Post-Millennialism vs Amillennialism Debate (Wilson v Foskey)

Welcome everyone to this Battle Royale with Royalty.

We're in the underground bunker, deep beneath Dallas Theological Seminary, and safe

from all of those readers of the late, great planet Mars, and 88 Reasons Why Jesus Did Not

Return in 1988.

And I'm your host for tonight, Pastor Tim Bushong.

Before we begin, I must confess some affinity for each of the contestants, both

royalty in their own right.

I happen to have affinity for Keith in his position on the recipients and timing of

baptism, and I have affinity with Pastor Doug on his position of the nature of the kingdom now.

So I'm really in a pickle, I don't know what to say.

But welcome.

Fortunately, my position in post -millennialism means that you guys get fixed eventually on the other one.

Oh, oh, not again.

Here it comes.

Well, first of all, King Keith.

Now, I did want to say one other thing, and we'll get right to it.

We contacted the Duke of Dispensationalism and the Grand Poobah of Premillennialism.

Neither one was willing to enter the fray.

And I think it's because they're both just terrified and frankly, cowards.

So Keith Foskey, introduce yourself.

Yes, sir.

I am Keith Foskey.

I'm the reigning king of the amillennialists, and I'm also the pastor of Sovereign Grace

Family Church in Jacksonville, Florida, where I have served for the past 16 going on 17 years now as their

pastor.

Very good.

And Pastor Doug, introduce yourself, please.

My name is Doug Wilson.

I'm the pastor of Christ Church.

We're in the panhandle of Idaho.

Idaho, like Florida, has a panhandle.

And I'm in it.

So I've been the pastor of Christ Church since 1977.

So the saints here are long -suffering saints.

They know what it is to go through the furnace of affliction.

And so that's what I do.

I write and preach.

That's my day job.

All right, so first of all, your highness, your liege,

let's start with this.

King Keith, why don't you explain what your eschatological position is

and why you hold to that specific position?

Well, very quickly, I began my eschatological journey as a dispensational

premillennialist because I did come up in the 90s, and there was a very famous set of books that came out in the late 90s,

early 2000s called the Left Behind series.

And when I went to seminary, I was taught dispensational premillennialism.

I was told if I did not hold to that position, they hoped that I would get left behind.

So there was some pretty strong feelings about it.

But over time, having examined the different positions, I have settled quite comfortably as an

amillennialist.

Some might say an optimistic amillennialist.

We might find that Pastor Doug and I may not differ on as many things as we may think, but I do know

there are at least a few differences.

So that's how I got to where I am just through a series of studies and teaching and having been

challenged in different areas.

All right, thank you.

In other words, the Bible.

Amen, yeah.

Pastor Doug.

Let me begin by saying that the pilgrimage from dispensationalism to

amillennialism, I would consider a serious upgrade.

So I'm appreciative of that.

And then when you qualify amillennialism with optimistic amillennialism, we have to be

careful lest we wind up ruining the whole debate by agreeing too much.

So I became an optimistic amillennialist reluctantly

at first and then enthusiastically later.

I was a generic premill, never dispensational, but a generic premill simply because I was a Christian in

North America.

And I couldn't get it to come out of the text over reading and rereading.

So I was a pastor by this time, and so I abandoned every eschatological position I

knew of.

And all I would say when people asked me, I'd say, look, Jesus is coming again,

don't push me.

And that would be something that where we would have a point of agreement.

Jesus is coming again.

So I knew that Christ was coming again, but I didn't have any idea.

And I was a nonmillennialist for probably two or three years.

And one day the penny dropped.

And I was reading a book that had a, the hermeneutic was a little bit

gaudy for me, and it wasn't really my jam.

But while I was reading that book, the author quoted 1 Corinthians 15, for he must reign

until he put all his enemies under his feet.

And something snapped in my head.

And a full fledged eschatological worldview

assembled in my head over a very short space of time, like one of those transformer

thingies in a movie.

And that was exhilarating and loads of fun.

So that's one reason I'm a post -millennialist is that progress.

Also, as I was, I did prepare for this debate.

