Augustine's unbiblical doctrine of Amillennialism

[civic]

I feel the same way. There's just so many, many unusual claims that were made along the way. Jesus will come back before 1988, even a book 88 reasons why he will....then many more variations of the same....at times I just feel it's good to be ready for when he comes anytime. And so many get caught up on the years or years time frame and fail to appreciate the drive and passion one is to get from believing he's coming back. They're just delighting some in date setting.

But he said be ready for his coming and I like what 2 Pt 3 states seeing all things will be dissolved as it's said by fire what manner of persons ought we to be in living in holiness. It's all meant to motivate us to set our priorities straight and be sober about doing so. Or to put it another way they should let end time knowledge do what it's supposed to do and give one a good sense of the fear of the Lord , in other words be ready and MAKE SURE that one is. We need to let it all change our lives and not just let it be a win to us that we pat ourselves on the back for our ingenuity in figuring all things out.

Ditto my friend

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Ditto my friend

That's why when the actual proper interpretations of prophecy come along "at the time of the end", it will have such a hard time being investigated and accepted. Gabriel told Daniel that his book would be sealed all throughout history "until the time of the end".

 

[armylngst]

Excellent points !!!

If you want to hear something interesting, listen to John MacArthur's first message on the Olivet Discourse. It is going back to the 90's I believe, but he took the time to bring up what the Jews thought about eschatology... before Jesus ever showed up. It very much sounds like dispensational millennialism. The reason he went back to the old Jewish writings on eschatology was to explain what the disciples and Jews of the time thought of the end times and of the Messiah. So to them, what Jesus basically said was... not yet. This is not the time. It is in the future yet. So, of course, the disciples wanted to know when, and wanted to know signs. They wanted to know what would take place.

 

[civic]

If you want to hear something interesting, listen to John MacArthur's first message on the Olivet Discourse. It is going back to the 90's I believe, but he took the time to bring up what the Jews thought about eschatology... before Jesus ever showed up. It very much sounds like dispensational millennialism. The reason he went back to the old Jewish writings on eschatology was to explain what the disciples and Jews of the time thought of the end times and of the Messiah. So to them, what Jesus basically said was... not yet. This is not the time. It is in the future yet. So, of course, the disciples wanted to know when, and wanted to know signs. They wanted to know what would take place.

I might have his study guide on that lesson. I use to get all his study guides for his radio messages back then. I also use to record all of them on cassette tapes lol.

 

[dwight92070]

The doctrine of Amillennialism was formulated by Augustine of Hippo (354-430) around 400 AD, four centuries after the birth of Jesus Christ. (Think about how long that it for a second. The USA hasn’t even been a country for 250 years!) ‘Amillennialism’ literally means “no millennium” and unsurprisingly maintains that there will be no literal thousand-year reign of Christ on earth before the eternal age of the new heavens and new earth, both of which are plainly detailed in Revelation 20-22.

Incredibly, this doctrine dares to suggest that we are already living in the Millennium; in fact, we’ve been supposedly living in it since the resurrection of Christ! Tell me, does it seem like Jesus has been reigning on earth for the last two thousand years? Does it appear like the devil has been bound up in the Abyss since Jesus’ resurrection in the 1st century? Of course not, the teaching is simply unbiblical and no sound student of the Scriptures would embrace the doctrine by simply reading the bible.

Even more incredible, Amillennialism teaches that we are simultaneously in both the Millennium and the 7-year Tribulation (!), the latter of which is chronicled in Revelation 6-19. Augustine’s reasoning was that the number 7 is symbolic and represents the period of time from the death/resurrection of Christ to his Second Coming. For those not in the know, the Tribulation is the 7-year period at the end of this age where God’s wrath will be poured out on the Earth wherein one quarter of the planet’s populace will perish followed by one-third of the rest (Revelation 6:8 & Revelation 9:18). Needless to say, no such calamity of this scope has happened since the ascension of Christ. Why? Simple: We’re not in the Tribulation as Amillennialism claims.

