Amillennialism Baptist Covenant Idealism

After the show.

You can say what you want, but you won't

around

me.

Sheep.

Among misfits.

A misfit in the trailer park at night.

A misprint with the six cents.

Been sick ever since my brother died of an OD.

My two cents never made sense either to me or anyone else inside of the sheep fence.

My 9th Smith on my right side.

Why are you staring at your cop?

Died signing my John Hancock on the dotted line.

Tell me what's the bottom line.

The bottom line is I'm not right.

I'm not left, but the cellophane won't fight.

There's nothing left but the spotlight.

Hold my beer.

You can find me in the moonlight.

You can say what you want.

You can say what you want, but you won't around me.

You can say what you want.

You can say what you want.

I'm whips in the deep end and I can't find my assigned seat to sit in.

My theology don't fit in.

Black sheep of the reformation sheep pen.

To the reformed, I'm just another Baptist baptized again.

The bastard child of Anabaptist.

Host to child of reformation society.

We don't need your education.

Give me a Bible in a bookshelf of dead man, cigars, bourbons, and beer cans, bow

ties, tattoos, and bearded men making reformation great again.

You can say what you want.

You can say what you want, but you won't around me.

You can say what you want.

Alright, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Open Air Theology.

My name is Jeff Rice.

I'm one of the pastors of I forgot the name of my church.

Covenant Reform Baptist Church.

We're here tonight to talk about all millennialism and Baptist covenant

idealism.

Theology is right.

If you're ever in Tallahoma, Tennessee and you're looking for a good church to go to, please come check us out.

Covenant Reform Baptist Church.

I'm gonna pass it to this jack leg underneath me.

Is that me?

Yeah, that's you.

Alright.

I am Pastor Braden of Valley Baptist Church.

We meet on Sundays at 11 a .m.

Come join us for a great time to worship the Lord together.

Just a super blessed privilege to be able to fellowship with these brothers here and enjoying a pipe after

a long hard day of doing different errands for the family.

So it's been a busy day.

So it's a blessing though to be on here to talk about this.

Whatever the topic is, that's what we're talking about.

I'll pass it over to you.

Nope.

That.

Way.

I don't know where you are.

Nope. Nope. That way.

Oh, it's.

Like the Brady Bunch, you know.

Well, I am Habs Addison, your friendly neighborhood Calvinist and coming live from

SoCal, home of the People's Republic of California and on my way to Idaho

and I am one of the hosts of Open Air Theology and.

Passionate.

Up.

Who's the new guy?

Who's the new guy?

The.

Fourth Beatle.

Yeah.

So my name is Tom Shepherd.

I'm with the Grace Bible Church of Bernie.

I'm a member there and it's in Texas.

So we're free over here along with some Idaho people and just

excited to be here and join you guys in the talk with about Millennialism and Idealism and

Covenant Theology, Baptist Covenant Theology.

So, thank you for inviting me.

You're welcome. You might not want to come back. You might.

Need therapy, medication, and a hug after this.

Yeah, you might.

Walk off of this and have PTSD.

One of my past.

Yeah, one of my.

Pastors is a biblical counselor.

I might be calling.

Him after this show.

You're gonna need it.

Yeah. You're.

Gonna need it.

So, apparently, apparently, we were miscommunicating with

one another.

I was wanting to talk about how all Millennialism fits best

with Baptist Covenant Theology.

Brayden heard that and thought we was talking about the book of Revelation.

So, we're going to kinda put it all together for you

if you will.

So, work with us or be patient with us as we travel down

this road.

Alright.

So, for those that might not understand what all Millennialism is, let's

give them a definition.

Brayden, would you mind giving a definition of what Millennialism is?

Well, all Millennialism is.

The biblical eschatological position to have.

So, I would start off saying that's a good definition right there.

That's a really good definition.

The second definition is not a great one that I would love but just defining the word is the negation

of Millennialism is a thousand years talking about the book of Revelation chapter twenty and so the

word itself would mean the negation of the millennium which is not what any all Millennialist would hold to.

They would say that Christ inaugurated the kingdom that that Satan is currently bound or curtailed

and that we are in the kingdom right now awaiting its consummation for the second coming of Christ.

That differs from Postmillennialism as Postmillennialism would say that

and what the world will look like is how the all Millennialists and Postmillennialists differ as what

will the world look like.

When Christ returns.

Now, would you say that there's a difference between this group of

Postmills today versus historical Postmills like they're not even the same.

So, like whenever my understanding of Postmillennialism is that they believe in a literal

thousand years and some would say it doesn't necessarily have to be a literal thousand years,

but it will be post the establishment of the kingdom of on earth,

right?

So, there's this the kingdom of God has been built on earth.

There's this long period of time of this golden age to where the kingdom of God

is on earth.

It's, you know, the rule and reign of Jesus is taking place versus the modern

day Postmills would basically agree with all Millennialism that

at the thousand years, it's the millennial period from first advent to second advent,

right?

It's believed that as we get closer to the return of Christ, then there's this

kingdom established, right?

But if at any time, there's this established kingdom where you can say, oh, look, there it

is and you can enter into it like it denies regeneration in my opinion, you know,

and so that is my big reason of leaving Postmillennialism is because if that Postmillennial

hope does come true, then there is no more regeneration because you don't have to be

born again.

To see it or enter into it.

You know, Kyle and Julie are already throwing up post post mill

gang signs.

They're gang.

Banging on us over here.

Well, that's fine.

It's because they're not really Postmill.

They think they're Postmill, but they're really just happy all mills.

They're Moscow.

Moscow.

Moscow.

They're one of the Postmills.

You know, I.

Think that all Millennialism has been given a a pessimistic view

from the Postmills.

They think, you know, where is your victory, you know, and we would say that the victory is in the gospel that God

will save whom he will save when he wants to save them and there's victory in that that God is

is glorified in condemning sinners just as much as he is saving sinners because he is

righteous and he's just and he's holy.

So there's victory in the gospel going forth and God will save whom he's going to save.

So that's why I'm very optimistic.

You know, it's for me coming out of the whole

dispensational.

Yeah, I was just like so full of fear and it was just like fear so many different things and

everything and you know, and then going to Postmill, it was like victory, victory, victory, you

know, and and when I started learning all mill, which which I I'm still working some

things out with all mill and everything, but you see victories in Christ victory to victory

throughout the ages in Christ.

You know, I mean you see and and when I go to read Revelation, it's so comforting

you know that Christ is ruling and reigning right now and and his church is

going through tribulation and not a tribulation and you know, and yeah, it's it's for me.

It's.

Very very comforting.

Yep.

Anybody else have anything to.

Say about all.

Millennialism?

I know we're going to dive in deeper, but just concerning definitions.

Yeah, real quick.

As far as you know, as you know the kingdom growing, we we know that God is going to grow

his kingdom, but as we go outside and we and we look out the door, I mean we

know God is growing the kingdom.

It's growing, but when we go outside and we look around society, you look in your neighborhoods, you look at all the

people you don't see it.

So the kingdom is growing, but it's invisible.

So evil is growing and the kingdom.

Is growing at the same time the weight and the tears right.

They they both grow together.

That's right.

Absolutely 100%.

Alright, so let's get into real quick.

The definitions that that we would have to concerning covenant theology right

now.

There's a difference between classical covenant theology versus Baptist

covenant theology.

Well, when y 'all want to give that definition, if not I can, but I'm kind of just

partialized and lead in this conversation.

Yeah, let's do this.

Go ahead Tom.

Would you want to give a definition for classical covenant theology and how

Baptist covenant Baptist don't really fit in?

Although there's a lot of Baptist who hold this position so Presbyterian.

Covenant theology would would flatten everything out.

They would say it's it's one covenant of grace all the way through flattening everything out

so that so that it's a different administration of the exact same covenant.

Everything where where the Baptist would say no, there's a distinction between the new covenant and the old

covenant.

It is a better covenant.

Things are realized things are things are all together better.

It's a better land.

It's a it's a It's an eternal peace and so that the difference in between

the the the flattening out of the one covenant going all the way through we would say

that there is that there's types and shadows that pointed to Christ and that in the new covenant,

it's all together different.

It's a it's all together better.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And I I go ahead.

Yeah.

And you know, also, you know, when when it comes to the, you know, like we were talking about this throughout the week

and everything, you know, Presbyterian covenant theology is is just

it's more of taking the old covenant new covenant and conflating both of them

and you know, I was just talking with Schumacher Andrew Schumacher and

you see that with Hebrew roots that the the old the new covenant is just a renewing of the old

covenant.

You know, no, it's it's a new covenant.

It's actually in the language when you go and you you you translate it

from Hebrew to English in the Old Testament, but if you go through the Septuagint, it it New

is new and built on better promises, you know.

Yeah.

So.

Like Tom was saying, the the the Presbyterian classical covenant theology, they hold to

the one covenant and that one covenant is the covenant of grace and all the

covenants are administrations of the one covenant that being the covenant of grace.

So so Abraham, Moses, David, and also Jesus, the

the covenant that Jesus makes is an administration of the one covenant,

the covenant of grace and so and where they would say that go

ahead.

I'm.

Sorry.

Yeah.

