought from the nations.​

Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons,
Gaul, (now France)
(AD 150)

Against Heresies Book III, Chapter XXIII: 1.

Perchance the Jews, complying with our humour, did put this interpretation upon these words. They indeed, had they been cognizant of our future existence, and that we should use these proofs from the Scriptures, would themselves never have hesitated to burn their own Scriptures, which do declare that all other nations partake of [eternal] life, and show that they who boast themselves as being the house of Jacob and the people of Israel, are disinherited from the grace of God.​

Against Heresies Book V, Chapter XXXIV

1. And again the same speaks thus: “These things saith the Lord, I will gather Israel from all nations whither they have been driven, and I shall be sanctified in them in the sight of the sons of the nations: and they shall dwell in their own land, which I gave to my servant Jacob. And they shall dwell in it in peace; and they shall build houses, and plant vineyards, and dwell in hope, when I shall cause judgment to fall among all who have dishonoured them, among those who encircle them round about; and they shall know that I am the Lord their God, and the God of their fathers.” Now I have shown a short time ago that the church is the seed of Abraham; and for this reason, that we may know that He who in the New Testament “raises up from the stones children unto Abraham,” is He who will gather, according to the Old Testament, those that shall be saved from all the nations, Jeremiah says: “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that they shall no more say, The Lord liveth, who led the children of Israel from the north, and from every region whither they had been driven; He will restore them to their own land which He gave to their fathers.”​

 

[Randy Kluth]

Are you implying that Revelation 20 is an added heretical teaching that should be exumed from God's Word?

You cannot change the words, but you certainly twist the meanings yourself worse than your alleged heretic Papias. Where do you assume these people at the end come from? Surely they don't pop out of sheol as that would be unbiblical, not found in Scripture any where.

Amil is just as heretical by changing the meaning of Revelation 20, to expunge it from God's Word through figurative means, and added human opinion.

No human is forcing 1,000 years into the text. It is already there in black and white. Yet Amil forcefully remove those words by explaining them away. They have to teach others their implied doctrinal stance, convincing them to believe the same way they do. That is the title of a current thread, no? 22 reasons to "abandon Revelation 20 as written". Except you have to be sneaky and blame pre-mill for your own opinions of the chapter.

Unlike PM, I won't call his Amil opinion "heresy." However, you have a point that while he projects his own failures onto Premil, he ignores the fact Revelation prohibits the removal of any words of the prophecy, including the part about the "thousand years" that follow the Return of Christ!

 

[Timtofly]

This means that at an extremely early date, even perhaps overlapping with the writings of the Apostle John, there are those in the church who have replaced Israel entirely with the Church in terms of future blessings.

Then we are living in the eternal future. There is no Second Coming. As the Second Coming already happens each time a person chooses to be a replacement for Israel. You have now put forth Amil Preterism, declaring you accept the teachings of the ECF as reformed theologians, even prior to the Reformation.

 

[Nancy]

Ask me the questions? I went through this thread and did find a few references you cited (not nearly enough for all your accusations but at least a start).

The accusers are true reinterpreters of Scripture. They take all the OT promises of God about paradise earth and simpluy spiritualize them away!

And teh Moromons and Jw's are not premils. they are mor like you - a mil but you do follow closely teh roman line of eschatology popularized by that heretic Augustine.

I shall be offline for a week. My wife has taken very ill on a vacation with one of our daughters and granddaughters and I am flying out to care for her.

Sorry to hear about your wife, prayers for her recovery.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The ironic thing is: in keeping with the early Amillennialists, many of the early Chiliasts emphasized the New Testament heavenly spiritual hope rather than an earthly carnal one, as most contemporary Premillennialists promote. They spiritualized the fulfillment of Israel's hope, relating it to the Church, the Promised Land being Christ, and (in doing so) expose the faulty Premil literalist obsession.

"In keeping with the early Amilllennialists?" Who are you talking about? The early Chiliasts didn't follow Amillennialists at all!

Chiliast Methodius (Bishop of Olympus, Asia Minor) denounces the materialistic approach of the apostate Jews (which sadly many Premillennialists advocate today):

[T]he Jews, fluttering about the bare letter of Scripture, like drones about the leaves of herbs, but not about flowers and fruits as the bee, fully believe that these words and ordinances were spoken concerning such a tabernacle as they erect; as if God delighted in those trivial adornments which they, preparing, fabricate from trees, not perceiving the wealth of good things to come; whereas these things, being like air and phantom shadows, foretell the resurrection and the putting up of our tabernacle that had fallen upon the earth, which at length, in the seventh thousand of years, resuming again immortal, we shall celebrate the great feast of true tabernacles in the new and indissoluble creation, the fruits of the earth having been gathered in, and men no longer begetting and begotten, but God resting from the works of creation (Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 9:1).
​