The only way Amillennialism can be accepted and perpetuated is by persuading Christian disciples through indoctrination in church or cemetery, I mean seminary. I repeat, believers would never see Amillennialism or accept it by merely reading/studying their Bibles. However, once disciples accept the idea that Amillennialism is unquestionable orthodoxy their studies of the scriptures will naturally be tainted and biased by their acceptance of this false doctrine; in other words, they’ll read the scriptures pre-supposing Amillennialism to be true, not freely or at face value, as is natural.

By contrast, when one studies the Bible free of such presuppositions, taking it simply for what it says, it isn’t difficult to see the error of Amillennialism.

The word ‘orthodox’ literally means “correct view.” What we determine to be orthodox Christian beliefs must be clearly and consistently taught in Scripture. In other words, if a doctrine is truly orthodox – that is, a “correct view” essential to Christian truth – it shouldn’t be necessary to engage in bizarre theological mumbo jumbo to prove its authenticity, like “spiritualizing” plain-as-day passages, which is what has to be done in order to “prove” Amillennialism.

The only way people who support Amillennialism can justify this doctrine is by convincing people that the Bible doesn’t really mean what it clearly says, which is that there will be a 7-year Tribulation period at the end of this age, then the devil will be bound up for a thousand years while Jesus Christ reigns on earth assisted by the resurrected saints (Revelation 20:1-6). To prove these plain truths one doesn’t have to resort to unjustified “spiritualizing” of the Scriptures, as is the case with Amillennialism. These truths can be discovered or proven simply by freely reading the Bible unhindered by foreign presuppositions.

How did a doctrine like Amillennialism come to be considered Christian orthodoxy when it’s so clearly unscriptural? The reason is that there’s another basis besides Holy Scripture used to determine the content of orthodoxy, and that is tradition. When people speak of Christian tradition they’re usually referring to religious literature, creeds and councils from the Patristic Age, or “late antiquity,” which extended from the 4th to the 8th centuries and includes Augustine’s advocacy of Amillennialism, as well as other errors. Augustine was the most prominent and influential “Church father” of this period. Christian tradition is also derived from other eras, including the later medieval, Reformation and post-Reformation eras. The very fact that Christian tradition is historically cumulative testifies that the worldwide invisible Church is in an ongoing state of reform; in other words, Christendom is not in bondage to historical tradition.

For important details on Amillennialism compared with the other views of the Millennium see this article by David Reagan, which features helpful diagrams. It contains vital information every believer should know about end-time events as prophesied in the Scriptures.

Why Am I Coming Down So Hard On Amillennialism?​

Answer: Not just because Amillennialism is so grossly unscriptural, but because of the immense damage it has done to the body of Christ and our understanding of eschatology ever since it was concocted. (Eschatology, if you’re not aware, is the biblical study of end times events). For instance, to this day genuine believers all over the globe believe that when a person dies he/she either goes to Heaven to sit on a cloud playing a harp forever or goes to Hell to eternally roast in fiery torment. That’s it. If you think either of these is wholly true then Amillennialism has had a negative impact on YOU. Unfortunately, most unbelievers think this is what the Bible actually teaches; and most unseasoned believers as well. Why? Because of Augustine’s false doctrine of Amillennialism and the Roman Church’s official embracing of it in 431 AD at the Council of Ephesus. http://fountainoflifetm.com/2019/03/11/amillennialism-what-is-it-whats-wrong-with-it/

Thankfully, as with any erroneous belief, the truth will set us free (John 8:31-32).

The promised literal kingdom on earth—David’s—was what James and John’s mother referred to in Matthew 20:21. And just before Christ ascended to Heaven after His resurrection, this kingdom was still on the minds of the disciples when they asked, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” Notice that the Lord didn’t ridicule them by asking something like, “Where did you ever get an idea like that?” No, it was legitimate for them to believe that this earthly kingdom would take place. Rather, He simply reminded them that it was not for them to know exactly when; that was God’s business. They were to concentrate on obeying the Great Commission after Jesus was gone to Heaven and on occupying until He returned, just as we believers still have the responsibility to do today.

Christ’s literal kingdom was prophesied in Jeremiah 23: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, that I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; a King shall reign and prosper, and execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In His days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell safely; now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS” (vv. 5, 6). This is a promise, and it has yet to come to pass. If prophetic passages like these do not mean Christ’s millennial (1,000-year) reign, they are meaningless.

hope this helps !!!

