1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Eternity in Heaven with God and the Lamb

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Brother Bob, Jun 23, 2007.

?
  1. Yes, we will be with God in Heaven, where He is now for eternity

    11 vote(s)
    47.8%
  2. No, we will not be in Heaven for eternity.

    12 vote(s)
    52.2%
  1. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    We've heard that argument before. Actually, the Early, Early church didn't receive the Revelation from John until late in the first century (about 96 AD) and pretty much the Scriptures the Early Early Church had to go by were the OT (which also contains much prophecy) and the Pauline letters. And, the Early Church was comprised of mostly Jews. Of course, they were trying to stay alive and avoid being thrown to the lions or being used as human torches to light the gardens of Roman rulers.

    However, if you are speaking of the Church from the time of Augustine (approximately 386 AD) - that is where some of the church doctrines were changed and then handed down through the years, both to Catholics and Protestants.

    So, the date of 386 (Augustine) is nearly 400 years from the time of Christ and there are very few writings as to what the Early Church believed up until that time other than the OT and the epistles and later Rev. - so to state that the church always considered the Kingdom to be spiritual is just false.

    You are welcome to post writings of church fathers (pre-Augustine) which support your statements.

    I will state some of my findings - (from the internet)

     
    #61 LadyEagle, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  2. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why do you persist in this allegation??

    I have demonstrated it to be false, in this thread, and that a literal kingdom was in fact, preached by some noted church fathers; not to mention by some sects, albeit a minority of Chrisendom, through history; showed this claim, to be an "urban legend" and the a"little girl" that is so disparagingly used by opponents of 'dispensationalism' was in fact 15 years old, not some 7-9 year old kid, in the first place; showed that Darby actually publishes a book that touched on the subject proclaiming a literal kingdom three years before the dream of Margaret MacDonald; showed that the doctrine was preached in this country by Jonathan Edwards, Increase and Cotton Mather, before Darby was even born; and showed that the doctrine was preached in our own state, before it even became a state, but was still part of VA, again long before Darby.

    There is a great deal of difference between believing in a "literal kingdom", and in being a 'dispensationalist'.

    (And, FTR, I would be classified as a 'dispensationalist', of a flavor, as there are several flavors of this teaching, some of which I completely reject, FWIW.)

    The believers who are known as "post-millenialist', and "historic millenialists" also believe in a literal kingdom.

    And I have showed that the A-Millenial teachings are, in fact, later than some millenial teachings and started with Origen with his allegorical views, and partly adopted by Augustine somewhat later.

    I really don't especially care as to what one believes on eschatology, as I have posted before, but get a bit weary of something being repeatedly stated that is simply not true. Guess that is the historian in me.

    You are an a-millenialist, by your own claim. Fine. Be one. You've got some good company.

    Some would be classified as historic millenialists. Guess what? They have some good company, as well.

    Some are post-millenialists. Still some good company.

    Some, as I, are one flavor or another (there are several) of pre-millenialists. Guess what again. We've also got some good company, as well, and in about all 'flavors'.

    BTW, I do not know about any you or your church associates with. I can only speak as too what I do know. And I do know you can find all the above among Southern Baptists, in varying numbers, it bein's as I is one. :laugh:

    But please be honest in the presentation, and not merely repeat the pejorative statements of some others. Calvin, Darby, Augustine, Origen, Irenaeus, Papais, et. al. cannot defend themselves any more. And I don't like to see any of "their graves robbed" by anyone, and history re-written to "prove" a point.

    "Prove" it from Scripture, the living Word, and let the dead rest in peace. Is that a fair request?

    Ed
     
    #62 EdSutton, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  3. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks, Ed. :thumbs:
     
  4. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now Ed; don't start by saying: don't do as I do, but do as I say. I will just post a few who deny that there were plenty of brethren who advocated a earthly reign, except to say it will be spiritual, or was.

    Ed. Sutton;
    Premillenial views were, despite the ignoring of them by the author above, held by several of the early Apostolic and Church Fathers, as well. Irenaeus, the personal disciple of Polycarp, the personal disciple of the Apostle John, and Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Papias are probably the four best known advocates of this

    Justin Martyr (A.D.150)
    CHAP. XI.--WHAT KINGDOM CHRISTIANS LOOK FOR.
    "And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose, without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom; whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment awarded to him who so confesses. For if we looked for a human kingdom, we should also deny our Christ, that we might not be slain; and we should strive to escape detection, that we might obtain what we expect. But since our thoughts are not fixed on the present, we are not concerned when men cut us off; since also death is a debt which must at all events be paid." (First Apology of Justin Martyr, ch. 11)

    "Chiliasm found no favor with the best of the Apostolic Fathers... the support from the Apologists too, is extremely meager, only one from among their number can with reasonable fairness be claimed, (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, v. 25 - 36 ).