So where they would say that is that since the grace is the same, the covenant's the same since it's

since grace is dispensed the same way or in a different way, but in a different time period or a different

dispensation, so they flatten it out.

So they'll say since the grace is.

The same, the covenant's the same.

Right.

Right.

Right.

Yeah.

So and then what what what what most modern day reformed Baptists

will do is is they'll take that covenant theology and they'll and they'll

basically add on to it believers baptism and I wanna say with the

Presbyterians that that that doesn't work and I know there's a lot you know like there's really

good faithful Baptist reformed Baptist brothers who are making an argument that it

fits and I'm not saying that it doesn't you know that the confession doesn't allow for it, but I'm telling you that it

doesn't work that if that view of covenant theology was true,

this guy right here would not be a Baptist.

I would be a Presbyterian right and so what we're arguing

for is that there is no establishment of the covenant of grace in Genesis

chapter three Presbyterian covenant theology rest on the foundation.

The foundation being Genesis chapter three verses fourteen and fifteen

right and so in in every covenant that we see throughout the Old Testament, you have

a do this and live and then you and then there's a prohibition given and

by prohibition, I'm saying what not to do so you have to do this

and live and then you have the what not to do and then the what not to do if you disobey it could

either mean your life or it could mean that you're being removed from the land, which is why we

have the establishment of of of sacrifices right so

like there's some sins that didn't call for taking your life.

There's and there's some sins that call for sacrifice, but there's some sins that

actually call for you being removed like like you see in in the

Abrahamic covenant.

If someone refuses to circumcise their male child, they were to be

removed from the land.

They would be cut off from the land and we see several times that well,

let's just take the captivity of Babylon.

They were supposed to have a Sabbath year right so so every seven years, the

seventh year they were not to work the land and they did and they disobeyed for

490 years.

So they were taken into captivity for 70 years, seven years.

I mean one year for every seven that they disobeyed they were cut off from the

land.

They were removed.

God removed them from the land for being disobedient right.

Any any comments on that?

Alright, so so you have to do this keep the law

and live and if you don't keep the law, the prohibition, you will be removed from the land.

So so so Adam had to fill the earth and multiply and he was not to eat of the

fruit of the ground.

I mean I mean he was not to eat of the fruit of the tree or he would die.

So you see the do this and live the prohibition.

If you eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you will die.

Noah was told it was a recreation covenant.

He was told to to to be fruitful and multiply.

He was not so here's the prohibition.

He was not to eat blood and and he and that the blood was not to be

shed for if you shed man's blood, your blood will be shed.

So that was the prohibition.

The covenant given to Abraham Abraham and I would add as well as his descendants were to walk upright before the

Lord prohibition was that they were to circumcise their male child

and if they didn't, they would be removed from the land.

Moses they were to keep the law in order to live and if they broke the law depending on what

the the consequences was of that law that they broke and they could either be put to death or

they could be removed from the land such as we just saw that took place in the seventh the Sabbath year.

The covenant the Davidic covenant God promised to raise up a a

son of David so that the covenant is that he's going to raise up a son of David and that this son would sit on the throne

forever.

If here comes the prohibition, he keeps the covenant.

The prohibition is is that if he breaks the law covenant, he would not sit on the throne forever.

Therefore, that means that he would die so son after son after son of David who did

not keep the law died and did not sit on the throne forever.

So so that's the the the ingredients that you have for when

God opposes a covenant you have to do this and live and then you would have the

prohibition that which not to do and if you do it, it comes with a punishment

and so what I want to do is is I want to look at Genesis chapter three verses fourteen and fifteen and see if we see

those.

Two things.

Would one of y 'all like to read that

which one.

Genesis three verses fourteen and fifteen.

I just want and I'll pay attention to see if you see the do this and live and see if you see the prohibition

because this is where this is where Presbyterian classical covenant theology.

This is their foundation.

So it should have those two things in here and if it doesn't have it, we should not hold to that

covenant.

Theology.

And Yahweh God said to the serpent because you have done this cursed are you more than any of the cattle and more

than every beast of the field on your belly.

You will go and dust you will eat and the all the days of your life and I will put an enmity between you and

the woman and between your seed and her seed.

He shall bruise you on the head and you.

Shall bruise him on the heel.

Did I mess it?

It's not there.

Is it?

It's not there.

Yeah, it's not there and so as Baptist, what we say is that this is a promise

only and that will lead into Baptist covenant theology of why we say it's a promise

only.

I know I've been talking for a while.

So if one of you guys want to take the reins from there, no, I think I.

Think you did a good job.

So you would say that that classical covenant theology with the Baptist mindset.

That's what typically is met with when somebody says they believe in Baptist covenantalism right

and then what you expressed right there would be typically defined in the term of 1689

federalism.

That would be the distinct, which I think is the correct.

That's that's Baptist covenant theology.

What you just perfectly explained there.

It's it's it's more than I don't know.

I I feel like the covenant theology person that is a is

believing in classic covenant theology.

They're using all the arguments that dispensationalists would use in in why not to baptize your baby

right, whereas the 1689 Federalist is going to have a much more robust argument for why you

shouldn't baptize a baby and I think that's because they they can't

draw from covenant theology to explain why it would be improper to impose a sign of a covenant

onto a child that is not believing it.

So that's just that's just something that came to my mind as you were talking on that Jeff right.

So what's.

The what would be the what would be the difference of the distinction?

I don't know you guys know the answer to this, but the distinction between who is in the covenant you

know in Presbyterian theology or covenant theology versus who is in the

covenant in Baptist covenant theology.

There's a.

Huge distinction there.

The Presbyterian would look at the old covenants and say look there were children all throughout this covenant that

that were included in this.

They were given signs.

They were included in the community.

They were included in the worship.

They were included in the meals.

They were included in the festivals.

They were included and so on and so forth and therefore they were covenant members, which is correct.

They were covenant members.

They were born in the nation of Israel, but all those things were so first of all they were born into a covenant of

works.

They had a yoke upon their back to obey God based off of him imposing commands upon them.

So this child was not born into a position of grace.

They were born into a position of obedience to God.

So you're saying that so they.

They weren't they weren't born into a position of favor, but yet they were still born

in the covenant of it was a nation.

Yeah, they were covenant members of that covenant.

They.

Were born into and so the nation only right like this is not

salvific.

It's it's nation only and those covenants that.

They were being born into they then would receive the sign after they were born into him and that would

be proper.

If you were in any covenant, you should receive the sign of that covenant and so in those days they were they were national

covenants being made with the purpose of the future promised seed that would come and so

that comes about through procreation and protecting a nation protecting communities coming about protecting the line of

David right all these things that would fit to to bring about the Messiah and now now that the

Messiah has come now the Messiah has died and rose again on the third day.

Now the covenant of grace you enter by being born again and that's the

message of Jesus Christ.

You must be born again or else you cannot enter into the kingdom of God in Israel.

You could be born physically into that physical kingdom and Jesus is saying no the kingdom that those

things were always pointing towards you have to be born again into and that's where a Baptist would say

that that comes along with a profession of faith and just like the old covenants that you would be born

and then receive a sign.

You must be born again and then receive a sign.

It's that continuity between both both the old and the new covenants the continuity of covenantal language period

right where I would say that a Presbyterian what they are doing is essentially

would be the equivalent of somebody trying to circumcise a child while inside the womb of their.

Mother before they're born.

Absolutely because if you look.

At Romans chapter 8 verse 9 at the end of that verse 9b it says.

But if anyone does not have the spirit of Christ he does not belong to him and so if a

person belongs to him only those who are in Christ who are believing who have been converted are the ones that

should receive the sign baptism versus somebody who is Presbyterian

would say it's presumptive.

You know that they're.

Yet.

Is there a blessing to be born of two believing parents?

Absolutely you know.

But is it a guarantee?

Yeah.

But is it a guarantee?

No.

So we.

Would wait.

Yep yeah statistics prove that right?

Statistics show that the child that is born in a Christian household is more likely

to have faith in Christ right.

And so there's obviously a ordinary means yeah and a benefit that God

providentially uses with bringing his elect to himself but that a

child that is born in a Christian household if they are not born again they are not members of the covenant of grace.

They should not receive the sign.

So in the.

Same way when you think of in the Old Testament when you think of the the the nation itself there were people in

that nation who were believing and had faith in the promise and the people who didn't believe within

that nation were reaping the benefits of their belief were reaping the benefits of

of having peace.

You know you look at judges you know all the way through it and it talks about that they had peace and then they you know they

fell off they they went around the route and and but because of the nation

not everybody who was was was believing they were still reaping the benefits of of

of being part of the believers in.

In the nation itself.

Yeah yeah yeah absolutely the God's covenant kingdom people in the

old covenant were physical descendants of Abraham right if you are a physical descendant

Abraham you know you were born into that covenant right, but that

doesn't mean that you have the faith of Abraham.

We find out in Galatians that that God's people are those that have the faith of

Abraham right the nation of Israel was set aside like if you just go back to Galatians

chapter three, he talks about putting enmity between the the seed of the Serpent

and the seed of the woman and so we see that the seed of the woman is the seed of the woman

is passed on to Abraham.

The promise here that we see is the promise of the gospel that that that the seed

of the woman is going to bruise the head of the of the Serpent while only bruising his

heel.