---

Actually, I think it's just the opposite. Dispensationalism has been indoctrinated into the minds of probably the majority of evangelicals, certainly in my lifetime of 74 years. That's all we were taught in our churches. Then I find out that that's all that our pastor's were taught in their cemeteries. The Dallas Theological Cemetery is pretty much founded on dispensationalism. There was a time when you couldn't even graduate from DTS unless you accepted the dispensation indoctrination as fact, which I find simply preposterous - that any cemetery calling itself a Christian institution would force a particular interpretation of the Bible on its students - to the point that they wouldn't even allow them to graduate, if they didn't comply. I thought we had religious freedom in this country, especially, of all places, in our seminaries. Apparently not at DTS - I don't know if that has since changed or not.

Dispensationalism can't be proven from the scripture, but that doesn't stop them. It began with John Nelson Darby in about 1830, the father of dispensationalism. There's no mention of a 7 year tribulation in the Bible. They simply take the 70th week of Daniel and add an imaginary 2000 year plus gap to the time of Christ and voila - they call it the 7 year tribulation No scripture supports a 2000 year gap. The truth is that the 70th week ran out shortly after the time of Christ. Nor is there a secret rapture seven years before the 2nd coming mentioned in scripture, where Christians simply disappear. In the true rapture, Christians will be lifted up or caught up visibly, just like Christ was when He ascended, as His disciples watched. And both the righteous and the unrighteous will be resurrected just seconds before that - John 5:28-29, but dispensationalists say the unrighteous get raised later - not true. Nor does the Bible say that the only ones who will be able to see Christ at the rapture, will be believers. In the true rapture, which Biblically happens at His 2nd coming, ALL will see Him.
I remember when the Left Behind book series came out. I had been a believer for several years, but I was suspicious of authors who seemed to be taking advantage of Christians by selling anything that appeared spiritual, especially about the end times. It seemed as if hundreds of end times books were coming out. It became a Christian fad to buy the latest Left Behind book. I suckered for only one by Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, and I was sorry I even put out my money for that one. I couldn't believe that they kept on coming out with book after book in the Left Behind series. I thought that LaHaye and Jenkins must be making a killing on gullible Christians.
Boy, was I right! It is now my understanding that Tim Lahaye made over 20 million dollars on the series, which followed dispensational teaching. So LaHaye became a multi-millionaire by presenting false ideas of the end times to the body of Christ. That's horrible. Jenkins made 3 to 4 million. I still do not believe that I was wrong in my suspicion. I remember hearing Tim Lahaye speak here in Denver - before he wrote those books, or maybe he had published one or two volumes - not sure. But I don't think he spoke on the end times. After that, I remember thinking that I did not trust the man. As I recall, he came across as kind of a know-it-all in Christian psychology, and it turned me off.
I am certainly not an expert on all of this, but it is my understanding that Augustine did NOT start Amillennialism, but that it was believed since the early church, all the way to 1830, when Darby invented it. In fact, I have heard, that he even admitted that what he was teaching was NOT taught in the church before Him, but that God had revealed it to him in or around 1830. Also, since Augustine came up with the doctrine that was later called Calvinism, which approaches heresy, I wouldn't look to him for trustworthy doctrine.
If you have Biblical or even historical evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it.
By the way, I don't think Amillennialists even believe in a 7 year tribulation, so how could we be living in it, according to their view?
Since you take Revelation literally, could you explain Revelation 8:10 "The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of waters."
If ANY star that we are aware of, fell on the earth, the earth would be toast, or should I say scrambled eggs and toast. How could a literal star fall on only a third of the rivers and the springs?

 

[dwight92070]

Actually, I think it's just the opposite. Dispensationalism has been indoctrinated into the minds of probably the majority of evangelicals, certainly in my lifetime of 74 years. That's all we were taught in our churches. Then I find out that that's all that our pastor's were taught in their cemeteries. The Dallas Theological Cemetery is pretty much founded on dispensationalism. There was a time when you couldn't even graduate from DTS unless you accepted the dispensation indoctrination as fact, which I find simply preposterous - that any cemetery calling itself a Christian institution would force a particular interpretation of the Bible on its students - to the point that they wouldn't even allow them to graduate, if they didn't comply. I thought we had religious freedom in this country, especially, of all places, in our seminaries. Apparently not at DTS - I don't know if that has since changed or not.

