Post Millennialism safe house

[JM]

I think there will a large-scale conversion of all peoples eventually. I can’t see a reason that Jews would be excluded.

I heard a fella say, "baptism is election."

I'm still working that out in a Postmillennial context. Baptism, Christendom, Christian Nationalism, and Postmillennialism are all within the same ballpark I just don't know how to bring it all together. If baptism is election or a kind thereof and, assuming the Reformed understanding of apostasy is true, I think there is a connection.

If “those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift” could not endure or continue in the faith because they had no root in Christ (see Robert Shaw, Exposition of the Westminster) it is entirely possible that someone can be baptized (enlightened) and take part in the Lord's Supper (tasted the heavenly gift) and still fall away.

What I still don't understand is why baptize infants if the actual baptism itself is an empty sign. The church Fathers almost unanimously believed in baptismal regeneration and still believed apostasy was possible.

I don't know, just thinking out loud.

Yours,

jm

 

[Mark Quayle]

I heard a fella say, "baptism is election."

I'm still working that out in a Postmillennial context. Baptism, Christendom, Christian Nationalism, and Postmillennialism are all within the same ballpark I just don't know how to bring it all together. If baptism is election or a kind thereof and, assuming the Reformed understanding of apostasy is true, I think there is a connection.

If “those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift” could not endure or continue in the faith because they had no root in Christ (see Robert Shaw, Exposition of the Westminster) it is entirely possible that someone can be baptized (enlightened) and take part in the Lord's Supper (tasted the heavenly gift) and still fall away.

What I still don't understand is why baptize infants if the actual baptism itself is an empty sign. The church Fathers almost unanimously believed in baptismal regeneration and still believed apostasy was possible.

I don't know, just thinking out loud.

Yours,

jm

Baptism isn't election.

 

[JM]

Baptism isn't election.

Proximity to the Gospel sure makes election more likely since God has provided the means by which you will be saved, that's kind of the point of Postmillennialism and Christian Nationalism, I think... The Gospel includes baptism and the Lord's Supper, they are means of grace, it's not just about 'getting folks saved.'

 

[Mark Quayle]

Proximity to the Gospel sure makes election more likely since God has provided the means by which you will be saved, that's kind of the point of Postmillennialism and Christian Nationalism, I think... The Gospel includes baptism and the Lord's Supper, they are means of grace, it's not just about 'getting folks saved.'

More likely? I expect you say that as a POV thing, and not how God sees it. Do you really think that anyone will 'get in' that he has not chosen from the foundation of the World? And yes, I agree, that the Gospel will accomplish all for which it is sent. But, "these things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come." If I am disobedient, and someone 'would have' come to Christ, but through my disobedience did not, that is my sin. Yet God's purposes are precisely fulfilled. If that person is never saved, he was not elect, no matter whose fault.

 

[JM]

More likely? I expect you say that as a POV thing, and not how God sees it. Do you really think that anyone will 'get in' that he has not chosen from the foundation of the World? And yes, I agree, that the Gospel will accomplish all for which it is sent. But, "these things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come." If I am disobedient, and someone 'would have' come to Christ, but through my disobedience did not, that is my sin. Yet God's purposes are precisely fulfilled. If that person is never saved, he was not elect, no matter whose fault.

Are you replying to me? I didn't write "get in" or "would have" but you have those words quoted.

I'm saying God's purpose is fulfilled by means, the means of grace including the preaching of the Gospel and other means. This is better expressed by the Reformed Confessions.

see LBC1689 and WCF.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Are you replying to me? I didn't write "get in" or "would have" but you have those words quoted.

I'm saying God's purpose is fulfilled by means, the means of grace including the preaching of the Gospel and other means. This is better expressed by the Reformed Confessions.

see LBC1689 and WCF.

I didn't mean those as quoting you. I was identifying those as terms in common use, and for common meaning, though not used in the Bible in that way. I agree, btw, about the LBC and WCF. I love the concise precision they employ.

My only point can be expressed, though in an almost hyperbolic way, by a simple, logical, statement. There is no evidence that anything "could have happened", except what did happen. Thus also, we have no reason to assume that anything ever can happen, except what will happen.

 

[JM]

Haha, you know I'm not common and even uncommon.