Now in hindsight, we know that this is speaking about what took place in the death

burial resurrection ascension of Jesus Christ right his

triumphant over his how do I say it triumphancy over I don't know I think I just made up

a word over Satan right, but that seed that it's speaking about is

passed to to Abraham right Abraham is told that that he's that that that

from him there's going to come a seed that would bless the nations and also

inherit the land and then we see it passed on through the line of

Israel finding its fulfillment in David right this this seed

and so when we're talking about the earthly descendants of Abraham.

That covenant was made to bring about this seed all the other

nations around you could probably say is the

offspring of the serpent right.

They constantly were trying to destroy the nation of Israel pollute it in such a

way that this one seed that would come to bless the nations would not

be able to.

To happen and then you see in John chapter eight Jesus even calls the nation of Israel

like I I think at this time the the seed of the serpent has done protruded

into the nations because he calls them sons of the devil.

Yeah.

Well, like there's some things taking place in scripture that if you're honest, you have to say yeah, this is

this is getting weird right like something's going on here.

So.

When so when you have some that say well, we're still looking for a land a physical land.

What would a Baptist covenant theology person say who holds to all millennialism be

what is the land promise?

Has it not been fulfilled?

So I I wanna.

Just pause there and just make mention of something on well, there's there's several places I wanna go.

I was gonna go back a little bit further, but let's talking on that topic right there.

That's where the historical post millennialist and maybe the more modern post millennialist

disagrees on things.

I I think that they maybe haven't worked out completely a historical post millennialist.

That's why they would say that that thousand years is yet to be still future for us because they would see those those

promised land promises.

They would see the the age promises the the the long longevity of life.

They would see the promise of a child putting their hand into a den and not being bit by the Viper all these kind of this this

these things are being talked about.

They would say that that's all future through the advancement of the gospel and so that land is future.

Whereas I think a lot of the modern post millennialists are borrowing from some of the the

metaphorical language that I'm all millennialists would hold to and saying no, we're we're in the

land right now.

I think the post millennialists would say well, we're in the land right now.

We're at peace right now that the child puts his hand in the pit of the Viper and doesn't bit we come.

We're born again children crying Abba father.

We're we're not we're not able to die.

You see what I'm saying like we we would sometimes apply those things in those ways.

I think post millennialists are borrowing from an all millennialist, but they're still holding to that the whole world is going to be taken over or

majority of it's going to be Christianized and so the all millennialist would though would say that today

we find pastor.

We we find the land because we're in Christ.

We're seated with Christ in heavenly places.

I'm in Idaho.

Tom is in Texas.

Haps is in California.

Jeff is in Tennessee, right?

We are in a kingdom.

We are kingdom brothers same kingdom yet.

We live miles apart from each other miles miles apart from each other.

We don't see each other face to face.

We can't see this kingdom around us that that in the in the same sense like a people in Israel would be able to go to

their neighbor and be like, oh yeah, you're part of the same kingdom right?

We we this is a kingdom that transcends just the physical.

You see what I'm trying to say, but it's a kingdom that you have to be born again in order to enter.

And we can't be trying to make it is taken over the world.

It is absolutely like like there's this kingdom is in Africa.

This kingdom is in China.

This kingdom is all around the.

World.

You mean it's not just this little space in Israel where it's not just that little section to the Euphrates and.

It's cut off and that's that's this is this is the great thing.

About the Galatians three.

It says the promises were made to the seed, not the seeds referring to many, but rather referring to one and that seed is

Christ.

Those promises the land promises were made to Jesus and so when we look and see what Jesus

accomplished on the cross, according to Ephesians two, he broke down the barrier wall and Jew and Gentile

is included in the Commonwealth.

What was the Commonwealth?

It was the land baby.

It was the kingdom.

Yeah.

Jesus makes it clear.

He says that the meek his people shall inherit the land.

No, that's not the land.

It's the.

Earth.

Yeah.

And and and also it expands it expands.

And also going from how Israel, you know the the old covenant promises

that they get to inherit the land.

Well, Christ was the perfect Israel.

He came and fulfilled what Israel couldn't do.

He came to fulfill the law.

The land promises everything.

And so now, you know, according to you know Daniel seven as he ascended, you know the

one like the the son of man ascending to the I mean it came into the the ancient of days to him was given dominion

and you go to second Psalms chapter two and he goes,

there's a second.

Psalms.

What?

I mean Psalms chapter two.

Psalms chapter two.

Oh man, that's not in my Bible.

Oh, it's not.

Oh, wait a.

Second.

I gotta I gotta second recitations.

No, it's just ask.

Me and I will I will make the nations your heritage so that um and

the ends of the earth, your possession, you know, and and and so uh just one more if I could just quote

one more thing and and the reason why we will look outside.

We're like, oh, look at everything that's going on and all this and that will Hebrews chapter uh chapter uh

two um says uh in um eight.

I'll just bring it right here.

Uh um now in putting everything in the subjection to him, he left nothing outside

his control at present.

We do not yet see everything in subjection to him.

So, we we we don't see everything in subjection to him but he is ruling and reigning right now.

Yes.

And as god's new covenant people, we are to take the gospel to the nation.

That's that's that's how that the kingdom is is blossoming and everything but not not

in the sense of like uh post millennial where you know, everybody is,

you know, it's gonna everything's gonna be.

Christianized and stuff but in the same way, would you guys agree with this?

I mean, because I mean, when you when you think of post millennial um and you think of let's say Christian

nationalism.

Yeah, I said it.

Um when when you think of the benefits of of having parents that are

believers, if you think of the benefits back in the old covenant, when when uh when the nation that

everybody in that nation reap benefits of the believing uh of the believing people.

Um shouldn't it in the same way uh our society be affected

by um by people who are going out and sharing the gospel?

Shouldn't shouldn't there be a?

Yeah.

Right.

So, we would definitely say that and and going back here, I just wanted to put that in before I lost it but I would definitely

say that the land promises were expanded.

Um in Romans 413, it says, for the promise of Abraham or to his seed that he would be the heir of the

world was not through the law but through the righteousness of faith.

So, it wasn't just a little and also.

In Hebrews, Hebrews chapter eleven beginning in verse fourteen is speaking of Abraham,

right?

And it says uh for people who speak thus make it clear that if they were speak

uh seeking a homeland, if if they had been thinking of that land

from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return but as it is, they

desired a better country that is a heavenly one.

They were not looking to a physical earthly land.

Therefore, god is not ashamed to be called their god for he has prepared for them a city

and that city is the kingdom of god which is here but it's not.

Yet.

Yeah, Susan Salter just said it right here.

She made a comment.

It says, ultimately, the land is the new heavens and the new earth.

Absolutely.

Yes.

But it's been inaugurated now.

Yeah.

Jesus came like like it's here but when he comes back, it's going to fall on earth,

right?

Right.

So, it's not coming like this like like let's say this is the earth and this is the kingdom like it's

not coming to where it's slowly developing to where we can see it.

It's here and when he comes, it's going to fall.

Yeah.

Then, when it when he comes and it.

Falls, it's going to be real life.

Tangible. Yeah. Yes. Yeah.

But I'm not I'm here but it's it's you can't see it unless.

You're born again.

Yeah.

I I was just going to say I do appreciate what Tom said though because there is tangible things like that's that's where an all

millennialist like post millennialism grabs this thought of we're the only ones that do things in the community.

We're the only ones trying to really trying to make a difference for the kingdom of god where no an all millennialist should be.

If they're not doing it, they're not doing the work of an evangelist.

They're not doing that which they're called on to do and that's a failure as a Christian, not as them as an all millennialist.

An all millennialist though says, we're ambassadors here.

Yeah.

Right.

We're ambassadors here like we're doing the work for the kingdom that the people in this world can't even see.

They hate us and and yet we know that.

There's one who overcame.

Of course, you got bad apples in all the groups, right?

Absolutely.

You know, you got the the the premillennial dispensationalist who are who are hunkered down in a bunker.

Absolutely.

Waiting for the rapture every every 30 minutes.

There's a new prophecy.

Worshiping Israel.

Yeah.

Yeah.

You got the all millennialist who are saying everything is spiritual and he's rolling inside the heart.

No, you need to take it out to the streets and then you got the post millennialist who are trying to

you know, establish God's kingdom right now in such a way that it's actually if it comes

true, it's heretical.

Yeah.

And.

God's using every single one of those for his glory by the way.

You know, let's not even if it's for him to laugh and I.

Would say also, I would say also that that's why I think post millennialism only consistently works

within Presbyterianism.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Totally theology.

And the reason I say that is because Presbyterians could say that their children are a part of a

covenant even though they may not be saved, right?

They they have this view that we can if we expand the the Christian, we

we we we expand the community.

We expand the the the the overarching covenant that is around us.

We can bring other people into this covenant relationship with God yet they're not saved and that's what post millennialists are trying to

do.

We can bring Christianity in this way and bring it to people even though they might not be saved and whereas the Baptist,

you have to be born again like you you cannot like a Presbyterian.

Would say that their child who has been baptized as an infant is a Christian until they prove

themselves not to be.

Yeah.

And we would say, no, our child is not a Christian until they're born again, profess Jesus

Christ and you know.

And then at that.