Dispensationalism can't be proven from the scripture, but that doesn't stop them. It began with John Nelson Darby in about 1830, the father of dispensationalism. There's no mention of a 7 year tribulation in the Bible. They simply take the 70th week of Daniel and add an imaginary 2000 year plus gap to the time of Christ and voila - they call it the 7 year tribulation No scripture supports a 2000 year gap. The truth is that the 70th week ran out shortly after the time of Christ. Nor is there a secret rapture seven years before the 2nd coming mentioned in scripture, where Christians simply disappear. In the true rapture, Christians will be lifted up or caught up visibly, just like Christ was when He ascended, as His disciples watched. And both the righteous and the unrighteous will be resurrected just seconds before that - John 5:28-29, but dispensationalists say the unrighteous get raised later - not true. Nor does the Bible say that the only ones who will be able to see Christ at the rapture, will be believers. In the true rapture, which Biblically happens at His 2nd coming, ALL will see Him.
I remember when the Left Behind book series came out. I had been a believer for several years, but I was suspicious of authors who seemed to be taking advantage of Christians by selling anything that appeared spiritual, especially about the end times. It seemed as if hundreds of end times books were coming out. It became a Christian fad to buy the latest Left Behind book. I suckered for only one by Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, and I was sorry I even put out my money for that one. I couldn't believe that they kept on coming out with book after book in the Left Behind series. I thought that LaHaye and Jenkins must be making a killing on gullible Christians.
Boy, was I right! It is now my understanding that Tim Lahaye made over 20 million dollars on the series, which followed dispensational teaching. So LaHaye became a multi-millionaire by presenting false ideas of the end times to the body of Christ. That's horrible. Jenkins made 3 to 4 million. I still do not believe that I was wrong in my suspicion. I remember hearing Tim Lahaye speak here in Denver - before he wrote those books, or maybe he had published one or two volumes - not sure. But I don't think he spoke on the end times. After that, I remember thinking that I did not trust the man. As I recall, he came across as kind of a know-it-all in Christian psychology, and it turned me off.
I am certainly not an expert on all of this, but it is my understanding that Augustine did NOT start Amillennialism, but that it was believed since the early church, all the way to 1830, when Darby invented it. In fact, I have heard, that he even admitted that what he was teaching was NOT taught in the church before Him, but that God had revealed it to him in or around 1830. Also, since Augustine came up with the doctrine that was later called Calvinism, which approaches heresy, I wouldn't look to him for trustworthy doctrine.
If you have Biblical or even historical evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it.
By the way, I don't think Amillennialists even believe in a 7 year tribulation, so how could we be living in it, according to their view?
Since you take Revelation literally, could you explain Revelation 8:10 "The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of waters."
If ANY star that we are aware of, fell on the earth, the earth would be toast, or should I say scrambled eggs and toast. How could a literal star fall on only a third of the rivers and the springs?

By the way, I don't think Amillennialists even believe in a 7 year tribulation, so how could we be living in it, according to their view?
Since you take Revelation literally, could you explain Revelation 8:10 "The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of waters."
If ANY star that we are aware of, fell on the earth, the earth would be toast, or should I say scrambled eggs and toast. How could a literal star fall on only a third of the rivers and the springs?
By the way, Christ is reigning right now at the right hand of God. Paul said that He must reign until He puts all His enemies under His feet. The spread of the gospel and the receiving of it is doing just that. Also Paul said that we are seated with Christ in the heavenlies, so we are reigning with Him now. We have died and our life is hidden with Christ in God. Also Jesus asked the Father that we may be with Him where He is, so that we may see His glory which God has given Him. John 17:24 Where is He now? At the right hand of God, reigning, having been given all authority in heaven and on earth.
Didn't Jesus bind Satan on the cross? Didn't He render Satan powerless - he who had the power of death? Heb. 2:14 For this purpose was the Son of God manifest, that He might destroy the works of the evil one. Did Jesus succeed in doing that? He did in my life and in yours. He disarmed the rulers and authorities, having made a public display of them. Col.2:15 Didn't He abolish death and bring life and immortality to light through the gospel? Didn't He bind the strong man and plunder his house? Mat. 12:29 Yes He did.
Then why do we still see Satan doing evil? Two possible reasons. One is because people have not surrendered to the Lordship of Jesus. When they do that, Satan is bound in their lives, except when God tests them, like he did Job. The other possible reason is that we may be in the time when Satan has been loosed for a little while, just before His 2nd coming.

