Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Revelations interpretation, church history,Re: Anglicans

Expand Messages
  • Anglicananswer@aol.com
    Well...I must say when it comes to the 1000 year reign I do agree with the best Reformed theologian-Francis Turretin. Institutes of Elenctic Theology Francis
    Message 1 of 2 , Jul 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Well...I must say when it comes to the 1000 year reign I do agree with the best Reformed theologian-Francis Turretin.


      Institutes of Elenctic Theology
      Francis Turretin

      Volume 3 page 581-582
      Twentieth topic, Third question XVIII

      Turretin writes,

      “As the binding of Satan for a thousand years coincides with the thousand years during which the martyrs will reign with Christ, if it is made clear that the thousand years of the binding of Satan have already passed, that of itself will prove that the reign of a thousand years has already elapsed and is no longer to be expected.

      For from whatever point this binding of Satan is begun,
      either from the incarnation of the Savior (as some think), at which time the strong was bound by the stronger, and his goods spoiled, and translated from darkness into the kingdom of light (Mt. 12:29);
      or, from his passion and death (as pleases others), in which Satan was bound by Christ, the handwriting that was contrary to us being taken out of the way, his head bruised and a triumph gained over him (Col. 2:14. 15; Heb. 2:14);
      or at the destruction of Jerusalem (according to others), that the obsolete reverence of legal things might not in any way hinder the course of the gospel;
      or, finally, in the reign of Constantine the Great (the opinion of more), at which time was granted to Christians the free exercise of religion, with the result that Satan was no longer allowed to seduce the nations openly and with impurity and persecute by the violent cruelty of Gentile emperors;
      from whatever point,
      I say, that binding is begun, it is clear that that time has long ago passed by and is no more to be expected hereafter.
      Now although in these intervals, Satan was not so bound but that he still did great injury to the church, yet the prophecy did not fail to obtain its fulfillment.

      For that binding was not to be absolute, but limited; not that he should do nothing at all, or act in secret hiding places, or run back to his depths (bathe), or by a vicarious beast under the mask of devotion and of the church intoxicate the inhabitants of the earth. But he should deceive the nations no more (i.e., with such unrestrained violence) as he had done before, making pagans and enemie
      s of the church mad, and desolating believers by idolatrous potions and violent persecutions.
      XIX. Now although this vision is related by John after the casting of the beast and the false prophet into the lake of fire (i.e., after the destruction of the Antichrist, recorded in chapter 19), it does not follow that the thing ought to happen in that order of time. A history which exhibits a continuous series of events differs from a prophecy, where the order of time is not always observed; nor is that always the later which is narrated after another event. Hence, however in the order of the vision the casting down of the beast may have preceded, we are not thence to infer that it preceded in the order of time. And what John says, ‘And I saw’ (kai eidon); not ‘After this I saw’ (meta tauta) (as in other places), sufficiently argues that he is narrating only an uninterrupted vision, not a continuous history. Thus the Holy Spirit, after he had narrated the judgment of God against the whore and the beast (Rev. 18, 19), now for the demonstration of a perfect victory, wished
      to describe the judgment against the primary enemy of the church (viz., Satan and the dragon, of whose kingdom Antichrist is the suffragan). However, he comprehends this judgment under double captivity: the one temporary, to last a thousand years; the other eternal and perpetual (Rev. 20:9, 10).

      XX. “As to the rest, it is safer to be ignorant of the nature and qualities of this reign of Christ with the saints, than curiously to pry into and rashly presume to define it.

      For it is easier to show what it is not than to explain what it is. And since that reign can with propriety be referred either to the reign of the saints and martyrs in heaven or to the spiritual reign of believers on the earth or to both together, there was no necessity (in order to explain this oracle) to devise a temporal millenarian reign before the end of the world in the face of so many passages of Scripture





    • A Mighty Fortress
      Paul, do you know where can I get the Turretin Dogmatics Works, Institutio, etc.? May be is it posted for download in a a website? I soley did found excerpts
      Message 2 of 2 , Jul 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Paul, do you know where can I get the Turretin Dogmatics Works, Institutio, etc.? May be is it posted for download in a a website? I soley did found excerpts here & there. Blessings.
         