No Premil believes in undoing the New Covenant! What a complete waste of time, arguing this! Both Jesus and Paul believed in the future restoration of Israel. And yet, both completely denounced Jewish legalism, as well. Judgment would befall Israel until a remnant repents and returns Israel to faith, and to eventual complete national restoration.
​

Methodius concludes, showing the feast of tabernacles to be a type of an incorruptible future millennial age:

Wherefore let it shame the Jews that they do not perceive the deep things of the Scriptures, thinking that nothing else than outward things are contained in the law and the prophets; for they, intent upon things earthly, have in greater esteem the riches of the world than the wealth which is of the soul (Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 9:1).​

Tertullian wrote in Against Marcion Book III (Chapter 24):

As for the restoration of Judæa, however, which even the Jews themselves, induced by the names of places and countries, hope for just as it is described, it would be tedious to state at length how the figurative interpretation is spiritually applicable to Christ and His church, and to the character and fruits thereof … At present, too, it would be superfluous for this reason, that our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, 'let down from heaven,' which the apostle also calls 'our mother from above;' and, while declaring that our citizenship, is in heaven, he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven … We say that this city has been provided by God for receiving the saints on their resurrection, and refreshing them with the abundance of all really spiritual blessings, as a recompense for those which in the world we have either despised or lost; since it is both just and God-worthy that His servants should have their joy in the place where they have also suffered affliction for His name’s sake.​

Tertullian (160 – 220 AD) said in Against Marcion, Book IV, Chapter 38:

You see how pertinent it was to the case in point. Because the question concerned the next world, and He was going to declare that no one marries there, He opens the way by laying down the principles that here, where there is death, there is also marriage. But they whom God shall account worthy of the possession of that world and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; forasmuch as they cannot die any more, since they become equal to the angels, being made the children of God and of the resurrection.
​

I don't know if early Chiliasts bothered to concern themselves too much with the character of the Millennial world except with respect to the hope of the present Church. We will be glorified and inherit the world as our own, ruling there for a thousand years. They did not take time to explain who the glorious Church will rule over.

We know that the glorious Church, who will inherit this future world, will have resurrection bodies, and thus will never again marry, and will become like the angels. As such, the Church will possess the world much as angels do today, having rule over it from heaven until the time of the new creation.​

Tertullian wrote in On the Resurrection of the Flesh (Chapter 26):

In Isaiah, “‘Ye shall eat the good of the land’, the expression means the blessings which await the flesh when in the kingdom of God it shall be renewed, and made like the angels, and waiting to obtain the things ‘which neither eye hath seen, nor ear heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man’ … You will reckon, (I suppose) onions and truffles among earth's bounties, since the Lord declares that ‘man shall not live on bread alone!’ In this way the Jews lose heavenly blessings, by confining their hopes to earthly ones, being ignorant of the promise of heavenly bread, and of the oil of God’s unction, and the wine of the Spirit, and of that water of life which has its vigour from the vine of Christ. On exactly the same principle, they consider the special soil of Judæa to be that very holy land, which ought rather to be interpreted of the Lord’s flesh, which, in all those who put on Christ, is thenceforward the holy land; holy indeed by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, truly flowing with milk and honey by the sweetness of His assurance, truly Judæan by reason of the friendship of God.​

Even Barnabas (who you wrongly claim was Premil) teaches The Epistle of Barnabas (Chapter 6):

[T]he prophet proclaimed, “Enter ye into the land flowing with milk and honey, and have dominion over it.” … We, then, are they whom He has led into the good land. What, then, mean milk and honey? This, that as the infant is kept alive first by honey, and then by milk, so also we, being quickened and kept alive by the faith of the promise and by the word, shall live ruling over the earth.​

Barnabas spiritualises the Old Testament land promises in a manner that would cause modern premillennialists to go cross-eyed. This is a classic Amillennial approach to the fulfilment of Old Testament prophesies in a New Testament context. He also applies the promises made to natural Israel in the Old Testament to the New Testament church today.

Again, this is not Amil source material, but Christian source material. We all believe God created Man to have domnion over the earth. We all believe that in the immortal state we should not depend on temporal foods, but on eternal foods. Spiritualizing, therefore, is not owned by Amils--it is normal Christian teaching.