A few minutes ago, I looked up amillennialism on Wikipedia.

And I'm here to tell you that it says amillennialism is a chilegaristic eschatological

position.

Chilegaristic.

Chilegaristic.

And I'm sorry, I just couldn't be an adherent of a chilegaristic position.

How would I defend that?

I don't think I could spell it.

I can't fathom it.

So in other words, the Bible.

Yes, the Bible.

Why am I a post -millennialist?

Well, I decided when I was well into my Christian life and I was into my ministry, I decided that,

you know, I really ought to believe the promises of God.

I think that I should do that.

Yeah, yeah.

That's the best way.

Well, when the king makes a promise, then us much lower

potentates and poobahs should say, amen, yes, and amen.

Go ahead, go ahead.

So when you say like the king of the amills and all this other stuff, in the challenge video,

Keith basically said post -mill was fancy amillennialism.

Does that make amillennialism shabby chic post -millennialism?

Well, I'll say this, I did look for a pair of overalls.

It's hard to find them in 3X.

I'm a big guy, so finding a pair of overalls.

But I tried, I was hoping you'd wear a sweater vest.

I was, I actually almost emailed you to ask what you were gonna wear so I could look the same.

You know, I pretend to be you in so many, so many forms now.

I'm the Harbor Freight version of Doug Wilson.

Well, one can aspire, can't one?

I haven't brought, you know, I've never smoked.

I don't ever smoke.

This is, I'm like the, I'm like, my cigars are like Joel Osteen's Salvation.

It's just not real.

So that's, oh, that's harsh.

I might wanna, yeah, so.

Let's continue with the next question.

King Keith, in your mind, why are you so

disagreeable to post -millennialism?

In other words, what do you disagree with?

Well, some people might say that the debate is unnecessary because in a sense, we are both post

-millennial.

We both believe that Christ will return to consummate the millennium and inaugurate

the eternal state.

And we both believe that the millennium is not a literal thousand years.

At least I think that's the position that Brother Doug would hold.

So in that sense, we're both post -millennial and amillennial.

So I guess we both win.

We can both put on our crowns and go have a scotch.

But obviously the differences are there.

I think that probably the place where you hear the most difference is in regard

to the optimism.

Sometimes post -millennialists are incurably optimistic in the idea that everything is

going to become Christianized.

We hear a lot of terms being thrown around today.

I know Brother Doug wrote a book about Christendom, mere Christendom.

And so the idea that there's going to be this flourishing of Christianity, not only in the souls of men, but also

in the culture and in the national governments of the

world.

And we're going to see this overtaking.

And most amillennialists would not expect so much.

They might expect that the gospel is going to go out into the world.

And we might call that a revivalistic version of post -millennialism, where the gospel is going to go out and people are going

to be saved, but not necessarily that the entire culture of the world is going to be transformed in a

more of a reconstructionist view, I would say is the post -millennial view.

And so our differences is probably what we expect.

And I think another important difference is possibly on the issue of the imminency of Christ's return.

If there is an expectation that these things are going to take place, does that mean that Christ's

return is not something that we should be considering an imminent possibility?

And therefore, do we run the risk of becoming like the virgins who did not have the oil prepared for

the return of the bridegroom?

So those are the concerns I would raise in that regard.

So let me begin by addressing the question of the imminent return of the Lord.

This is one of those things where Jesus said emphatically, no man knows the day or the hour.

And so I don't want to pretend that I do, that I do know the day or the hour, but if

I were a betting man, do I anticipate lots of history ahead?

Yes, I do.

I think that if we are thinking culturally, thinking about engaging

with culture and building institutions, planting churches, that sort of thing, you can't do it

or can't do it consistently if you think that it's all going to burn tomorrow, right?

Now, having said that, I'm not opposed, as I heard R .J. Rushuni

once say, that he's not opposed to changing his theology in midair.

Yeah, I love that.

So of course, the Lord is the Lord of history and he can disrupt

all our calculations.

But I think if I'm planning for a century out or five centuries out and

praying and laboring for that, for any Christian who's doing that, an imminent return of

Christ would be a pleasant surprise.