New birth, they are baptized.

Which happens to be the same means of grace that God has saved everybody.

You are born again.

You place faith in the in Jesus Christ.

Jesus imputes his righteousness onto you.

He paid for your sins 2000 years ago.

That's been the the means of this taking place every single time every single time and so it

extends to the child and then it extends to the the elderly person that's on their deathbed.

You must be born again in order to enter into the kingdom of God.

It's not through you being born in my family and be giving you the sign making you a covenant member.

That's not the means of you being saved.

It's that you're born again into a covenant and therefore you receive a sign of the covenant.

Right.

It's it's one of them.

I.

Think Jeff hit it on the head earlier when he had he had talked about the covenant in the Old Testament was made with the nation in

that nation.

There was a mixed congregation.

It was mixed in the new covenant.

We are not a mixed congregation.

Only those who have been taught the blood of Christ.

Yeah.

All one.

Yes.

So, indivisible church, indivisible church will see, you know, not everybody in the visible church and and

so Presbyterians will say, we'll see.

That's the exact same thing.

No, it's not.

It's not the same thing because only those who are professing believers are are able to be

counted as sons and daughters of God.

You know, and I think.

The backlash on that from their, you know, what they'll say is, well, then why raise up your kids in the ways of the.

Lord?

You know, because the Bible tells us why.

Yeah.

You know, it's like, I mean, I can give you ten or twenty reasons why, right?

I mean, yeah.

I mean, for a simple reason, Jesus says, if you love me, you'll obey my commands.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Alright.

Well, Jesus also is the god of the Old Testament.

I don't know if a lot of y 'all know that like there's not two different gods.

They're not the they're not god, the father of the Old Testament and god, the son of the New Testament and god, the Holy Spirit of the church age,.

Right?

That's not.

I mean, there's not two brides.

There's not two brides.

There's one bride, right?

One.

Yeah, there's.

Only one bride, right?

And god doesn't have a good cop back or not, right?

And so and so, you know, whenever god tells the his covenant

people to raise up their child and to teach them, right?

We as Christians who who have families are to raise up our children and teach them god's way,

right?

We wanna be missionaries to our kids.

We wanna raise up our kids knowing who god is and catechizing them, right?

The gospel is god's power for salvation.

Why would we not preach the gospel to our kids?

Why would we not call our kids to our faith and repentance,.

Right?

But you know what?

Go ahead.

But you know, I think that what it comes down to is is still it's

um saving faith.

You know, like, I mean, just because I raised my kids up in the way of the lord, if the lord

hasn't called them unto himself, uh um the the um

just because like if it was a Presbyterian brought into a covenant promise, you know, the family, uh you

know, you're baptized within the church into the church into this covenant promise and stuff like that.

But uh I can honestly say I have a son that was brought up Presbyterian

baptized.

I went all all that believed all that and and he does not believe, right?

You know, I've heard.

That at all.

Yeah, I've heard Doug Wilson say basically in describing covenant theology and Presbyterianism

would, you know, this this band represents this is the sign and seal of of my marriage, this wedding band

but it doesn't mean that I'm going to be faithful.

This is this is Doug Wilson's position and I could take off this wedding band anytime I want and not be faithful

and and but but you can't do that with Christianity.

You can't do that in the new covenant.

I mean, if you were, you were never part of the new covenant if you were never born again.

So, those people who leave or have never been a part of the covenant, they were never.

In the first place.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I would say that, you know, like this is this is kind of like a sneak peek and I won't go all the way through it with you but in the old covenant

like you know, like speaking with continuity and discontinuity like like I would say that our position is more

faithful than the Presbyterian's position.

The old covenant had a kingdom people, an earthly, I mean, had a kingdom people and uh entrance into the kingdom, a covenant

sign, a meal on the law and I'll just stop right there because I can keep going.

The new covenant has a kingdom people and entrances to the kingdom, a covenant sign, a meal in the law, right?

It's just the difference is the kingdom people from the old covenant as I mentioned earlier are the physical descendants of Abraham

and the new covenant, the kingdom people are the spiritual descendants of Abraham.

Those who have the faith of Abraham.

The entrance into the old covenant was birth.

The entrance into the new covenant is the new birth.

You must be born again.

The covenant sign was circumcision and the uh the new covenant sign is baptism, right?

You didn't like Brady was saying you didn't enter into a woman's womb and circumcise the child

before it exit the womb nor do you baptize of

someone before they've been born again, right?

The meal was Passover.

So, you know, so if your child had been born into the covenant, you when Passover came,

even if it was an infant, you would at least, you know, get a little meat on your hand and rub it on the baby's

gums, right?

That baby was a partaker in the meal.

So, in the new covenant, if you've been born again, baptized, you partake in the meal.

The old covenant people are under a law.

So, to the new covenant, you know, whenever you're a Christian, Jesus says, this

is the Bible.

Jesus says, if you love me, you'll keep my commandments.

First John chapter three chapter two verse three says, this is how we know that we've come to know him if we keep his commandments,

right?

And so, the continuity is there.

The discontinuity is is that the new covenant is built on greater promises

and plus we can go all throughout the the promises of of Jeremiah and in Hebrews which talks

about the new covenant and how the old covenant is vanishing away.

Yeah.

How can they be the same thing if there is one is vanishing away?

That's right.

Second Corinthians chapter three clearly says that.

You know, the old covenant is is vanishing away.

We are we're the ministers of the new covenant and and you can't you can't bring both of them together.

You can't bring the old covenant and new covenant together and and think that I mean, that's what cults do.

Well, and II think go ahead.

Sorry.

No, no, no.

II was just going, you know, anyways, I'm sorry.

Yeah.

No, it's good stuff.

The thing that blows my mind, the thing that I think a lot of Presbyterians fail to recognize is

why it was a physical kingdom in the Old Testament.

Put yourself in the shoes of Eve and she hears the curse pronounced to the serpent

that the seed is going to crush his head, right?

Here, she has Cain and Abel and she she's hopeful.

She's had a and she's like, maybe that's what it is.

Abel dies.

Abraham.

But how did Abel die?

Through the seed of a serpent, right?

He was, he was killed, right?

And he didn't rise again.

You go, you fast forward and it's this continual promise of a seed.

Abraham, you're going to have a seed.

There's this physical part of what the old covenant was was because it was bringing about Jesus.

They were longing for Jesus.

Yeah, yeah.

The whole point of when it says that they were longing for a kingdom that was heavenly.

They were longing for the for the heavenly kingdom in Hebrews is that they were longing for the seed that would return them to

garden of Eden to bring them back to the tree of life and seed after

seed after seed that seed died and died and died and died and

died and that's why when Jesus dies, all the disciples scatter.

Another seed died but then he rose from the grave.

It's it's not a physical.

It's not needing to be a physical kingdom in the sense of bringing about a seed again.

That's done.

It's done.

Yeah, it's done.

That was the whole point of those old covenants was to bring about the seed and that's happened.

Yeah. Yeah. Amen. Good stuff. Yeah.

Alright. Alright.

Now,.

How does all millennialism fit in to Baptist covenant

theology.

And we'll get into the the interpretation of revelation

after this.

So, it's biblical.

Yeah.

So, I get that but I think our listeners are going to want a little more.

Explanation.

So, I might get this mixed up here.

I might get this mixed up but in Matthew three, I think it's Matthew three sixteen.

It says that Jesus came into the city of Galilee preaching the gospel of preaching the preaching the gospel saying the kingdom of God is

hand repent and believe in the gospel and then in Mark, it says that the the kingdom of heaven

is near repent and believe in the gospel.

Mark 115.

I believe it is and so that kingdom of heaven kingdom of God is interchangeable according to the gospel account writers.

What kingdom was at hand?

So, first of all, what kingdom was at hand?

If it was at hand, was it future for us still or is it a current reality?

Was it current reality when Jesus walking when he said it was at hand?

Is that kingdom going to be replaced with a thousand -year kingdom in the future as as a premill person would

say because Jesus says the kingdom at hand.

So, there's where I'm going with this is that the only logical conclusion is is that

Christ as our mediator, Christ as our king, he inaugurated a kingdom

at his death, burial, and resurrection specifically at his resurrection.

What kingdom did he inaugurate?

What kingdom was at hand and do we think that it's going to be replaced with another another new kingdom in the

future which then will also have an end and will be replaced with another another new kingdom.

You see what I'm saying?

Like, yeah, yeah.

That doesn't work.

That doesn't work.

The kingdom that the the the consummation of the kingdom of the consummation of the new heavens and the new earth in the

future is going to be when all the kingdom people that Christ died for in his

inaugurated kingdom when he inaugurated the kingdom, all the people he died for have come to

live in Jesus, have come to have faith in Jesus, and that therefore, it's not a different kingdom in

the in the eternity future.

It's just all the people are now realized together one another fellowshipping and worshiping the god who

saved them.

Yeah,.

Like in in in the prophecy of Daniel, the son of man come going up to the ancient of days.

He's given a kingdom, a dominion, and it's everlasting and all the nations are

are going to come to him, right?

Yep.

And at the the resurrection, it's the same kingdom but but but Jesus

hands it over to the father.

That kingdom never ends.

It never ends and that's the kingdom that we're saying is

here but it's not yet and at the resurrection, it comes.