Barnabas continues in Chapter XVI:

Let us inquire, then, if there still is a temple of God. There is—where He himself declared He would make and finish it. For it is written, “And it shall come to pass, when the week is completed, the temple of God shall be built in glory in the name of the Lord.” I find, therefore, that a temple does exist. Learn, then, how it shall be built in the name of the Lord. Before we believed in God, the habitation of our heart was corrupt and weak, as being indeed like a temple made with hands. For it was full of idolatry, and was a habitation of demons, through our doing such things as were opposed to [the will of] God. But it shall be built, observe ye, in the name of the Lord, in order that the temple of the Lord may be built in glory. How? Learn [as follows]. Having received the forgiveness of sins, and placed our trust in the name of the Lord, we have become new creatures, formed again from the beginning. Wherefore in our habitation God truly dwells in us. How? His word of faith; His calling of promise; the wisdom of the statutes; the commands of the doctrine; He himself prophesying in us; He himself dwelling in us … This is the spiritual temple built for the Lord.​

Again, you attribute to Amil, falsely, what all Christians have taught and believed, no matter what their eschatology is. I myself have taught these things for many years, that the physical temple in Judaism was symbolic of the Lord himself, whose body we now belong to. We are built up in him into a holy temple for the Lord's presence. This is taught in Hebrews, not in Amil 101.

But thanks for taking the time to quote your arguments. I do understand your pov.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Hippolytus
Rome, Italy
(AD 170 – 236)

On the End of the World:

3. Isaiah as our first witness, inasmuch as he instructs us in the times of the consummation. What, then, does he say? Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence: the daughter of Zion shall be left as a cottage in a vineyard, and as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city. You see, beloved, the prophet's illumination, whereby he announced that time so many generations before. For it is not of the Jews that he spoke this word of old, nor of the city of Zion, but of the Church. For all the prophets have declared Sion to be the bride brought from the nations.​

Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons,
Gaul, (now France)
(AD 150)

Against Heresies Book III, Chapter XXIII: 1.

Perchance the Jews, complying with our humour, did put this interpretation upon these words. They indeed, had they been cognizant of our future existence, and that we should use these proofs from the Scriptures, would themselves never have hesitated to burn their own Scriptures, which do declare that all other nations partake of [eternal] life, and show that they who boast themselves as being the house of Jacob and the people of Israel, are disinherited from the grace of God.​

Against Heresies Book V, Chapter XXXIV

1. And again the same speaks thus: “These things saith the Lord, I will gather Israel from all nations whither they have been driven, and I shall be sanctified in them in the sight of the sons of the nations: and they shall dwell in their own land, which I gave to my servant Jacob. And they shall dwell in it in peace; and they shall build houses, and plant vineyards, and dwell in hope, when I shall cause judgment to fall among all who have dishonoured them, among those who encircle them round about; and they shall know that I am the Lord their God, and the God of their fathers.” Now I have shown a short time ago that the church is the seed of Abraham; and for this reason, that we may know that He who in the New Testament “raises up from the stones children unto Abraham,” is He who will gather, according to the Old Testament, those that shall be saved from all the nations, Jeremiah says: “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that they shall no more say, The Lord liveth, who led the children of Israel from the north, and from every region whither they had been driven; He will restore them to their own land which He gave to their fathers.”​

Thank you, but I already know well that the Church Fathers, including the Chiliasts, took a dim view of the Jews and of their religion. This was in keeping with both Jesus and Paul, who despite their belief in Israel's restoration, firmly denounced the current state of affairs among the Jews.

As I said previously, this is why, I believe, that Amil took over dominion of Christian eschatology in later centuries. The initial denial of the Jews' place in future prophecy led to a change in view about the necessity of a future age in which Israel can be restored. We agree on this much.

 

[Randy Kluth]

As I have repeatedly shown: Amils stand in concert with the ancient Chiliast ECFs in their belief that the Church today is true Israel.

You need not do so! I've repeatedly admitted that the Early Church, including Chiliasts, viewed with disdain the Jews and their religion, just as Jesus and Paul did. They saw the Church as a kind of "Israel," and essentially replaced the Law with its spiritual fulfillment, the New Covenant. All of this has some legitimacy, as I've said myself.

However, the part about the Church *replacing* Israel, or being the "true Israel," I do not agree with. And that's why the literal account of the Millennium was eventually thrown out by the Amils, out of unbelief in the restoration of Israel and out of unbelief in the need for a Kingdom in which that can happen.

The Chiliasts believed in a literal Kingdom Age of a thousand years simply because it was written as such in the book of Revelation, ch. 20, and were told not to tamper with these words. Regardless of their disbelief in the literal restoration of national Israel they chose to believe in John's account of the Revelation.

The ancient old covenant arrangement that you promote has been eternally abolished. We stand in agreement with these early writers on most matters.

You need not quote them. I've commented on this repeatedly, and you know my view. You are just taking opportunity to show that you know the Church Fathers and their quotations on matters that border on anti-Semitism. That's where Luther got his own kind of anti-Semitism.

I don't really wish to call this "Anti-Semitism," but the unnecessary infatuation with "beating the dead horse" appears to give it a valid argument for the Jews. You won't be able to explain to a Jew why this is not "Anti-Semitic!" And I don't wish to extend it too much in this way.

 

[WPM]

"In keeping with the early Amilllennialists?" Who are you talking about? The early Chiliasts didn't follow Amillennialists at all!