    Epiphanes(315-403)
    "There is indeed a millennium mentioned by St. John; but the most, and those pious men, look upon those words as true indeed, but to be taken in a spiritual sense." (Heresies, 77:26.)

    Eusebius (A.D.325)
    "This same historian (Papias) also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise certain strange parables of our Lord, and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the antiquity of man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as, for instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments. (Book III, Ch. 39)

    J.A.W. Neander (1837)
    " Among the Jews the representation was growing that the messiah would reign 1000 years upon the earth. Such products of Jewish imagination passed over into Christianity. " (History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. I, pg. 248)
    "Amazingly meager indeed, are the direct and explicit statments which can by any show of reasonablness be claimed as evidence for Chiliasm. To imagine that we can distil from these rare fragments the orthodox faith of the early church is a huge assumption, and even more perpostrous is it to claim that these barren, feeble utterances represent Chiliasm in its modern premillenial manifestation. " (Ibid. pgs. 52 - 53)

    Philip Schaff (1877)
    "Though millenialism was supressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Schaff's History, pg. 299 )

    Daniel Whitby (1703)
    "The doctrine of the Millennium was never generally received in the church of Christ " (Daniel Whitby, "A Treatise on the True Millennium," in Patrick, Lowth, Arnald, Whitby, and Lowman, Commentary on the Gospels and Epistles of the New Testament, 4 vols. (Philadelphia, PA: Carey and Hart, 1845), vol. 4, p. 1118.)
    "The doctrine of the millennium was not the general doctrine of the primitive church from the times of the apostles to the Nicene council . . . for then it could have made no schism in the church, as Dionysius of Alexandria saith it did." (Ibid., pp. 1122-23. He cites Dionysius 5:6; Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 7:24.)


    I want to know the truth Ed, when this doctrine became accepted as "church doctrine", and as you can see by my posting of the Elder Fathers, it was not until around 200 years ago. Forget about the "little girl", I don't feel confortable using that anyway. I know there were a few around from just after the time of Christ until the ninetenth century, but most were considered heretics and had to apologize for making statements supporting a "earthly Kingdom", as well you already know, for one of your four you mentioned Justin Martyr had to apologize himself.

    You are winning the vote, even though the doctrine doesn't have a lot of support until the 19th Century. That is what surprises me.
     
    #64 Brother Bob, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  5. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]
     
    #65 EdSutton, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  6. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    As I said Ed, don't post the writings of those who support you position and then tell me I am dishonest because I overwhelmingly post many who lived back then and said it was not accepted in the church doctrine.

    I give you there were some who advocated, but those some had to come before a council and apologize. Your
    Justin Martyr himself had to apologize.

    Justin
    And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose, without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom; whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment awarded to him who so confesses. For if we looked for a human kingdom, we should also deny our Christ,

    Stop! calling me dishonest when you publish everyone you can find to support your theology, now that is being dishonest or hypocritical.
     
    #66 Brother Bob, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have not ever claimed that the 'majority' of Christians, at least from the later times of Augustine, believed in a literal millenium, only that some did and taught it. And I have already mentioned that some heretical sects taught the same, specifically the Donatists, chiliasts (although some have erroneously lumped all who believed this around that time as "chiliasts" which is not accurate), and Montanists, among others.

    But I am a bit reluctant to classify the Anabaptists, and Waldenses as heretics, I add, and some, not all, of them taught this, as well.

    But, as I have also mentioned, there were those who accepted this, as well, who would not be considered heretics, specificly Justin and Irenaeus, whose Against Heresies, is his most important work, and is noted for being a vocal opponent of Marcion, the Heretic, and in fact wrote a book specifically against his teachings. (A snip of that is found below.) Would you be surprised to learn that Marcion, the most noted heretic of all time did not believe in a literal kingdom, and taught there would be no such thing? Just so you will know, his "bible" consisted of Luke, and ten epistles of Paul, all highly edited (cut out), The Epistle to the Laodiceans, plus an "Antithesis", written by Marcion, naturally. :rolleyes:

    Maybe that is partly why the church condemned him as a heretic, ya' think?
    Whaddya' know! These four did, in fact, teach this. :thumbsup:

    The question is not did the majority of the church accept this. Obviously she did not. But that neither makes the teaching correct or incorrect. And I would actually say, contrary to your assertion that "you are winning the vote", the majority of Christians still do not accept a literal kingdom to come. Certainly the Roman church does not as a rule, neither does the Orthodox church, Methodists in general, Presbyterians, nor do most other abominations, 'er I mean denominations. :laugh: And I do not know of any major groups that make a literal millenium required "church doctrine" (Southern Baptists cetainly do not.), but granted I don't know what all groups teach as to this.