It's in.

The same way in the same way in Ephesians chapter two, we are seated with him in the heavenly places in

Christ Jesus so that in the ages to come, he might show us surpassing riches towards right kindness.

So, yes, I'm here in Texas.

You're in Idaho, California, Tennessee, but yet we're seated with him in the heavenly places already and

not yet right now.

Right.

Now, we worship the same god that we cannot see right now.

There's going to be a time though where Tom, Jeff, me, we get to worship together.

The one god that we will see.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Sorry.

And we have that.

We have that that now and not yet where all tribes and tongues and you know, people

are are all flowing to god right now.

We we see that in our our congregations and you know, one day, that's the

temple of his.

Yeah, he is tabernacling tabernacling with us right now.

But one day, it it's it's a now and not yet but what one day, we're going to physically be walking with him.

In the garden, you know?

Hey, Holly and Anthony just want to say hi.

Saw him at the at the Open Air Theology Conference.

That's right.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's a good couple right there.

Oh, yeah.

I love them.

Yeah.

And everybody at Open Air was was fantastic, man.

Oh, yeah.

We were fantastic.

Me and Susan.

That's right. Laying flowers.

Great.

He's not good online.

Yeah, he's not good online but he's a nice guy in person.

Yeah, he's a he's said I look like Kevin Hayes' dad.

Oh, poor Kevin.

Alright.

So, let's look into the book of Revelation real quick and let's.

Can I can I say something.

Quick first and I think it's important to set something up.

Yeah, absolutely.

No. No.

Okay.

As the guest.

The fourth.

Beetle.

The fourth beetle.

So, when we talk about this age and the age to come, I think this is important thing especially for the premillennialists

and everything.

Yeah, this right.

Here gets you into some trouble.

Yes.

Well, no because.

They they know who I am and and and you know, so hold on.

Let me let me go ahead and qualify this saying number one.

Yes, I go to do it to a dispensational church.

Both of my two of my elders go have graduated from the master seminary

and they are the most loving guys I know.

I mean they're it's a wonderful church that I belong to.

We do disagree on eschatology.

That being said, we agree.

Nothing nothing wrong with that at all.

Yeah.

We we we have a great right.

Right.

So, that being said, here we go.

So, this age is always referring to always referring to this present course of the human

human age.

Whenever the Bible mentions this age, it's talking about temporal things.

It's talking.

About where things die.

I used to not agree.

Jeff used to disagree with this.

I'm glad he was back when he was a.

Postmill.

Yeah, I got him. I got him.

I disagree with.

Because I was hardcore preterist.

Right.

Yeah.

So,.

But that's pretty hard.

So, but when this when the coming of Christ comes, that's at the consummation of things.

When temporal gives way to when mortality and death give way to immortality.

When corruptible gives way to incorruptible.

When when when things that die, you know, so when Christ comes back and we are raised from the

dead, all raised, you know, the judgment, he comes back to raise the dead, judge the earth and makes all things

new.

There's no gap.

When Christ comes back, everything is consummated, you know, and and so, and there's so

many verses that we could go to talking about what happens on the last day, you know, talking about the

resurrection of the of the believers and the unbelievers happen on the last day and I have

the verses here.

I don't know if you guys want to go through them or not, but I just wanted to make that point here that

you know, to think that there's a millennium, you know, in in a pre millennial,

a pre millennium when the church is raptured off the earth and there's going and when Christ comes

back, we are in our glorified bodies and we're going to be on the earth with

people in corruptible bodies makes absolutely no sense.

That is that is a biblical impossibility that and we say it and when we pray it all the time that

when you know, when we are when we're saved, we're saved from the power of sin, but there's going to be

day there a day when we are saved from the presence of sin and and that's going to be the day when

we have our glorified bodies, but in the millennial kingdom, that's not the case.

You are surrounded by people that die.

You are surrounded by people that sin and lie and cheat and during this millennium, there are believers and people

in glorified bodies next door neighbor is eating and having sex with his wife and et cetera, et cetera, et

cetera makes absolutely no sense.

So I had to get that get that out.

That's right.

Yeah.

All right.

So.

Book of Revelation.

Brayden and myself would would argue

tooth and nail about how this book should be interpreted.

Even as an all meal, I would have argued that this is mostly

past and he was like everything is spiritual right.

You mean and listen, listen, if if y 'all don't believe me, listen, me and him would

argue like like if y 'all don't think him and I argue like like if y 'all could

be a fly on the wall sometimes.

Yeah.

Like even yesterday, we were arguing on the first time and we still gotta finish that.

One.

I was yelling at Jeff about first John yesterday and a church member of mine pulls up

in the parking lot for Bible study and gets out of the car.

I'm like, Jeff, I gotta let you.

Go.

Yeah.

And this this church member watched me yelling at.

Jeff for a solid minute before I could let you go.

I was like.

Shut up.

Oh, there just got lost.

Habs got raptured.

Yeah.

So me and Brayden, me and Brayden argue like like for real argue.

Yeah.

And and so we were going through the book of Revelation on how it should be interpreted and

and it turns out that both of us were wrong.

I was wrong.

Brayden, was you.

Wrong?

I was a little less wrong but yeah.

Come on.

I was.

Wrong.

So and so we did coin a name for how we think the book of Revelation should be

interpreted and it's and it's it's the second part of the topic

and that is Baptist covenant idealism.

And and so the idealism here would be kind of modified.

So we're not saying that everything in the book of Revelation should be interpreted idealism.

But but the foundation of the interpretation should come from what we've been talking about

as in Baptist covenant theology.

What what.

And I I would just pause real fast and just say this came about one night after we were arguing

hardcore and something clicked in the text and we both started

bawling.

Yeah.

Just we were crying and glorifying God.

It was it.

We couldn't.

We couldn't.

No tears.

We stayed awake for like an hour just like marveling over this and I mean this is like at 1 o 'clock in the morning and we're like

okay we gotta go to bed at this point and then none of us look.

Asleep.

So this was.

Is this Revelation 119?

No.

Is this Revelation 11 whenever we started this but but

because I was arguing like like I was like chapter one tells us how to interpret it and he was like

just right here tells us how to interpret it and then next thing you know we we we were.

Reading this verse and we came about what what what it came about because we were discussing

when was the book of Revelation written and since Jeff was that partial preterist that hardcore partial preterist

he was saying it had been written before because there's a mention of a temple and so then we started digging deep into all this language around that

and all of a sudden it clicked and it was it was awesome but so before we even

introduced maybe what that is I would just qualify these things so idealism is typically seen as a very

allegorical means of interpreting.

It's that it's the idea of both good and evil in the book of Revelation continually at

war from the beginning of the Christ's first coming to the second coming is typically just a really general sense

of idealism and so like everything in the book of Revelation is just spread over

the entire last 2000 years together always continually happening.

Redemptive historical modified idea or no yeah redemptive historical modified

idealism is the position of G .K. Bill.

That's the position I used to hold to and it's still really similar to what I hold to now but that was

more that there could be particular instances where you could point back to 70

AD or things that happen in time as a fulfillment of those things but it still wasn't

super clear in a lot of the ways that it answered it and so that's that's where we're it's

still idealist because it's still it's still taking the symbols for a book of Revelation that it's talking about

and it's applying them in the way that the book actually tells us to.

Apply them.

And I'll yeah because when the Bible when the book of Revelation when it gives you a symbol, if you keep

reading it interprets the symbol and that's what Braden was missing from his idealism that

it wasn't given him.

He wasn't seeing the interpretation and I was seeing everything as as past events

and maybe some of this could be coming true.

Right and I think that you were also missing a little bit too.

So the the redemptive historical modified idealism also really plays into the seven recapitulations that are

found in the book of Revelation as well.

And so we we still see that.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yes.

Yep you did.

But it was all placed on 70 AD or majority of it was placed on 70 AD.

Right.

Yeah.

And so Braden.

What's what's the difference real quick in idealism and modified historical of idealism?

So like in.

So just to give you an.

Example so Matthew chapter 24 a classical idealist would say that that chapter

should be totally explained.

In fact I from what I can remember reading the commentary from John Calvin I would classify him as a classical

idealist because of his his interpretation of it.

He would say things like these these things that we see that are taking place in there that has always been taking place

since the first coming to the second coming of Christ.

All of Matthew 24 is always taking place whereas a modified idealist would say well well

chapter 24 verses 1 to verse 32 that was 70 AD and then

the rest of the chapter is what's taking place throughout the rest of time and so that

and they would they would look at like chapter 21 and they would say you see there's highlights of different parts of this

story that are taking place in these different chapters in chapter 24 there's just a major point of the highlight is

focused on chapter or in 70 is is focused on 70 AD.

So so I would I would say a modified idealist finds more particulars within history mostly

falling around 70 AD.

Which so I I would say what the big thing I would say that leads

into the interpretation that Jeff and I hope Tom you would agree with it too other than myself have come to in the book of

Revelation is that we have to understand that it is written to John while they're

still members that are proclaiming the old covenant there's still Jews and Judaizers and

these people that he's fighting against that was very culturally contextually important for us to understand the book of Revelation

but yet he's also explaining what the new covenant is and and how that plays out

overall of course of history throughout throughout the first coming to the second coming of Christ and so the big part is

right yep yep and so the big part is is in Revelation 119 it's it's right the things that

that you have seen the things that are and the things that will be right and so that's that

recapitulation of what was was Christ's death what what was accomplished

what is is what's taking place for John in that day and can be drawn out to us today and then

what will be is what's future for John and what's future for us.

