Can "Old" Europe be Reclaimed for Christianity?

[rgrove]

Here's an interesting article on Chalcedon Foundation's website on a new book out called The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America, and Politics Without God. I've read about this book elsewhere, but those reviews didn't have some of the stats this article discusses with the author:

"Weigel’s most dramatic claim is that contemporary Europe’s spiritual emptiness is responsible for its “depopulating itself in numbers not seen since the Black Death in the 14th century.

“It’s bad enough that Spain will lose approximately 25% of its population by 2050,” Weigel said, “or that Germany by that time will lose the equivalent in population of the former East Germany."

I've heard they're having problems with depopulation over there, but that's pretty startling. He makes this point as a source of the reason:

"When a people’s horizon of aspiration is drastically foreshortened,” Weigel said, “the tendency is to turn in on oneself. That makes it difficult to think of one’s life as a life for others. And without that conviction, children are a burden, not a blessing. Given the availability of contraceptive technology, where all that leads has now become obvious."

Of course I believe it can and will certainly be reconverted when God is pleased to turn His attention to them again. I found the author's point about how this is beginning to take shape very interesting:

"Many Christian missionaries from Africa are coming to Europe today to re-evangelize the former colonial powers. If they are successful, Weigel wrote, “it will be because of the tremendous evangelical energies Europe poured into Africa in the 19th century."

In other words, it will be a direct result of the long term planning and arduous work by committed Postmillennialists in these other countries that God may be using to reconvert an apostate Europe.

Yours In Christ,
Ron

[Soulfyre]

Well, I think assuming all Christian missionaries coming from Africa to evangelize Europe are postmillennialists may be somewhat a big leap. I think many assume that premillennialists do not evangelize because the are "pessimists" concerning the progress of the gospel. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am what might be called an historical premillennist, but strongly believe in aggressive evangelism. Belief in a great apostasy prior to the millennial reign of Christ does not assume a failure of the gospel or of the kingdom of Jesus Christ through His church. In fact, it is the progressively clear distinction between the Truth of Christianity and the evil cancer that is the world system (the maturation of the wheat and the tares) that will that great harvest when Jesus Christ will return and defeat His enemies to establish his Messianic reign on earth.

We do, however, believe that in the final days, our final victory may be similar to the victorious matrydom of the saints of the early church, for the world cannot abide true Christianity. Paul was optimistic that he might be granted the opportunity to suffer as His Lord suffered. Sometimes it seems as though postmillennialism seems to have the philosophy of "every day in every way things are getting better and better", without carefully defining "better" as an increasing purity of Christian obedience within the church which might require a costly discipleship, suffering, or even death. But such a conclusion may be a red herring.

In Christ,

Mattthew (soulfyre)

[rgrove]

Well, I think assuming all Christian missionaries coming from Africa to evangelize Europe are postmillennialists may be somewhat a big leap.

Miscommunication here. The missionaries are the direct result of the work of the earlier postmillennialists is what I was saying.

Evangelism is much different now than it was when postmillennialism was the dominant eschatology. They built infrastructure on a solid Christian foundation for the long haul. Nowadays they just roll into a village, show a Jesus film and move on. I'm simplifying obviously, but it's a fact that the nature of evangelism has changed drastically as a result of the pessimillennialism of the 1900s. A predominant attitude has been "don't shine brass on a sinking ship". A retreatist pietism frequently results where Christians withdrawal from active engagement with the culture around them. Premillennialism, and especially dispensational premillennialism, is extremely pessimistic about the future. I read their works when I was one and I even stopped voting as a result. My wife voted for me if my vote was sent in at all. I got the message loud and clear. "Society is a mess, don't bother to try to clean it up. You can try to save a few from the wrath to come if you can, but don't expect much success because the end is at hand." Even in the millennial reign, where Christ is ruling personally and resurrected saints are back surrounded by a sinful world again where they can see their offspring dying, some still even unsaved. Where Christ resurrects the divide between Jew and Gentile by having the Jews ruling the gentiles during this time (especially prominant in dispensationalism). Where for dispensationalists Christ restores the temple he supposedly came to do away with once and for all so that animal sacrifices to God can once again take place. Where even thought the people in the millennium see Christ and the saints living forever before their eyes, the world still turns against him at the drop of a hat so badly that Jesus has to resort to supernatural methods to save Himself. Yes, the pessimism here even comes through as with Dave Hunt:

"The millennial reign of Christ upon earth, rather than being the kingdom of God, will in fact be the final proof of the incorrigible nature of the human heart."

and:

"In fact, dominion - taking dominion and setting up the kingdom of Christ - is an impossibility, even for God."