 

[armylngst]

Actually, I think it's just the opposite. Dispensationalism has been indoctrinated into the minds of probably the majority of evangelicals, certainly in my lifetime of 74 years. That's all we were taught in our churches. Then I find out that that's all that our pastor's were taught in their cemeteries. The Dallas Theological Cemetery is pretty much founded on dispensationalism. There was a time when you couldn't even graduate from DTS unless you accepted the dispensation indoctrination as fact, which I find simply preposterous - that any cemetery calling itself a Christian institution would force a particular interpretation of the Bible on its students - to the point that they wouldn't even allow them to graduate, if they didn't comply. I thought we had religious freedom in this country, especially, of all places, in our seminaries. Apparently not at DTS - I don't know if that has since changed or not.

Dispensationalism can't be proven from the scripture, but that doesn't stop them. It began with John Nelson Darby in about 1830, the father of dispensationalism. There's no mention of a 7 year tribulation in the Bible. They simply take the 70th week of Daniel and add an imaginary 2000 year plus gap to the time of Christ and voila - they call it the 7 year tribulation No scripture supports a 2000 year gap. The truth is that the 70th week ran out shortly after the time of Christ. Nor is there a secret rapture seven years before the 2nd coming mentioned in scripture, where Christians simply disappear. In the true rapture, Christians will be lifted up or caught up visibly, just like Christ was when He ascended, as His disciples watched. And both the righteous and the unrighteous will be resurrected just seconds before that - John 5:28-29, but dispensationalists say the unrighteous get raised later - not true. Nor does the Bible say that the only ones who will be able to see Christ at the rapture, will be believers. In the true rapture, which Biblically happens at His 2nd coming, ALL will see Him.
I remember when the Left Behind book series came out. I had been a believer for several years, but I was suspicious of authors who seemed to be taking advantage of Christians by selling anything that appeared spiritual, especially about the end times. It seemed as if hundreds of end times books were coming out. It became a Christian fad to buy the latest Left Behind book. I suckered for only one by Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, and I was sorry I even put out my money for that one. I couldn't believe that they kept on coming out with book after book in the Left Behind series. I thought that LaHaye and Jenkins must be making a killing on gullible Christians.
Boy, was I right! It is now my understanding that Tim Lahaye made over 20 million dollars on the series, which followed dispensational teaching. So LaHaye became a multi-millionaire by presenting false ideas of the end times to the body of Christ. That's horrible. Jenkins made 3 to 4 million. I still do not believe that I was wrong in my suspicion. I remember hearing Tim Lahaye speak here in Denver - before he wrote those books, or maybe he had published one or two volumes - not sure. But I don't think he spoke on the end times. After that, I remember thinking that I did not trust the man. As I recall, he came across as kind of a know-it-all in Christian psychology, and it turned me off.
I am certainly not an expert on all of this, but it is my understanding that Augustine did NOT start Amillennialism, but that it was believed since the early church, all the way to 1830, when Darby invented it. In fact, I have heard, that he even admitted that what he was teaching was NOT taught in the church before Him, but that God had revealed it to him in or around 1830. Also, since Augustine came up with the doctrine that was later called Calvinism, which approaches heresy, I wouldn't look to him for trustworthy doctrine.
If you have Biblical or even historical evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it.
By the way, I don't think Amillennialists even believe in a 7 year tribulation, so how could we be living in it, according to their view?
Since you take Revelation literally, could you explain Revelation 8:10 "The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of waters."
If ANY star that we are aware of, fell on the earth, the earth would be toast, or should I say scrambled eggs and toast. How could a literal star fall on only a third of the rivers and the springs?

