I have written a few comments in the past about some general frustration I have concerning the predominant Amillenial position in the Presbyterian Church of America. My constant exposure to godly Amillennarians like Dr. Simon Kistemaker (whom I love dearly as a professor and friend) and Professor Chuck Hill (whom I have grown to admire) has led me to be more humble in my assessment of their theological presuppositions. Nevertheless, the position held by these men falls short of a truly victorious gospel.
When Scriptures declare the “discipling of the nations” (Matthew 28:18-20) what shall we think? Is this a commandment expressing a unfulfilled desire or a future reality in history? When Christ says that all things–including his enemies– will be placed under his feet (I Cor. 15:24-26) before the end comes, are we to think that these enemies are immaterial beings? When God says that the nations will be given to the Son (Psalm 110), are we to think that these nations are not in space and in time, but rather a consummative promise? It is all non-sensical in my estimation. Postmillennialism is the ONLY eschatology that places heaven and earth at the feet of King Jesus and furthermore, destroys these detestable dichotomies of earth and heaven, flesh and spirit, things visible and things invisible and for the record, law vs. gospel. We MUST see these as unifying perspectives into one reality. God’s kingdom comes to manifest its glory on earth as it is in heaven; to transform flesh and spirit, things physical and things spiritual.
The common assumption is that Postmillennialists do not see “suffering” as a central motif in their eschatology and therefore it does not do justice to the New Testament. I have a fairly long response to this absurd accusation, but David Field has answered this question in a Q&A format that I highly recommend anyone read (click here).
Some years ago Dr. Kenneth Gentry debated Dr. Richard Gaffin. Gentry defending the Postmillennial view and Dick Gaffin defending the traditional Dutch Amillenialism. Though the debate was long and perhaps not the most revealing (since both speakers didn’t interact as much as I expected), one statement summarized Amillennialism best. Professor Richard Gaffin said: “The church wins by losing.” By this he means Christ manifests His glory through the church as she suffers for the cause of Christ. It is undeniable that the church suffers, but that is not the same as losing. Now winning is not losing and losing is not winning. This is standard logical procedure, but the paradoxical, Already/Not Yet, Vosian, Tension-Driven, World-is-becoming-worse scenario leaves me wondering how is that ever connected with “The gates of Hell shall not prevail.”
Dominion is an essential aspect of Biblical faith. Losing to this present world is NOT a victory. Christ demands and commands that His church be triumphant and victorious and the necessary ingredient to this victory is the proclamation of Christ’s Lordship in every area of life. His invisible kingdom is being made visible though eyes cannot see nor ears hear as clearly as some would desire. His church is conquering Asia, His gospel is being heard, and Christ is being glorified from sea to sea. All Glory and honor and power to the One exalted Lord Christ who rules now and forever. Amen.
Resurrectio et Vita 
The “we win by loosing” philosophy is tricky. It’s true that the blood of the martyrs are the seeds of the church, and yet an expectation of persecution, an eagerness to be trodden down by the unregenerate, encourages an abdication of our responsiblities.
If we expect to win by loosing, we are not surprised by apostacy. We assume that it will happen whether the church is faithful or not… but apostacy is not some impersonal drifting, like a glacier sliding into the ocean. It is the aggregate of countless Christian men and women compromising their faith, squandering thier inheritance, and putting down the sword and trowel to take up the remote control.
Yes, God is glorified even as we are defeated. But God is glorified in all things. God was even glorified in Judas’s betrayl. Judas was an active betrayer of Christ, but the proverbs say “one who is slack in his work is the brother to him who destroys”. A passive acceptance of the rout of Christianity is a betrayl of our King.
A defeatist mentality keeps us from asking hard questions, and creates an expectation of failure. God will forgive us, but will He reward our failures? Not when He has equipped us for victory.
Hope you visit us and link to us. God bless you all. JL.
“us” meaning TheAmericanView.com.
Will do John. I am a strong supporter of the Constitution Party (or what’s left of it). My next task is to update my politics and news section with relevant links.
Excellent comments David. Did you read David Fields comments?
Hey Uri,
This was excellent. I remember when I first switched from a pre-trib/pre-mil view to postmillennialism and hearing about some catastrophe on the news. When I first heard about the catastrophe I thought “well what do you expect, today is the best day we’ll have” but then I remembered, “oh yeah…. I don’t believe that stuff anymore.”
Having an optimistic eschatology, which I believe is rooted in scripture of course, is a great encouragement and has really motivated me to get to work. We can make a difference through Christ.
Hopefully I’ll be able to see you at the debate tomorrow. God bless.
Blessings to you John. Let’s cheer White against the hostile crowd.
Pingback: 314039 Blog Verification