        I sent you private post to your email.
         
        Enrique

        Anglicananswer@... wrote:
        Well...I must say when it comes to the 1000 year reign I do agree with the best Reformed theologian-Francis Turretin.


        Institutes of Elenctic Theology
        Francis Turretin

        Volume 3 page 581-582
        Twentieth topic, Third question XVIII

        Turretin writes,

        “As the binding of Satan for a thousand years coincides with the thousand years during which the martyrs will reign with Christ, if it is made clear that the thousand years of the binding of Satan have already passed, that of itself will prove that the reign of a thousand years has already elapsed and is no longer to be expected.

        For from whatever point this binding of Satan is begun,
        either from the incarnation of the Savior (as some think), at which time the strong was bound by the stronger, and his goods spoiled, and translated from darkness into the kingdom of light (Mt. 12:29);
        or, from his passion and death (as pleases others), in which Satan was bound by Christ, the handwriting that was contrary to us being taken out of the way, his head bruised and a triumph gained over him (Col. 2:14. 15; Heb. 2:14);
        or at the destruction of Jerusalem (according to others), that the obsolete reverence of legal things might not in any way hinder the course of the gospel;
        or, finally, in the reign of Constantine the Great (the opinion of more), at which time was granted to Christians the free exercise of religion, with the result that Satan was no longer allowed to seduce the nations openly and with impurity and persecute by the violent cruelty of Gentile emperors;
        from whatever point,
        I say, that binding is begun, it is clear that that time has long ago passed by and is no more to be expected hereafter.
        Now although in these intervals, Satan was not so bound but that he still did great injury to the church, yet the prophecy did not fail to obtain its fulfillment.

        For that binding was not to be absolute, but limited; not that he should do nothing at all, or act in secret hiding places, or run back to his depths (bathe), or by a vicarious beast under the mask of devotion and of the church intoxicate the inhabitants of the earth. But he should deceive the nations no more (i.e., with such unrestrained violence) as he had done before, making pagans and enemie
        s of the church mad, and desolating believers by idolatrous potions and violent persecutions.
        XIX. Now although this vision is related by John after the casting of the beast and the false prophet into the lake of fire (i.e., after the destruction of the Antichrist, recorded in chapter 19), it does not follow that the thing ought to happen in that order of time. A history which exhibits a continuous series of events differs from a prophecy, where the order of time is not always observed; nor is that always the later which is narrated after another event. Hence, however in the order of the vision the casting down of the beast may have preceded, we are not thence to infer that it preceded in the order of time. And what John says, ‘And I saw’ (kai eidon); not ‘After this I saw’ (meta tauta) (as in other places), sufficiently argues that he is narrating only an uninterrupted vision, not a continuous history. Thus the Holy Spirit, after he had narrated the judgment of God against the whore and the beast (Rev. 18, 19), now for the demonstration of a perfect victory, wished
        to describe the judgment against the primary enemy of the church (viz., Satan and the dragon, of whose kingdom Antichrist is the suffragan). However, he comprehends this judgment under double captivity: the one temporary, to last a thousand years; the other eternal and perpetual (Rev. 20:9, 10).

        XX. “As to the rest, it is safer to be ignorant of the nature and qualities of this reign of Christ with the saints, than curiously to pry into and rashly presume to define it.

        For it is easier to show what it is not than to explain what it is. And since that reign can with propriety be referred either to the reign of the saints and martyrs in heaven or to the spiritual reign of believers on the earth or to both together, there was no necessity (in order to explain this oracle) to devise a temporal millenarian reign before the end of the world in the face of so many passages of Scripture







        ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.