No Premil believes in undoing the New Covenant! What a complete waste of time, arguing this! Both Jesus and Paul believed in the future restoration of Israel. And yet, both completely denounced Jewish legalism, as well. Judgment would befall Israel until a remnant repents and returns Israel to faith, and to eventual complete national restoration.
​

I don't know if early Chiliasts bothered to concern themselves too much with the character of the Millennial world except with respect to the hope of the present Church. We will be glorified and inherit the world as our own, ruling there for a thousand years. They did not take time to explain who the glorious Church will rule over.

We know that the glorious Church, who will inherit this future world, will have resurrection bodies, and thus will never again marry, and will become like the angels. As such, the Church will possess the world much as angels do today, having rule over it from heaven until the time of the new creation.​

Again, this is not Amil source material, but Christian source material. We all believe God created Man to have domnion over the earth. We all believe that in the immortal state we should not depend on temporal foods, but on eternal foods. Spiritualizing, therefore, is not owned by Amils--it is normal Christian teaching.



Again, you attribute to Amil, falsely, what all Christians have taught and believed, no matter what their eschatology is. I myself have taught these things for many years, that the physical temple in Judaism was symbolic of the Lord himself, whose body we now belong to. We are built up in him into a holy temple for the Lord's presence. This is taught in Hebrews, not in Amil 101.

But thanks for taking the time to quote your arguments. I do understand your pov.

These movements towards the Amil position by you are obviously welcomed. However, it seems like you will change whatever view you possess in order to agree with Chiliasm, which, whilst encouraging, demonstrates how fluid and changeable your views are. Honest end-time observers will know that the above teaching cuts across modern-day Premil and corresponds with consistent Amil over the years. At least this debate is pushing you in the correct direction. You are now defending and espousing views that 99% of Premils would repudiate.

You are the one a few posts back was rubbishing the allegorizing of Israel, the spiritualization of the old covenant promises, including the land promises, yet ancient Chiliasts articulated this in a very clear way and explicit manner. Notwithstanding, these major movements towards Amil are obviously welcomed.

 

[WPM]

You need not do so! I've repeatedly admitted that the Early Church, including Chiliasts, viewed with disdain the Jews and their religion, just as Jesus and Paul did. They saw the Church as a kind of "Israel," and essentially replaced the Law with its spiritual fulfillment, the New Covenant. All of this has some legitimacy, as I've said myself.

However, the part about the Church *replacing* Israel, or being the "true Israel," I do not agree with. And that's why the literal account of the Millennium was eventually thrown out by the Amils, out of unbelief in the restoration of Israel and out of unbelief in the need for a Kingdom in which that can happen.

The Chiliasts believed in a literal Kingdom Age of a thousand years simply because it was written as such in the book of Revelation, ch. 20, and were told not to tamper with these words. Regardless of their disbelief in the literal restoration of national Israel they chose to believe in John's account of the Revelation.



You need not quote them. I've commented on this repeatedly, and you know my view. You are just taking opportunity to show that you know the Church Fathers and their quotations on matters that border on anti-Semitism. That's where Luther got his own kind of anti-Semitism.

I don't really wish to call this "Anti-Semitism," but the unnecessary infatuation with "beating the dead horse" appears to give it a valid argument for the Jews. You won't be able to explain to a Jew why this is not "Anti-Semitic!" And I don't wish to extend it too much in this way.

It is obvious that you realize you have zero support from the ECFs right up until AD 240. Your failure to present one single quote to support all the main tenets of Premil apart from one (a future thousand years, albeit Chiliasts believed it will be a perfect age, unlike your rerun of our corrupt age) is damning for your beliefs. I will continue to present the avoided questions which expose your faulty claims:

1. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described sin existing on a future millennial earth?
2. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described corruption existing on a future millennial earth?
3. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described the wicked existing on a future millennial earth?
4. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described mortals existing on a future millennial earth?
5. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described decay existing on a future millennial earth?
6. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described the curse existing on a future millennial earth?
7. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described Satan existing on a future earth?
8. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described an alleged future millennium which involved the elevation of natural Israel above all other ethnic groups as Premil does?
9. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described an alleged future millennium involving a renewal of the Jewish sacrifice system as Premil does?
10.Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described an alleged future millennium involving carnal pleasure like procreating in the age to come as Premil does?
11.Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that advocated the binding of Satan for 1,000 years+ after the second coming as Premil does?
12.Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that advocated the release of Satan 1,000 years+ after the second coming as Premil does?
13.Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that advocated the revival of Satanism 1,000 years+ after the second coming as the wicked in their billions overrun the Premil millennium as Premil does?
14.Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that taught that Jesus would be reigning over His enemies for 1,000 years upon David’s throne?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Sorry to hear about your wife, prayers for her recovery.

She is fine now. I caught Covid and only had just a slight hacky cough for a few days. But thanks for the prayers!