What about you?

Oh, okay.

Who's going to object?

You're back early.

So can you just wait a couple of minutes?

Cause we were doing this.

Yeah, we were trying to evangelize the world, but that would just be dumb and

stupid.

So I think it's best to have a long -term faith commitment

where we're going to seek to disciple the nations long -term.

I think it's going to take a while, but if the Lord said, no, I think you were,

you'd gotten more done than we thought we had gotten done.

And he returned, that's not a bad thing at all.

I mean, it's the Lord coming again.

So that's the first thing.

The second thing is when you say optimistic, Amil, I would want to ask optimistic

about what?

Okay, optimistic about what?

If you're simply saying optimistic about the opportunity of salvation to everyone who

believes, then pre -mills, dispensationalists, post -mills, Amils,

all are optimistic in exactly the same way.

Okay, we all believe that if someone believes in Jesus and repents of his sins and calls on the Lord, he

will be saved.

If that's the extent of our optimism, then we agree.

But I would want the optimism to leak out more.

I don't see how there's any way for a large number of people to be converted

and not have that transform the world around them.

Business becomes more industrious, more honest.

Wilberforce gets the slave trade abolished.

Things start to happen outside of our hearts, outside of our minds.

And that kind of cultural engagement, I think is what we mean when we talk

about optimistic eschatology.

Of course, it has to start with the forgiveness of sin and the transformation of individual sinners.

That's the place where Ezekiel's living water starts to flow from.

But I just think it gets farther than the threshold.

Well, I would agree in the sense that the gospel, when it goes out and it changes

hearts, it does change the world around it.

It can't help but do that because changed men change the world around them.

So I absolutely have no issue with that.

I think where I may have some trouble is when we see the gospel going in the

parables, the mustard seed and others as they're growing, that is true.

Even Daniel's, the stone cut without hands hitting the feet of the Colossus.

And we would see that as the gospel growing.

I assume that's your understanding of it.

Yeah, it grows and fills the whole earth.

Yes, I agree.

But it's the existence of and continued survival

of those who are opposed to Christ.

And I think of the parable of the wheat's in the tares in that, yes, there's going to be wheat.

Yes, there's gonna be growth.

And yes, that is gonna change culture.

But I don't see it as something that is going to be so wholesale that there doesn't still have an existence

of those who are in opposition to it.

And that there aren't those still in the world who are going to suffer for it.

I think about Romans chapter eight, which tells us that those who are fellow heirs with Christ will suffer with him.

And therefore, does that promise not, or does that truth not apply to those who are

in the later part of the millennium where this Christendom has filled the earth?

Is there still not a sense in which there will be suffering?

Is there still not a sense in which there's going to be evil in the world?

Will that be wholesale abolished?

That would be a, so it's not that I don't see Christendom growing.

I see with the wheat's in the tares, both are growing together until the harvest, which Christ says is the end of the age.

So, yeah.

So, with responding to both of those things, I would say that,

yes, there will be holdouts all the way to the end.

I don't think post -millennialism requires us to believe 100 of all the

people alive for millennia will all be true

believers.

I believe that there will be infidels and people who reject and just stubborn,

stubborn sort.

So, the presence of tares in the

wheat does not present a problem to the post -millennialist.

We just wanna say, look, it's a wheat field.

It's not a tare field, okay?

It's a wheat field and there are tares in it.

Great, Jesus told us to expect that.

With regard to the question about affliction and trusting the Lord,

I believe that every Christian right up to the very end is going to have to trust the Lord with

things that are a weight and an affliction and a grief to him.

It says in Isaiah that a man who dies at 100 will be considered

accursed, okay?

Everybody's looking around, man, what did he do?

But there will be saints, let's say, let's pick that guy.

There'll be saints at that time who have to go to that guy's funeral.

That man will have daughters.

That man will be diagnosed with a terminal disease and

have to depart when he's 100 instead of 300 like everybody else.

There will be grief, there will be heartache, there will be things that we have to trust the Lord for.

And one of the things that I think that we have to come to grips with, and this seems like, you've probably

heard the joke about first world problems, you know?

