Tuesday, September 18, 2012

There Is No Such Thing As The Millennium!

Getting Right To The Point!
There Is No Such Thing As The Millennium!
The term “millennialism” can include many false beliefs: That Christ will return visibly to earth a thousand years before the end of the world and rule over this world in a political sense; That before The End Christians will enjoy special prosperity; That before Judgment Day a number of Christians will be “raptured,” and escape the tribulation; That before the Last Day a universal conversion of the Jews will take place; and many other wrong ideas.  

But Scripture teaches: That the kingdom of Christ on earth will remain in tribulation until the very end, Acts 14:22; John 16:33; 18:36; Luke 9:23; 14:27; 17:20-37; Second Timothy 4:18; Hebrews 12:28; Luke 18:8; That the second visible coming of the Lord will be His final coming to judge the quick and the dead, Matthew 24:29, 30; 25:31; Second Timothy 4:1; Second Thessalonians 2:8; Hebrews 9:26-28; That there will be but one resurrection of the dead, John 5:28; 6:39, 40; That the Last Day is unknown, even to Jesus Himself, Matthew 24:42; 25:13; Mark 13:32, 37; Acts 1:7; That there will be no conversion en masse, of the Jewish nation, Romans 11:7; Second Corinthians 3:14; Romans 11:25; First Thessalonians 2:16.

Therefore the teaching of Millennialism not only contradicts the Bible, but also gives a false idea of the kingdom of Christ, turns the minds of believers upon mere earthly hopes, and leads people to look upon the Bible as a mysterious and obscure book, which it most certainly is not! It is very clear about the end of the world. And that's the point!


Anonymous said...


I was wondering if the Intrepid Lutherans had a response to the papers delivered at the recent seminary symposium. My impression after reading them is that they were a direct condemnation of your site.

Isaac L. Parson

Joel A. Dusek said...

Mr. Parson,
Thanks for the heads-up on the Symposium. Interesting papers. They are certainly directly addressed at Intrepid Lutherans, Rev. Treptow describes it without ever using the name. Revs. Treptow and Koelpin don't outright condemn IL, but offer multiple caveats against the use of the internet for Brotherly Admonition. (I think the attention paid to the use of the Internet is simply a euphemism for IL. If they are actually questioning the medium used, how very Luddite. The medium is not the message!)
While reading through the papers’ prescriptions for Brotherly Admonition, I sometimes thought, “That’s what IL does.” The papers are especially concerned about determining actual sin and any consequent public rebuke. The editors are more than capable of defending this site, so speaking only for myself having followed IL for a couple years now, I cannot find a post where anyone from IL has irresponsibly accused anyone of a sin. I recall one posting where something went awry in the comments, Brotherly Admonition was applied, and all was well. On those occasions when a person (or conference, or TV show) has been called out by name, it has been after the appropriate steps had been taken with less than appropriate results. IL is not a news outfit, scooping breaking WELS stories, nor a disciplinary body attempting to usurp the authority of the CoP.

Although some of the more rabid WELS cultists may disagree, examining a Synod program, policy, or function is neither sinful nor calling out sin. I commend the existence of IL for sparking a Symposium on Brotherly Admonition!

Joel Dusek said...

By the way, Rev Fr Spencer, excellent piece on the Millinneum!

Mr. Douglas Lindee said...

Mssrs Dusek, Parson and Others,

Yes, we are aware of the papers that were presented at the recent seminary symposium, and had been discussing them among ourselves as they had become available. Some have suggested that we were the target of some criticism. It was suggested to us that in one paper it seems we might have been labeled an 'elephant in the room' -- but we were not named, and quite honestly we simply do not recognize ourselves in the descriptions the author uses to characterize that elephant. We are not sure who the author of that paper was referring to. If the author did intend to refer to us, it is clear that he is not at all familiar with our published work, nor of facts surrounding various circumstances, and is probably relying mostly on rumors or the negative opinions of others. It would seem strange, however, if the author did intend to refer to us in his publicly delivered paper on 'Brotherly Admonition,' since we have never heard from him regarding a single one of his criticisms. We are always open to comments and suggestions and yes, even criticism. The author of that paper or anyone else is very welcome to write to us publicly here on our blog and express any of his concerns. And let us stress that this public forum is the appropriate place to do so, since we actively invite such responses in this very forum in which we publish. If he, or anyone, has any concerns, we look forward to hearing from them soon! We also thank our readers for their concern and their active involvement.

Anonymous said...

After reviewing some of the papers of the symposium, and specifically Koelpin's and Treptow's, I agree with Mr. Dusek's comments. As Koelpin said, do not admonish or rebuke an individual on the Internet when it deserves to be private and personal. Good words. From what I have seen on IL, if IL has done what Koelpin said not to do, it has been rare. What I have seen frequently on IL is a study of practices occurring in the WELS, and how they compare to what the Scriptures teach. Is that any different then these Symposium papers being posted on an internet website and doing the same thing? I have a hard time seeing the difference. If Koelpin's and Treptow's statements were intended as an outright condemnation of everything IL is and does (I personally don't think they were), their statements were certainly made in a broader context that includes other groups and events and practices as well.

I am glad the synod decided to do a symposium on brotherly admonition. I think there is a tremendous need within the WELS for such a symposium, and not because of IL. I'm grateful that those who were responsible for initiating and carrying out such a symposium had the courage to do so, just as I am grateful that IL has the courage to do what it does.

Often, I have seen and heard an admonishment portrayed as the absence of love. So I was particularly appreciative of Pastor Treptow's words that we admonish out of love. These papers point out that admonishment is not easy. If given a choice, most would choose to do anything other than admonish. But where is the greater love, to do the easy thing or to do the difficult thing? I think it is good that the initators and organizers of and contributors to this symposium chose to spend time and energy and resources on the more difficult thing.


Post a Comment

Comments will be accepted or rejected based on the sound Christian judgment of the moderators.

Since anonymous comments are not allowed on this blog, please sign your full name at the bottom of every comment, unless it already appears in your identity profile.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License