Many premills teach nothing short of cultural surrender and their evangelistic outreach reflects this. Do things for immediate effect, but don't build for the long term. We won't be around anyway. People like Hunt have a lot of influence and that's what they're saying a lot of the time.

Sometimes it seems as though postmillennialism seems to have the philosophy of "every day in every way things are getting better and better", without carefully defining "better" as an increasing purity of Christian obedience within the church which might require a costly discipleship, suffering, or even death.

What is that I smell? A straw man burning, perhaps?

- Postmillennialism teaches that history ebs and flows. Revivals come and go, so does apostasy. But over time, God's kingdom will continue to increase through the power of the Holy Spirit working in His church to accomplish His Great Commission. At some point Israel will be converted by the power of the Holy Spirit and He will pour out His spirit as never before. We are not to have our eyes on the newspaper headlines, but rather on God's promises. He is reconciling this world to Himself and He will accomplish His mission.

- I have never seen a Postmillennialist teach that fulfilling the Great Commission would not be costly and would not require suffering, sometimes even to death. The question is, has God ordained that the suffering of His bride would be towards victory in the world or defeat? Premills and pessimistic Amills both teach that in this age God's Spirit filled church will suffer towards defeat in this age. God is incapable of drawing the world to Himself via the Spirit filled church. Only supernatural military action can bring victory. The biblical answer is the postmillennial answer.

Please have a listen to Bahnsen or Gentry in their answers to the questions about suffering. They have excellent lectures addressing this and virtually every postmill addresses it in their books.

But such a conclusion may be a red herring.

The things you stated are not the teachings of any postmillennialist that I have ever read. I buy every postmill book and commentary I can get my hands on as well as over 30 Systematic Theologies by Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Assemblies of God, Dispensationalists, Congregationalists, Catholics and Orthodox. Many of the Methodist, Presbyterian and Baptist Systematics I have are postmill. The theme of reconciliation of the world to Himself is also a major theme in Orthodox writings as well. I've run across several Orthodox postmills on Internet bulletin boards like this one. I also have collections of "Works" by several authors who lived from the 1600s to the early 1900s that are postmills and wrote on eschatology there. This is not to brag about my bookshelves, but to say that in all that I don't have a single postmill work that I know of reaching conclusions that you say they are reaching. Postmills are confident in Christ's victory through His church in this age, but they do not ignore the cost of that victory.

[Soulfyre]

Actually, I believe that both postmillennialism and dispensationalism have probably undergone a great deal of development (even since Dave Hunt made the statements you quoted).

I tend to believe that many blanket disagreements with "dispensationalism" fail to recognize the incredible change and development within dispensational theology due to their emphasis on grammatico-historical exegesis of the scripture. It is by no means monolithic (Scofield dispensationalism and Chafer dispensationalism have long since been abandoned by many evangelical dispensational scholars). Few, if any, dispensationalists that I know argue for a re-establishment of the temple system of sacrifices during the millennial kingdom. Rather, they view the view the rebuilding of the temple and re-institution of the sacrificial system as the final apostasy of Judaism, prior to the return of Jesus Christ.

Most of us do not believe in cultural surrender, either. Being a great respecter of Francis Schaeffer, many of us believe in our responsibility to stand firmly against the world system in all areas. Yet we are not universalists. Hence, we assume that the Great Commission (which is a command, and can only be obeyed by us, not fulfilled) only applies to the proclamation of the gospel throughout the world. We do not believe that the Holy Spirit will regenerate all, therefore leaving that pesky problem of the non-believers, who we believe will, in fact, exist until the final judgment. The existence of non-believers only constitutes a problem if one believes that the victory of the Spirit-filled church is dependent upon all being regenerated through the ministry of the Holy Spirit through the church. Dispensationalists, however, do believe that it is more accurate to the theology of Paul in Romans that:

- That there is, indeed, a differentiation between the elect among ethnic Israel and Gentile (Gentiles are referred to as the "wild olive branch" grafted into the cultivated olive tree;

- The elect among both Jew and Gentile is both finite and pre-determined;

- We are living in the "time of the Gentiles" (a time in which the predominant spread of the gospel is among the nations), which will ultimately cease;

- It is subsequent to this that "all Israel" (the elect among Israel) will be saved;