As well in that um and so coming second coming.

Um personally persecution.

Second coming.

Uh rapture i mean not rapture.

Well it is right.

Second coming there we go a different rapture.

Well i said rapturing up here let me get them back on the screen.

Did you really appear.

Yeah well yeah.

They didn't want him.

Hey heaven heaven's pretty cool.

God says hi lazarus.

I was i was uh listening and um you know i i think that that when we go to

revelation i mean chapter one.

He i i mean the first verse or so.

You you have god i know that you interrupted me.

Jesus.

No no no.

God gives a message to jesus that gives it to an angel that symbolizes it to

john and john explains it to the the to the church that that's the all of

revelation.

Right there right.

So.

Well well you're not getting into the the meat to what we was talking about is that we're.

You know like there's seven recapitulations.

I never say that word right.

So please forgive me but but it's the idea that that the what was

is speaking of what happened to jesus what is from john's writing all up

until the second coming well nearing the second coming and what will be will be the

persecutions the release of the dragon from the uh from being bound

and and the uh second coming rapture of the church so on and so forth.

And so when you read the recapitulations with that understanding we would say

that's where the covenant theology comes from.

And that's what i was going to say.

So i was.

I was reading this as an idealist and an all -millennialist and i wasn't reading it as a 1689

federalist.

And as soon as you and i were talking about this all of a sudden the hermeneutic that we've been applying like we've been talking about every other

hour every other book in the bible that's so clear that teaches this all the centers would.

Define the the hermeneutic.

For everybody it would be.

Um just that that that looking continual looking at the covenant of grace playing out

in the world right.

And and maybe that that wouldn't be the the fine tuning of all the hermeneutic with that because that's obviously looking to christ and

and letting uh the book explain itself letting clear interpret the unclear.

All those hermeneutics are still at play.

But the big part is is that that we're now recognizing the

way that the world will look at those that are the covenant of grace members i think

is a big part of it and so.

Do you want to give an example.

So yeah.

So what would you would you say that we're um looking at basically through the lens.

Of of christ.

Absolutely okay.

Yeah that was covenant framework that that there was a a

nation that was right to bring about a the physical offspring god's

son son of god son of david son of man who received the kingdom.

That is here but it's not yet.

And then and then in the recapitulations you see those events what has

happened what's happening and what will happen and unfold into the last couple of chapters

where it really focuses in on that what will be.

Right you see what i'm saying and that so that gk biel book does a great job at explaining some verses it it

fantastic love the book.

But then there's some areas that where where it seems like he's just answering in a very general and i would i

want to hopefully one day i can sit down i want to interview gk biel because i really enjoy his work on that.

It seems like he then just kind of is more gray in some of the areas where he's interpreting things.

And that was always a frustrating part of it.

And all of a sudden now when when looking at that book of revelation and seeing it now with those

baptist covenant theology framework to it it's all of a sudden okay that's what john

is getting at with this.

That's what that's what's being spoken of in here and it applies and answers those difficult those difficult verses that i

couldn't answer before as just a modified idealist.

And so that's i don't know it's going to be hard to just generalize it without looking at specific examples and i don't know if we

have time for.

That tonight.

So yeah yeah.

To real quick answer dawson's question.

Um and i'm sure that and i'm not sure if i'm having the right answer for you but but

it is an answer that this that what happened when christ was was uh what happened when

christ was raised from the dead.

And those other people were raised that could have been a shadow of what's going to

happen.

And and we don't know for sure if their resurrection was like his resurrection meaning

uh that they had uh glorified bodies that descended into heaven.

The scripture doesn't ever fully flesh that out.

It could have been a resurrection such as uh uh lazarus to where they had to

die again.

But but but i would definitely right now lean toward that.

That was a a foreshadow of something greater to come at

the resurrection of the dead.

So i wouldn't say that oh yeah it was the resurrection of the dead but i think it was pointing to

something that's going to happen right.

That's how.

That's how powerful his resurrection was that others rose with him

and so when he comes and the dead will.

Rise in christ.

I mean that's just yeah yeah.

So maybe before we get off here let's give them a little taste of how.

So.

So let's look at a recapitulation in here where you can see the what was.

There's several places that is it is the y 'all know.

There's seven right.

Yeah obviously john.

John loves sevens.

Just go read john.

Absolutely yeah.

And i don't know.

Maybe we should give them the example of the revelation 11 one that we talked about a little bit with the temple and all that.

Or if we.

Should talk about.

Well yeah 11 and 20 would be great.

Yeah well see i i'm fine with 11 and i'm fine with 20.

Um maybe not i'm just i'm fine with doing both of them right now.

I don't know how long y 'all have to to talk.

I ain't got nothing but i gotta take pictures of some bibles and stuff like that later but i was thinking

eventually we'll do a podcast where we just compare the tape but if you think we've got time right now.

I'm up for it.

Should should we maybe give just the example of what kind of opened our eyes with with this and then

maybe we can come back and do another time where we go further in depth in the book of.

Revelation then.

Yeah yeah because you know like simply because

in the name of the uh the title of this brayden was thinking we were just going.

To be in the book i thought we were just doing revelation yeah.

And and then i had no idea was even going to touch revelation like you asked tom like it was like

five minutes before we're going on him and i are arguing.

About the topic yelling yelling at each other.

Yeah.

Yeah yeah and so i mean

like like i'm fine either way i ain't got nothing to do.

I'm sure no one else in the facebook world.

Yeah i don't know right i don't know i i'd kind of look like a little more time on it.

I like brayden's idea yeah.

Well let's just give them a sneak peek of the recapitulation and of

what we see.

So if you remember in chapter 1 verse 19 and i also want to point out so

real quick chapter 1 verse 19 he says.

Write what.

Write the things that you have seen those that are and those that are to take place.

Right.

And also was talking about symbols earlier.

So in this we're talking about how symbols are given interpretations.

And i think we need to go through the book of revelation and show a lot of those.

But just to wet your mouth right here he's talking about lamp stands.

And then you read in verse 20 it says.

Ask for the mystery of the seven stars that you saw my right hand and the seven golden lamp stands.

The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches and the

seven lamp stands are the seven churches.

So when you read the book of revelation and it mentions lamp stands your mind should say

churches.

The lamp stands are the churches.

Because the book of revelation defines that for us.

Yeah.

Yep.

And so whenever as you're reading through here and you see the word lamp stand or anything concerning with a candle

fire or whatever like it's speaking of that stand it's talking about the churches churches.

So when you hear a pre a pre -millennial say that after chapter chapter three the churches are not

mentioned.

Well it is mentioned but they're just.

Called the lamp stands.

So so one night so jeff and i were arguing right we were saying

temple was still standing.

Temple wasn't standing.

When was the book of revelation written.

And so we looked at revelation 11.

One then a measuring rod like a staff was given to me saying get up and measure the sanctuary of

god and the altar and those who worship in it.

I'll pause there for a moment.

And this is where jeff so jeff was like you see it had to have been written before 70 a .d.

It had to have been written 65 a .d before and you sort of like this had to have been when it was somewhere in.

That period which i still think it was written that early but i don't think it matters concerning the interpretation.

And this temple that it's talking about as the measuring is not the physical temple that was standing in 68 a .d.

Right.

Right.

Because i said jeff when is there any case in the new testament when it talks about the

sanctuary god the temple of god.

That it's not talking about the church and that's what i'm telling you.

Baptist covenant theology kicks in right.

So when he said that baptist covenant theology drop kicked me right in the face.

And you said wait hold on.

I think you said wait hold on.

You're right.

Like something along those lines.

Is what you said it like you.

It doesn't.

Every time it talks about the sanctuary it talks about the church.

And so so then it was jesus we are his body and we.

The church and we'll come back to verse one here in a moment.

But then you said so then then it says and leave out the court which is outside the sanctuary and do not measure it

for it has been given to the gentiles and they'll trample the holy city underfoot for 42 months.

And then i was like well i don't know.

And jeff was like well what does the outer sanctuary mean.

I was like i don't know.

And i think the gkbl this is where it doesn't go into as much detail as what baptist covenant

theology would answer this for us or covenant theology in general.

But we're saying that it's still baptist covenant theology.

Jeff said well john is the same author of the book of revelation as he is of

first john.

And he is of the gospel of john.

Yeah who had the appearance to be religious but really wasn't.

Who had the appearance of being a part of god's people.

But weren't pharisees.

The the pharisees the judaizers.

Those that weren't of the church.

Right.

They had the appearance to be a part of the temple.

But they're outside of the sanctuary.

They don't worship inside of it.

And they're trampled underfoot for 42 months now.

Pause.

There 42 months is used over and over and over again through this chapter in chapter 12.

And it's talking about the period between the first and second coming of christ.

And so this isn't talking about just the destruction of the 70 a .d.

It's included in that.

Right.

The temple and the jews and all these things have been persecuted by the gentiles.