I'm drawn to the logical conclusions offered by Reformed theology and recently was told I'm "too mean and too logical" to be Lutheran but I find resorting to rationalism and reason may not be the best way to handle scripture. For example Reformed theology allows for apostasy but still claims you are elect from the foundation of the world. Another, you are a covenant child when you are baptized into the covenant but can still fall away. Another, you are saved by grace through faith because we are utterly dead in sin and sinners the rest of our lives this side of glory, however, you must produce works, examine your works, for assurance.

Things like that.

 

[Hammster]

THE NEW CREATION & MORE SEA? (1)

PMW 2023-047 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. In Rev 21:1 an unusual statement appears at the coming of the new heavens and earth: “and there is no longer any sea.” Commentators have long debated the mean…

postmillennialworldview.com

 

[JM]

 

[JM]

Postmil study guide, 24p.

https://theremnantradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/postMill-study-guide.pdf

 

[Hammster]

Postmil study guide, 24p.

https://theremnantradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/postMill-study-guide.pdf

Looks good.

 

[JM]

A summation of the Book of Concord on the Antichrist:

"As to the Antichrist we teach that the prophecies of the Holy Scriptures concerning the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:3-12; 1 John 2:18, have been fulfilled in the Pope of Rome and his dominion. All the features of the Antichrist as drawn in these prophecies, including the most abominable and horrible ones, for example, that the Antichrist "as God sitteth in the temple of God," 2 Thess. 2:4; that he anathematizes the very heart of the Gospel of Christ, that is, the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace alone, for Christ's sake alone, through faith alone, without any merit or worthiness in man (Rom. 3:20-28; Gal. 2:16); that he recognizes only those as members of the Christian Church who bow to his authority; and that, like a deluge, he had inundated the whole Church with his antichristian doctrines till God revealed him through the Reformation — these very features are the outstanding characteristics of the Papacy. (Cf. Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 515, Paragraphs 39-41; p. 401, Paragraph 45; M. pp. 336, 258.) Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is "the very Antichrist." (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)" Source

 

[JM]

A video from Apologia defending Theonomy. I've been reading a lot from Lutheran authors and they espouse a two Kingdom theory which is very confusing, even for Lutherans.

I have to deny what Lutherans teach about two Kingdoms, God's Law is Kingdom Law and will expand in application and influence all over the globe.

A Reformed Defense of Theonomy: A Response to Theocast

We have been receiving a lot of requests to respond Theocast's, "A Reformed Response to Theonomy." We are joined in studio today by Eric Jaeger to do so. Enj...

www.youtube.com

 

[JM]

“The Gospel forbids private revenge, and Christ stresses this so often lest the apostles think that they should usurp the government from those who hold it, as in the Jewish dream of the messianic kingdom; instead, he would have them know their duty to teach that the spiritual kingdom does not change the civil government. Thus private revenge is forbidden not as an evangelical counsel but as a command (Matt. 5:39; Rom. 12:19). Public redress through a judge is not forbidden but expressly commanded, and it is a work of God according to Paul (Rom. 13:1ff.). Now the various kinds of public redress are court decisions, punishments, wars, military service.” THEODORE G. TAPPERT | ed., The Book of Concord the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. (Philadelphia: Mühlenberg Press, 1959), 223 (Apology of the Augsburg Confession, ch. 16)​

Confessional Lutherans hold to the Book of Concord, the B of C is completely against Premillennialism in any form and all forms of literal millennialism. The older arrangements of Postmillennialism were very much literal believing the future millennial period would be discernable from start to finish. Modern Postmillennialism is closer to Amillennialism in that the millennial period is real but not limited to a discernible starting point, real but not limited to “1,000” literal years.

Literal millennialism is referred to as “Jewish dreams” because it resembles the vision of the Pharisees and other Jewish sects.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[JM]

Anyone want to answer this question? It's a doozy.

 

[Bob_1000]

The resurrection happened at the resurrection of Christ.

Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

 

[JM]

The resurrection happened at the resurrection of Christ.

Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Full preterism is against the rules because it is a damnable heresy.

 

[JM]

This was fun.

 

[Hammster]

This was fun.

I’ll check it out.

 

[Bob_1000]

Full preterism is against the rules because it is a damnable heresy.

I agree full preterism is a damnable heresy and the Old Testament Christians being raised with Christ is not taught in full preterism.