- There is a future time, referred to as the time of "Jacob's trouble", or the time of "great tribulation"...a final time of pestilence and wrath upon the unbelieving, especially upon those Jews who have apostatized and rejected God's Messiah [note: because of our believe in the sovereign election of God, we do not view this a pessimistic--merely an outworking of God's grace as a final act to convict the world of sin and accomplish His redemption of the true Israel];

- Jesus Christ will return (just as He ascended--bodily), revealing Himself to all as Lord and Messiah, when the chosen among God's elect of Israel will repent, looking upon "Him whom they pierced";

- The penultimate stage of Jesus' fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant will occur, when Jesus Christ reigns from His throne in the Holy of Holies (the ultimate fulfillment, of course, is when heaven and earth are made new, and the new Jerusalem is established in God's new creation). During this time, the Bride of Christ will reign with Jesus, her Bridegroom.

There is much more discussion to be had regarding this issue, and I will try to delineate more as time progresses. I realize that much of your reaction is predicated on a rather extreme form of dispensationalism. I, too, shudder every time some new prophecy maven expounds upon his or her views of the immediacy of the coming tribulation (which reminds me of the Millerites), as though we were to drop all involvement in the world and rush off to a mountainside to fast, pray, and wait for Jesus. I believe that we are to be involved redemptively in every area of culture, with an eye to ward God's promises. But I also believe that we are not simply a Christian form of a moral re-armament society. I do not believe that it is God's purpose that the ultimate defeat of the world system will be the proclamation of the gospel (although I do believe that evangelism is not simply a "wham, bam, thank you, ma'am" proposition, but a long-term investment, not only in the individual, but in the community and culture), but in the fulfillment of the gospel in Christ's return and reign. Hence, to pray "Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven", will only be fully accomplished at Christ's return.

God bless you in all things according to His grace in Christ Jesus,

Matthew (soulfyre)

[rgrove]

Actually, I believe that both postmillennialism and dispensationalism have probably undergone a great deal of development (even since Dave Hunt made the statements you quoted).

I'm not familiar with any significant developments in postmillennialism, but I am aware of what is called "Progressive Dispensationalism". I have the major books on this, but this is predominantly seminary only teaching. Ryrie rejects it completely and his study Bibles are everywhere as is the Scofield (old and new) reference bible. Tim LaHaye has sold millions of his books which are traditional dispensational, not progressive which he rejects completely as not even being dispensational. All but one of the books on the Christian Supply prophecy section here in Beaverton, OR are classical dispensationalist works. People in the pews and in prophecy conferences all over the country still hold to Scofield dispensationalism. I expect someday the "progressive" form will trickle down into the churches as these last remaining classical dispensationalists will retire of die off. But radical separation of Israel and the church is still the norm in the pews and they still look for the rebuilding of the temple and the renewal of sacrifices at that temple at any time as well as during the millennium. My dispensational friends, who don't read current texts and only go off of what they've heard preached in the past, have not changed one iota. They believe Ezek 37ff to be clear on this point. So while I recognize there has been development in the system, it has not trickled down to the pews to a great extent.

I tend to believe that many blanket disagreements with "dispensationalism" fail to recognize the incredible change and development within dispensational theology due to their emphasis on grammatico-historical exegesis of the scripture

I disagree of course. Postmillennialists use grammatico-historical exegesis as well. I also contest as a result of consistent application of this principle, and the principle of interpreting scripture with scripture, we also read the Bible more literally than dispensationalists do regarding prophecy. Dispensationalism is the art of eisegesis based on an undisputed presupposition regarding the radical separation of the church and Israel. This is why John Walvoord calls the fundamental difference between covenental theologians and dispensationalists and Ecclesiological argument at it's core. He acknowledges that without this difference there is no pre-trib rapture period because there isn't a single text in the Bible (at his own admission) that teaches this without this in place.

I say this sitting here knowing my thoroughly classical dispensational mother-in-law will be here not too long from now. She watches classical dispies on TV (where they abound), on videos she gets at prophecy conferences in Arkansas and Missouri, etc. Classical dispensationalism is alive and extremely healthy in local churches.

I am glad to see that you don't share the retreat from society that many have taken, but it is a practical result of the teaching in many, many quarters.

I have many articles that I will be putting online in the next couple of months in the fire right now. I'd prefer that people get the books and lectures (on tape, video, MP3, etc) that people far more capable than I have already done, but it's rare than anyone has the desire to put forth this much effort or expense. I'll seek to gather resources, and where they don't already exist online, create them myself to demonstrate that scripture teaches the postmillennial hope. I look forward to the day that chiliasm will be considered the bizaar, off the wall teaching that it is once again.

Yours In Christ,
Ron