You might be interested in listening to John MacArthur's sermons on the Olivet Discourse. He went through the Jewish writings on the end times prior to Jesus coming to Earth. If you look into these, you will find that the Jews prior to Jesus coming sound just like dispensational premillennialists. Consider that the disciples would have known these teachings from the religious leaders prior to Jesus coming. Now consider the disciples questions in light of the knowledge they already had. Their millennial views did not include Gentiles, however, their millennial view did contain the whole world, considering prophecy stated that the world would come to Jerusalem to worship God.

The questions the disciples asked in the Olivet discourse were to find out what Jesus is saying is actually going to happen, in relation to what they already know. The thing to note is that the destruction of the temple that begins the chapter is completely separate from the questions that the disciples ask. That occurred prior to Jesus arriving at the Mount of Olives. The disciples questions deal with other things.

You have fallen for the trap of believing that Darby invented Dispensationalism premillennialism. He did not. He may have sytematized it, but he did not invent it. Bits and pieces can be found throughout church history, and a very large chunk can be found in pre-Christ Jewish literature. That literature considers the prophesies of the Old Testament.

 

[civic]

You might be interested in listening to John MacArthur's sermons on the Olivet Discourse. He went through the Jewish writings on the end times prior to Jesus coming to Earth. If you look into these, you will find that the Jews prior to Jesus coming sound just like dispensational premillennialists. Consider that the disciples would have known these teachings from the religious leaders prior to Jesus coming. Now consider the disciples questions in light of the knowledge they already had. Their millennial views did not include Gentiles, however, their millennial view did contain the whole world, considering prophecy stated that the world would come to Jerusalem to worship God.

The questions the disciples asked in the Olivet discourse were to find out what Jesus is saying is actually going to happen, in relation to what they already know. The thing to note is that the destruction of the temple that begins the chapter is completely separate from the questions that the disciples ask. That occurred prior to Jesus arriving at the Mount of Olives. The disciples questions deal with other things.

You have fallen for the trap of believing that Darby invented Dispensationalism premillennialism. He did not. He may have sytematized it, but he did not invent it. Bits and pieces can be found throughout church history, and a very large chunk can be found in pre-Christ Jewish literature.

Exactly thats the same argument anti trins use against trins with the Trinity being formulated post the dating of the book of revelation being complete. The concept precedes the formality of the doctrine in time.

 

[Behold]

So we should expect Jesus to have a sharp sword sticking out of His mouth during this 1000 year reign, right?

If you keep reading the Bible as if its a cereal box, you'll keep posting the proof as your "cut and paste".. commentary.

 

[dwight92070]

You might be interested in listening to John MacArthur's sermons on the Olivet Discourse. He went through the Jewish writings on the end times prior to Jesus coming to Earth. If you look into these, you will find that the Jews prior to Jesus coming sound just like dispensational premillennialists. Consider that the disciples would have known these teachings from the religious leaders prior to Jesus coming. Now consider the disciples questions in light of the knowledge they already had. Their millennial views did not include Gentiles, however, their millennial view did contain the whole world, considering prophecy stated that the world would come to Jerusalem to worship God.

The questions the disciples asked in the Olivet discourse were to find out what Jesus is saying is actually going to happen, in relation to what they already know. The thing to note is that the destruction of the temple that begins the chapter is completely separate from the questions that the disciples ask. That occurred prior to Jesus arriving at the Mount of Olives. The disciples questions deal with other things.

You have fallen for the trap of believing that Darby invented Dispensationalism premillennialism. He did not. He may have sytematized it, but he did not invent it. Bits and pieces can be found throughout church history, and a very large chunk can be found in pre-Christ Jewish literature. That literature considers the prophesies of the Old Testament.

You might be interested in listening to John MacArthur's sermons on the Olivet Discourse. He went through the Jewish writings on the end times prior to Jesus coming to Earth. If you look into these, you will find that the Jews prior to Jesus coming sound just like dispensational premillennialists. Consider that the disciples would have known these teachings from the religious leaders prior to Jesus coming. Now consider the disciples questions in light of the knowledge they already had. Their millennial views did not include Gentiles, however, their millennial view did contain the whole world, considering prophecy stated that the world would come to Jerusalem to worship God.