They've been warring against that which has the appearance of being god's people.

But isn't 70 a .d included uh in it.

Um the point of this is going back to verse one.

What does a measurings rod.

Because the the court outside is not measured.

The court the the the sanctuary and those that worship in it are.

In the old testament it always talked about protection in the end of the book of revelation when

the the the measurements are given to the perfect exact dimension of what the new heavens the new earth is.

It's talking about divine protection.

And so again what is this book being written for the persecuted church.

The persecuted church has had judaizers come to it pharisees attacking it all these things that have the appearance of

the church but aren't the church.

John is saying in here church even though you're persecuted don't you worry.

You're divinely protected.

Yeah yeah those people out there those people outside that have the.

Appearance.

The dogs the dogs yeah they're gonna be.

Attacked by the gentiles and when you're even attacked you're.

Protected they aren't.

And you know what i think the end of revelation really sums everything up you know because he

said let the evil doers keep doing evil all this.

And that you know.

And and um and you know.

But what i i found like so encouraging and stuff was this was meant to be understood.

This isn't like what you had the like the dispensational pre -millennial set that had this progressive revelation

going on you know.

Like somehow in the 1800s they all they got this this new revelation of how to interpret

revelation and and uh like something new jesus is doing and stuff.

No no.

No he says at the very end of um of revelation he goes like this do not

seal up the prophecy of this book.

It's not like daniel where he said do seal it up for a time later on.

No no no.

This wasn't sealed up because it was meant to encourage us.

It was meant to be read yeah meant to be read and encourage the persecuted.

Church.

You know understood in a way.

It's a comfort.

Right.

Yes fully a book of comfort.

Man.

And so when you when we kept on reading these things we kept on seeing that take place.

And then we went to revelation chapter 12 and we see a woman being cared for.

And then in revelation chapter 17 there's a woman that's also in the wilderness but she's not being cared for and she's being

ravished by the beast that's sitting upon the many waters.

And the many waters is talked about as the nations the tribes the tongues and the peoples of the world that are not gods

and yet those are the ones that are ravishing this woman that's in the wilderness that just happens to be in the same appearance in the same

location as the woman that went into the wilderness that's being divinely protected in chapter 12.

And so again.

Church.

Those that appear to be the church and the world persecuting we are secure

the the shaft the chaff will will fly fly away.

Right.

That they they'll be persecuted.

They'll.

They'll be dealt with.

You know what i i think.

We were all talking about it several months ago when we were staying up really late talking about this.

But what i thought was really cool.

In revelation.

Where you know.

The new jerusalem.

We are the bride.

You know.

So he's he's um.

He's shown us that that um that.

Uh the bride is actually the new jerusalem.

He says that in scripture he actually calls us that.

But i also thought it was fascinating how you see the other bride.

And i don't mean of god.

You know.

You have you have the the um babylon.

The synagogue.

Yeah you know.

And it's just like when you start when the lord starts opening up your eyes to see that.

You're like oh that's.

That's pretty tight.

Hey i gotta go guys.

I'm getting but i'll get.

Rapture.

Get off.

I'm gonna get raptured.

Go eat your tacos.

Glory.

I gotta enjoy them for.

Forever guys all right later haps boom.

So that was just a quick that was just.

A quick demonstration of what we're seeing and kind of how this all started unraveling and and i would say too that this is

not anything new that jeff and i are seeing it's several commentaries say these things.

But they aren't they're not putting them together they're not.

They're not cohesive in one set yet.

And just think about this just think about.

This you know having a hermeneutical background a hermeneutical framework

but you abandon that hermeneutical framework the moment you get into the book of revelation like that

doesn't make any sense.

And so your hermeneutical framework should be consistent from genesis to revelation.

Right.

And that's what we're trying to do.

With this way of interpreting i i think it's it was good the way you guys pointed out in verse 11 um

the the framework in which revelation should be interpreted because a dispensationalist would say the

exact same thing as you are except their hermeneutic is different.

They're gonna they're gonna they're gonna interpret everything literal.

They're not gonna abandon what they how they how they interpreted genesis all the way through revelation.

They're gonna stick with that hermeneutic which is why they come up with what they come up with.

Um that's craziness you know.

At the end i mean you look at there's there's clearly symbolic language um and in in the book of

revelation um.

And i mean just think about the gospel of john.

The gospel of john is it's a very very symbolic.

Yes and so it's the same author.

In revelation right.

We we.

When we say and i like.

That's where i i think that the the western church has failed to understand what

literal means.

Right.

Because the grammatical historical hermeneutic that christians ought to be taking

where we understand the bible in its grammatical sense and also in its historical sense

literal means.

A noun is a noun.

A question is a question.

A verb is a verb.

And we can't change those things.

When somebody says i take a literal position they're talking usually that i take a physical position

and they're ignoring in my opinion.

Oftentimes they're ignoring the genre and then the way that the author was intending for the

person to read it.

Somebody when they say i i fought someone and i knocked their socks off

do we take that as a physical that their socks are laying out in the streets.

No.

We say that the person won the fight.

Right.

It emphasizes how bad they lost.

Right.

I knocked their socks off.

And so when there's genre that is being written apocalyptically and and

symbolically and it's giving us symbols with explanations

how dare we try to take those same symbols and say ah you see.

It's the apache helicopters.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah that's i mean just so you know i mean yeah the dispensationalist i go to

church they would never say that they wouldn't say that.

Right.

There is a huge distinction between uh john hagee dispensationalism

but yeah well one of the things i wanted to bring up and and hopefully doesn't just real quick uh dr schultz

he was he was talking about um one of the verses here.

And we went to revelation 119 as well.

Yeah one night and yeah and he was looking in the same pattern um except he was looking at it

in a different way and he was saying that therefore write these things which you have seen which is exactly what we would say that

he's looking exactly what he's been shown exactly what he just got through writing and then the things that are.

So he says that that was the present church the churches at that time

right.

So he's saying that that in the greek that it's saying and what they signify

and and and he could look in in different chapters.

He's he's got he's got this all written out but so in other words he's looking yeah so it's saying it's

what what what was just written what you've just seen the things that john just saw and the things which are

means in the lit in the greek according to michael schultz he's making a case for this is that and

what they signify and the things so he's explaining what he just what the symbols were what

everything was what everything it was that he saw.

Um anyway i thought i thought it was a interesting approach.

Yeah and i would echo that too.

That's how very first.

One of verse one starts off with chapter one.

Verse one the revelation of jesus christ which god gave him to show his slaves the things which must soon

happen.

And he indicated that word.

Right.

There is that same signified word and he signified.

He indicated this by sending it through his angels and to his slave.

Uh it's through his angel to his.

Slave john.

So so i think it means the same thing but it is a different word.

It is a different word.

Schultz will take the interpretation that that that when he's speaking to the seven churches

that that is the r and that which will take place will be chapter four

onward except for he'll have some like he'll say something with chapter 11 he'll say that

that's something that's happening now.

Like it's kind of weird the way his his interpretation yeah revelation is

because i.

Would say what is what the things that are is that seven churches.

But that also extends to us as well.

So like right um when when john is saying that the the the

witnesses will witness for 42 months right or the 1260 days that's including the

seven churches in that day that's including the churches of asia and that's including us today right.

The two witnesses that are given to us as the two.

Lampstands which is defined for 1260 days is this long period of

time of first and second advent.

Wishing the reason i say that is in chapter 12 it tells us that the woman that give birth to the seed runs

to the wilderness for 42 months.

That's the 1260 days.

Who's the woman that gave birth to the seed.

That's old covenant ethnic israels or oath covenant.

Israel giving birth to jesus.

Then those that run to the wilderness and her seeds run with her.

So now that's jew and gentile.

You see the language see the baptist covenant theology right there.

They run to the wilderness and they're.

Protected divine protection because we would say that since we have the faith of abraham we are.

Absolutely yeah right.

So yeah even if some even might even interpret romans 11 as abraham being that

root that's the root that he's talking about.

I would go a little bit further and say that the.

Root is christ.

Absolutely yeah.

But yeah yeah it's good stuff.

Well anything else you want to add to this.

We definitely need another show.

Yeah yeah yeah.

So maybe next time the next show we'll we could dive deeper into the book of revelation.

Let's do that like we've already got.

You know.

Um you know now that we know.

Right.

Brayden.

Right.

We're on the same.

We're on the same page brother.

Apparently sometimes some days yeah.

But we still got to finish that first john conversation.

So yeah yes we do.

We'll take care.

Of that at another time because i got a lot of pushback dude.

It was an interesting bible study.

Because then it opened up more dialogue.

You're conflating things but i won't i won't get into because people won't understand what we're talking

about.

So.

Dawson long.

Yeah just just keep on coming man.

I mean you're you're almost there.

Just just make the leap.

Make the spiritual leap.

Man.

Yeah.

Well he was talking at the cigar shop the other night that he was a theonomist and i was like shut your mouth.

Stop it stop it stop it.

Right now.

Uh.

Mick.

Uh.

Michael.

Yeah.

We are.

We are.

Yep.

Yeah.

We are.

All.

Meal.

I used to be a dispensational pre -meal.

I cut my teeth on on uh harry stone john heggie and all those

guys.

Then.

Jack vanipy.