Yes.

So you've got somebody living in a cardboard box under a bridge in Manila somewhere,

and he's gonna define a good day and a bad day very differently

than we would, right?

We're having a bad day because the air conditioner on our car went out.

And now I'm gonna have to take it to the shop and they're gonna fix it.

It's gonna take two days instead of one day.

And I've got first world problems.

But all of us know what it's like to stumble over those sorts of problems.

And we have to learn how to trust the Lord for those problems.

And we're all still gonna die.

So everybody has to cross the Jordan River, whether they're living in 50 AD or 5

,000 AD, we're all going to have to give it up to God.

So I think that all the lessons that the New Testament teaches us that we should have to learn

in this life, which is a veil of tears, I think it remains a veil of

tears even when times are, comparatively speaking, good.

That's very helpful.

When both of you were talking about the evangelism and the

imminency of Christ, I wrote down the word urgency.

I think there's an urgency in premillennialism for evangelism.

There's an urgency in post -millennialism for engaging the culture and winning.

Keith, I'll ask you this and then Doug, you can give an answer as well.

What is the urgency, the sense of urgency given your eschatological

position, amillennialism?

What gets you up in the morning?

Well, I would say both of the things that you said are true of amillennialists.

And I don't know if I said this earlier, I don't think I did, but sometimes the

post -millennialists are called optimists and the premillennialists are called pessimists.

And if that's true, then I guess we're the realists.

And so we deal with that.

Well, I'm glad that's settled.

So we have the reality that we're going to continue to

preach the gospel and continue to expect that there is a binding of Satan through the preaching of the gospel.

There is the flourishing of the gospel throughout the world.

And we're seeing that not necessarily in the United States, even though the gospel is going out in the United States, but in other

parts of the world, it's flourishing.

And especially where it's persecuted, it's flourishing wonderfully.

And so we're thankful and getting up in the morning and knowing that we're supporting missionaries that are going and we're holding the rope for these men who

are going into these terrible places and we're sending them and we're thankful.

And still standing outside of abortion clinics like I have done and will continue to do and

continue to preach the gospel in the open air as we do at our church.

These are not things that are opposed to the Amillennial view.

Like I said, when it comes down to brass tacks, there may not be that big of a difference between us in the sense of how we do ministry,

because I think we both have the same goal and that's that the world would hear the gospel and that Christ would change hearts and through

that change this world.

It's just what extent are we going to see that change?

Right.

Can I break in just a second?

And then I'll give Doug, you can respond to that.

So Keith, you're telling me that it's legitimate for a pastor

to call his civil magistrate to legislate in a certain way, say

abolish abortion rather than regulate abortion.

Would you agree with that's a legitimate thing for a pastor to do?

Yeah, I would say that I am an abolitionist

and there is some, in my heart,

I understand some of the people who are incrementalists and I don't want to paint them with a terrible brush.

I know that sometimes that's a, and I know that's not what we're here to debate, but in my heart, I believe abortion is a sin.

I believe it's wrong.

And I believe it's against God's law and it should be against all of man's laws because it's one of the most things

that's ever existed.

And so like Jonah, who went to Nineveh and proclaimed

repentance and God saw fit to bring repentance from the King all the way down to the stall,

I would preach the same.

I would say, I would call men to repent because they are facing the judgment of God.

A man who stands behind a governmental desk or within the Oval Office who makes a declaration

of some law is going to stand before God and be judged for that.

And I think he needs to hear that.

And so, yeah, I certainly would.

Well, good.

The only reason I brought that up is that does not sound like a lot of my other AMIL

friends that are more Two Kingdom, R2K.

They don't think it's legit for a pastor to do such a thing.

So I just wanted -.

Well, and perhaps I may disagree with some of my brothers on that and that's fine.

You know, again, I've been known to disagree with people.

So it would be, but yeah, definitely.

No, all right.

Prince of the Post Mills, Doug, what do you say to that?

So it sounds to me that Keith is more than happy to

witness for and fight for various tactical victories on the

ground, right?