The questions the disciples asked in the Olivet discourse were to find out what Jesus is saying is actually going to happen, in relation to what they already know. The thing to note is that the destruction of the temple that begins the chapter is completely separate from the questions that the disciples ask. That occurred prior to Jesus arriving at the Mount of Olives. The disciples questions deal with other things.

You have fallen for the trap of believing that Darby invented Dispensationalism premillennialism. He did not. He may have sytematized it, but he did not invent it. Bits and pieces can be found throughout church history, and a very large chunk can be found in pre-Christ Jewish literature. That literature considers the prophesies of the Old Testament.

If a doctrine is false and unbiblical, we can determine that even without knowing who came up with it. This is true with Dispensationalism, but your statement about Darby is not true. Bits and pieces - if they exist, where are they? He himself said that his view of the end times was NOT known or taught by the church throughout it's history, since the time of the apostles. Consider the following statements

taken from Wikipedia;
Darby is considered to be the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism. Pretribulational rapture theology was popularized extensively in the 1830's by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren, and further popularized in the U. S. in the early 20th century by the wide circulation of the Scofield Reference Bible.
Darby's eschatology is still being propagated at Dallas Theological Seminary and by Hal Lindsey and John Hagee. Darby is noted in the theological world as the father of "dispensationalism". Darby has been credited with originating the pre-tribulational rapture theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world to its heavenly destiny before the judgments of the tribulation.

Please identify and come up with the pre -Christ Jewish literature that teaches what Darby taught. There is NONE - or else prove that there is.
Before Christ, nobody ever heard of a rapture of any kind, or a 2nd Coming (many were surprised at His 1st Coming), or a 7 year period called a tribulation or a 1000 year period after His 2nd Coming or an anti-Christ, or a 2000 year gap between Daniel's 69th week and the 70th week, so it would be quite a find to see Jewish literature from before the time of Christ with all of those predictions in it.

The trap is believing in Darby's totally made up end-time events and when they will happen.

It's also noteworthy that Darby was a Calvinist, another system of errors. Birds of a feather ...

from Wikipedia:

 

[DavP]

You might be interested in listening to John MacArthur's sermons on the Olivet Discourse. He went through the Jewish writings on the end times prior to Jesus coming to Earth. If you look into these, you will find that the Jews prior to Jesus coming sound just like dispensational premillennialists. Consider that the disciples would have known these teachings from the religious leaders prior to Jesus coming. Now consider the disciples questions in light of the knowledge they already had. Their millennial views did not include Gentiles, however, their millennial view did contain the whole world, considering prophecy stated that the world would come to Jerusalem to worship God.

The questions the disciples asked in the Olivet discourse were to find out what Jesus is saying is actually going to happen, in relation to what they already know. The thing to note is that the destruction of the temple that begins the chapter is completely separate from the questions that the disciples ask. That occurred prior to Jesus arriving at the Mount of Olives. The disciples questions deal with other things.

You have fallen for the trap of believing that Darby invented Dispensationalism premillennialism. He did not. He may have sytematized it, but he did not invent it. Bits and pieces can be found throughout church history, and a very large chunk can be found in pre-Christ Jewish literature. That literature considers the prophesies of the Old Testament.

Darby did not invent the Premill doctrine, that doctrine actually is Biblical.

But Darby did push a false pre-trib rapture, what he referred to as a secret rapture, because he had said only those raptured would know. Darby was an associate of the Edward Irving church, which was teaching a pre-trib rapture, so most likely that's where Darby picked it up. The fact for both though, is that no such doctrine was ever preached in a Christian Church prior to their day of 1830s Great Britain. Even some of their own scholars have admitted that.

So for about 1,800 years, the Christian Church held to Christ's future coming AFTER the tribulation, which is when God's Word shows His "thousand years" reign with His elect will start, which means a pre-mill coming. And this is not simply just my opinion. Those who disagree simply do not read their Bible, but allow some charlatan to tell them what The Bible does not say to deceive them.

 

[civic]

Darby did not invent the Premill doctrine, that doctrine actually is Biblical.

But Darby did push a false pre-trib rapture, what he referred to as a secret rapture, because he had said only those raptured would know. Darby was an associate of the Edward Irving church, which was teaching a pre-trib rapture, so most likely that's where Darby picked it up. The fact for both though, is that no such doctrine was ever preached in a Christian Church prior to their day of 1830s Great Britain. Even some of their own scholars have admitted that.