Historic jack vanipy.

Yep.

Absolutely no.

No.

Joel stein.

And uh.

And so i.

I went to historical pre -meal but i don't think i had a a rich understanding such

as i would say schultz's.

His understanding of of historical pre -meal is beyond anyone else's i've heard of.

Yeah i said it.

Greg.

More better.

Uh better too.

I would say yeah.

Yeah.

Way better.

Like like it's really good.

If i didn't hold the position that i have now i would definitely be on schultz's side.

Yeah.

So i jumped over all millennialism and went to post -millennialism.

But.

But understanding the historical narrative of how words matter.

Uh things have definition.

The definition of his.

No.

No.

I wouldn't say that.

I'm gonna say it i think.

He he.

He definitely had.

Excuse me right.

It was a small hand.

Yeah a small hand.

I had to fix this theology on some things and he's helped me come around on some things as well.

Right.

But yeah.

But i bought into post -millennialism hook line and sinker.

But but understanding that that that a word has a definition and you cannot change the

definition of a word.

Right.

You cannot change the definition.

And so.

And i think that post meals have changed the definition.

Right.

Because again post meals believe that a literal thousand years.

And it doesn't necessarily have to be a literal thousand years.

But a long period of time the earth will be christianized before the second coming of physical

kingdom.

Yep yeah physical kingdom.

So historical post -millennialism wouldn't see the thousand years being first to

second advent.

But modern day post -millennials see it first to second advent.

And i'm just saying if that's what you see you need to just say you're an optimistic omni.

If you're going to say your post meal you need to hold to a literal golden age.

And that's the king.

Like like that's that period of time of that millennial reign versus saying that we're in it now.

If you're saying that we're in it right now first and second advent you're on your all meal.

Yeah.

And so because definitions matter i'm.

An all mill all millennialism is just just makes more sense.

It's seamless it is safe.

Yeah it really is.

I mean you know the other day um but there was there was a popular uh dispensational

preacher who spent 18 minutes explaining his system before he went in to

to actually explain the text and it's because if he was to read the text nobody

ever would have gotten what he was.

Getting ready to preach.

Yeah.

And uh so yeah huge presupposition.

And i would say like i am a partial preterist but if your interpretation of all the text is

partial preterist you are on your way to being a full preterist.

So so so i bought into hook line and sinker.

I was hardcore partial preterist and the only thing that kept me from being full

preterist was the creeds and the confessions.

It wasn't for the creeds and confessions i would have been a full preterist.

Look jeff was saying jeff was saying that revelation chapter 1 to chapter 20 had all been.

Fulfilled.

Yes.

That's scary.

Yes.

That's seriously dangerous.

Let me circle back real quick.

Remember how i was saying that the reason why classical covenant theology doesn't work in

baptist covenant for a baptist is because a baptist.

They have to slap a band -aid or our bumper sticker to classical covenant theology that

says yeah.

But believers are to be baptized.

Right.

That was my position in preterism.

That that that i believe that all these things were fulfilled.

But then i would slap a bumper sticker that says except for the second coming of jesus and the resurrection of the dead.

Yeah.

Amen.

And it wasn't working.

That's a good way.

I had to i had to abandon that position and so which.

So i'm still i see part i'm still a partial preterist.

Right.

And if you're a christian you are a partial preterist and you and you are a futurist but

you cannot dogmatically interpret everything in with that lens on

or you you will be going into full preterism.

You will be going.

Into.

That's what sam frost said.

Didn't he.

Wasn't he saying that that.

Yeah partial preterism is.

It's the it's the dating phase.

It's the dating phase.

Right right.

And that's where i asked.

Like that was my push back to jeff was what.

What is the hermeneutical principle to stop you from going all.

The way right.

And i was praising confessions.

Oh gosh.

Yeah yeah it was.

It was only crazing confessions.

It wasn't the scriptures.

It was crazing confessions you know.

And that's the.

Thing right there i mean when you sit when you have to create that's so.

That's so important to be confessional.

When you're confessional it prevents you from going outside the lines outside like the melodic lines and

playing your own tune.

Yeah it's yes.

Sit them into that.

It's.

The bumpers it was the bumpers that kept right from gutter balling.

Yeah it literally was.

I mean i mean i mean like like at the partial at the preterist the i can't

the dangers of full preterism conference that we had i mentioned that.

Right that that the thing with preterism is the reason what makes it so

attractive is that it answers a lot of questions at surface level.

Like like like it just answers so many questions but that's not how the bible is

supposed to be interpreted as surface level answers.

Right.

We're meant to dig into this book and to connect the dots and to interpret it the

way that the author that is writing the book intent it.

Well you know like like like i would say that's the same way that i use this pen to write a letter.

God used men to pin his letter the bible.

But he also used the way that they spoke and and interacted with

people like he used them to do it.

So these letters have these guys personalities and their sure work that i mean

their quirks and stuff like that in it so you're able to see it.

And so he's going to use how how they speak and and articulate things to

to write this.

And so you cannot just just say partial preterist stamp on everything.

Right.

You gotta let the author of the book explain what he is saying.

Right.

And i think if you're just coming at it with that framework with those goggles

it's the same thing that we're saying about the presbyterians.

I would also add.

You know when when we as christians read the old testament you know important to keep the lens through christ

everything because the like the old testament authors and i think it was uh sam renahan that said the old

testament authors hadn't knew exactly what they were writing.

They knew uh what they were writing about but they didn't have an exhaustive uh

exhaustive knowledge of what they were writing.

Right in the old covenant you know.

Because there are things that were revealed over time.

Um you know and then now we look through the the lens of christ and now we.

Can understand what what it meant.

So that's right.

Yeah jonathan edwards would have been one of those historical post mill guys that would have said that the golden age is future.

Right.

And so it's not.

Yeah yeah not the same type of post -millennialism that's common today.

And i think when it comes to partial preterism the the issue is that it gives really clear answers like you go to matthew 24.

That's the starting point.

Right.

It gives really one for one.

This sounds super sweet.

It refutes.

And a lot of the post post mill partial preterist guys are post -dispensational people.

Right.

And so here dispensationalism gave you really good solid answers.

But then you look into it and it's like it's not really there in my opinion.

And so then then you look somewhere else.

Oh here's something that says that that's 70 ad.

Wow.

That sounds really good over here.

And then it just let's keep on stretching that canvas.

Okay.

Let's keep on stretching it.

Let's keep on stretching it until eventually the sad part is now i'm denying

there ever being a physical resurrection in the future.

I'm now denying jesus coming again.

I'm now denying because 70 ad right.

It it that it's.

Just that slippery slope that that's not great.

Yeah.

And again i want to echo that that all of us are partial preterist right.

If you believe you know you cannot be a christian and and not be a partial predator.

It's just like you cannot be a christian and not be a futurist right.

The thing is is you want to allow the scriptures and the authors of the book

to to give you the interpretation.

Right.

You just don't want to come at it with a presupposition of this is partial predator like

this is preterist this this whole text.

It's preterist and you know and i have been guilty of.

That and and and and i do repent.

It's it's good to to acknowledge that when we have presuppositions too.

I mean because we're all looking at through different lenses you know.

Um.

And my presupposition now is baptist covenant theology.

Right.

Yeah.

Which which would be through the lens of christ.

I would.

I would yeah yeah absolutely yeah that's what scripture teaches and and scripture scripture.

Interprets scripture.

Scripture always interprets scripture.

Yeah yeah that's the big thing when it.

Came to revelation for me.

Is that it's why.

Why has there been consistent answers given in other books.

That are are when diving deep into it 1689 federalism just so sweetly

shows and demonstrates that that's the the harmony that's throughout the scriptures.

Is this hope of the covenant of grace the hope of the seed coming and the types and the shadows and

all these.

Yeah.

And then all of a sudden revelation comes and i'm like i'm not gonna apply it to it.

You see what i'm saying like it.

It's still there still there.

The one who overcame uh is the one who was that is and is to come.

Right.

That's right.

Like yeah.

And just happens to be the same interpreted crib that that it said.

To read the book what was what is and what is to come we interpret it through the lens of christ.

He is.

The one who was who is and is to come.

Yep yeah.

And so so was.

What happened is what.

What's he doing right now.

He's ruling and reigning putting all of his enemies under his feet.

He's protecting the church.

Yes there's going to be persecution.

What will be.

The satan is released and christ comes back and destroys him for a final time.

Like like it just.

It's so beautiful.

Yeah it's so beautiful.

It is yeah and one one one last thing before we go to you if there's anybody

watching who doesn't know christ as their savior and you're trusting your own righteousness

before christ and thinking that you're reconciled to him thinking that you could be pleasing to him

on your own repent of.

Your sin and turn to christ.

Amen amen.

All right.

Any last words.

Brian i just echo everything.

Tom said amen to that.

Yeah.

Thank you everybody for for for watching.

If you haven't uh checked out the youtube yet check it out.

Like it uh subscribe all that good stuff.

And if you're ever in talahoma tennessee please come check us out.

And uh we are uh we have another conference coming up next february on

sanctification.

It's going to be called war the the flesh versus the spirit spirit versus

flesh whatever.

Um so so keep that in mind make plans on coming.

And as always hallelujah.

All the best.