    But once again I have to correct one thing you wrote. Justin did not "apologize" for this belief, in the sense we generally use the word, today. His works, titled "Apologies" are used from the Greek 'apologia' which is the word from which we get "Apologetics" the term used to describe "defending the faith". That is what Justin was doing, not at all saying he was sorry for what he had said.

    One more thing. Are you also surprised that the doctrine of 'justification by faith alone' and 'saved by grace' has only had a lot of support for maybe 450 years? Guess we should question that too, by that logic.

    After all, the Roman Catholic doctrine of salvation through the church, had pre-eminence for a millenium (Yeah, there's that word again! [laugh]), until that heretic, Luther came along! :rolleyes:

    Ed
     
    #67 EdSutton, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  8. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, an apology, you say not, but Justin seems to have been called before the council for the very doctrine of the Millenium we are discussing. You will admit that Justin was called before the council for preaching the Millenium, won't you?

    It seems we are saying about the same thing now Ed, concerning the whole matter. We just covering the same ole territory now. Like a preacher, preaching the same sermon over and over. :)


    Maybe it just the majority on Baptist Board then Ed, who believe the Kingdom on earth doctrine? :)

    I think the discussion has been at least "civil", and enlightening, don't you Ed
     
    #68 Brother Bob, Jun 26, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2007
  9. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Justin Martyr (Martyr was not part of Justin's name, but was added as an appelation after his death, in honor of his being martyred by the Romans) was the author of what is now called his First Apology, which was addressed to the Emperor of Rome, Antionius Pius, his sons and the Roman Senate, and Second Apology, addressed to the Roman Senate. Both were noted early Defenses of the Faith to the secular "powers-that-be". You can read the translated text of the First Apology here-

    http://earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html

    And no, Justin was never called before any 'church council', although some of his writings and teachings may have been discussed at some of them. On this I do not know. He would not be born for another 50 years, at the time of the Council at Jerusalem, recorded in Acts around 50 A.D., for he was born in 100. He was martyred under the reign of Emperor Marcus Aurelius and Rome prefect, Rusticus, in Rome, between 162-168, with 165 being accepted as the most likely year of his martyrdom. The next 'church council', after Jerusalem did not occur until 325 in Nicea, 160 years later. Some of the later church fathers were around then, and had some of their writings and teachings 'accepted', 'ignored' and/or 'condemned', but Papias d.150, Polycarp d.155, Marcion, the Heretic d.160, Justin Martyr d.165, Irenaeus d.200+, Tertullian d.230, and Origen d. 254 were all long since dead by the time of the next council, the Council of Nicea in 325 occurred. (Maybe they were all there in spirit, but certainly not in body.) :tonofbricks: :laugh:
    I can't speak for the majority on the BB, for I know what few of them believe (and none in great detail), as to this, but you may be corect here. I simply do not know, save for what I see posted.

    But as you said, I too, like my beliefs to have a firm foundation. And I am very leery of basing any of them on the mutilations of Marcion, the allegories of Origen, and the spiritualizings of Augustine, which seem to be less somewhat less than faithful to the author's intent in what he wrote. I just would like a sounder basis than what I think that is. The normal "historico-grammatical" meanings of Scripture would seem to support something other than this, IMO. And that is where I stand on this point

    And I do hope that this and all other discussions have been "civil". I see no reason for them to be otherwise, in any case.

    Ed
     
    #69 EdSutton, Jun 26, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2007
  10. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    This seems to me to be humor, or an attempt at it. :)

    I only have to read this by Justin and know someone had questioned his doctrine on the Kingdom.
     
    #70 Brother Bob, Jun 26, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 26, 2007
  11. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not really. On the BB, I have seen some threads, especially in the Bible Versions sections, some C/A threads, and some others on various subjects that were almost "out and out 'war'". What is the point? Not to even mention that that violates the BB rules about showing grace to other posters.

    That is kind of like the sermon notes that a preacher had once left behind, and a parishoner got hold of. As he read along the notes, he came to this written in one - "Weak point; Pound pulpit!" Now that is humerous, but unfortunately, too often true in my experience. I can speak of the experience of no others, and never try to.

    Gotta' go to Somerset, so I'm outta' here, for now.

    Ed
     
  12. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bumping up.............
     
Loading...