So for about 1,800 years, the Christian Church held to Christ's future coming AFTER the tribulation, which is when God's Word shows His "thousand years" reign with His elect will start, which means a pre-mill coming.

Yes its the same fallacious argument the ant trins use against the Trinity. Its Biblical and precedes the creeds who made it the official and formulated doctrine we have today.

 

[DavP]

Yes its the same fallacious argument the ant trins use against the Trinity. Its Biblical and precedes the creeds who made it the official and formulated doctrine we have today.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. I was simply saying that the Pre-Mill idea that Jesus returns prior to the Millennium is Bible, but the idea that Jesus comes prior to the tribulation to gather His Church is not Bible.

 

[civic]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. I was simply saying that the Pre-Mill idea that Jesus returns prior to the Millennium is Bible, but the idea that Jesus comes prior to the tribulation to gather His Church is not Bible.

So am I with the doctrine of the Trinity whom the anti trins claim it came centuries later. I’m agreeing with you using the Trinity as an example to substantiate your claim with pre- mill that both doctrines are biblical

 

[DavP]

So am I with the doctrine of the Trinity whom the anti trins claim it came centuries later. I’m agreeing with you using the Trinity as an example to substantiate your claim with pre- mill that both doctrines are biblical

But how... are you agreeing with me using the Trinity when I'm speaking of Christ's coming after the tribulation, but before the Millennium? What does that have to do with the idea of the Trinity?

 

[civic]

But how... are you agreeing with me using the Trinity when I'm speaking of Christ's coming after the tribulation, but before the Millennium? What does that have to do with the idea of the Trinity?

It was a comparison that people use against the Trinity just like they do with pre mill and Darby. They parallel each other in that both are going in the Bible. Those who oppose pre mill and the Trinity are making a strawman argument claiming they were developed after the Bible was written and formed by man. Can you see the connection I’m making if not I will drop it. I’m actually supporting your argument since I’m both pre mill and a trinitarian. No worries.

 

[DavP]

And just so brethren know, St. Augustine was not the father of man's leaven doctrine of Amillennialism. The theory of Amillennialism can be traced back to the 2nd century A.D. when the Gnostics began creeping into the Church. It is essentially a doctrine of Gnostic origin, because it bases a lot of Bible Scripture as 'non-literal' in order to create the Amill assumptions. That's the kind of working the Gnostics were popular for, taking what is literal and turning it into an allegory.

 

[DavP]

It was a comparison that people use against the Trinity just like they do with pre mill and Darby. They parallel each other in that both are going in the Bible. Those who oppose pre mill and the Trinity are making a strawman argument claiming they were developed after the Bible was written and formed by man. Can you see the connection I’m making if not I will drop it. I’m actually supporting your argument since I’m both pre mill and a trinitarian. No worries.

I'm aware that some seminaries like to associate Pre-mill with Darby's Futurism. But I've only heard of those against the idea of the Trinity claim it was just a later fabrication by the Catholic Church.

(For those curious about the idea of the Trinity of The Godhead, it simply means God as 3 Persons in The Godhead of God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Spirit. The Godhead thus is triune, which means 3 as 1, which is where the idea of the word Trinity was derived. And clearly, the idea of The Godhead being 3 Persons is a Bible doctrine that existed prior to the existence of the Catholic Church.)

 

[civic]

I'm aware that some seminaries like to associate Pre-mill with Darby's Futurism. But I've only heard of those against the idea of the Trinity claim it was just a later fabrication by the Catholic Church.

(For those curious about the idea of the Trinity of The Godhead, it simply means God as 3 Persons in The Godhead of God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Spirit. The Godhead thus is triune, which means 3 as 1, which is where the idea of the word Trinity was derived. And clearly, the idea of The Godhead being 3 Persons is a Bible doctrine that existed prior to the existence of the Catholic Church.)

We are in agreement brother

 

[DavP]

We are in agreement brother

Good.

I'm well aware of the Judaizer converts to Jesus Christ still hold to the old false Jewish doctrine that Jesus of Nazareth is not God. I see those as mainly being the ones that are against the idea of the Triune Godhead.