Outside the abortion clinic or in a particular situation, God has put us in

various settings and I have to witness to the truth of the gospel and God's

untouchable law wherever I am, okay?

So I don't have any doubt that all sorts of AMILs and pre -mills too, for that matter, are able

to be faithful tactically where they are.

But what happens when you're testifying before the magistrate and the

magistrate listens and the magistrate says, oh, you're right, that is a

big sin, we're gonna, and the King of Nineveh tells everybody, okay, everybody,

the orgy's off, we're repenting.

We're repenting now.

With the AMILs, all of a sudden, it's a strategic issue.

It's not tactical anymore.

It's not just one sidewalk or one section of your town.

All of a sudden, you have this breakthrough and Jonah goes, oh, crud,

that's not what I wanted.

And Jonah's not a coward, he just hated Nineveh.

He just wanted to see Nineveh burn.

And he knew, God, you're like this, this is just the sort of thing I was afraid you were gonna do, that's why I ran to

Tarshish.

With the AMIL, when the king repents, when there's a massive revival, there's a great breakthrough,

are you gonna struggle fitting it into your eschatology?

I would say no, only because if that were to happen, I would rejoice, just like

I did rejoice when the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, even though I know that there's a ton more

work to be done, I can still rejoice in those types of victories and see that happen and thank God for it.

I can thank God for it and yet at the same time, know that in this situation that we're in and the structure of

government that we're in, it would take such a wholesale and massive change in the hearts

of more than just one man.

It's not as if we have a king who can make a decree, even though the president often acts like he is.

We have a situation where it might change my eschatology if I saw all

of our senators repent in the sackcloth and ashes.

And yeah, I mean, like you, you said if you were caught up in the air, you would change your eschatology on the way up.

Well, if I saw the government cast down their idols and bow the knee to the Lord Jesus Christ,

yeah, that would change.

But as I said, it's an expectation situation at this point.

I don't expect that even though I preach to the man and I do call him to, I don't expect it, but if it were to happen, I

wouldn't be unhappy.

I wouldn't be like Jonah and cursing the gourd.

I'd be happy or cursing God because of the gourd.

I'd be praying and thanking God for his ministry.

One of my pleasant eschatological daydreams is to envision the day when the earth is as full

of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.

The mission, our missions were triumphant.

All the nations have streamed to Christ and it was all done by dispensationalists.

And the Left Behind series is studied in all the

schools and it's on the bestseller list.

Millions of them sell and the dispensationalists are looking around at each other.

What do we do now?

I must've forgot to cross a T somewhere because it's not working out quite as planned.

Right.

So honestly, it doesn't sound like there's that much difference

except maybe in expectation.

And Keith, you don't sound like some of the Amils that Doug and I know.

So, you know, you're in good company there.

I mean, am I right?

So we absolve you of everything.

I may have to give this back if I may have to hand, they may take it back

now if I'm not, if I don't quite meet the standard.

You're now an honorary Post Mill.

Yeah, just not quite.

You're not a fancy lad yet.

You're a grumpy Post Mill.

Right, right.

Well, gentlemen, it is at the 30 minute mark and then some.

Thank you both for coming and giving of your time.

Appreciate it.

All of us are pastors.

We see the gospel and the stewardship of the word of God as being primary.

And then all these other things that are just extensions as, and I'm gonna quote

Prince Doug here, our theology should come out of our fingertips.

Couldn't agree more.

And so let's pray for one another.

Keith, continue your great ministry down there in, well,

there's Florida and then there's Inland.

So that's a whole thing.

And Doug up in the panhandle of beautiful Idaho.

You're just too close to Washington state, that's all.

So that's the problem with Governor Kim Jong Inslee.

Right.

Oh, may you live in interesting times.

Well, folks, this is Pastor Tim Bushong.

So glad you listened in tonight.

And we're all best friends now and everything.

We go hang out at the Waffle House and whatnot, but seriously.

Watch the fights.

Yeah, watch the fight.

Yeah, that's right.

I forgot.

Yeah, they know how to fight there.

Yeah.

Something about the chair training process, right?

Know this, that God is the creator of the universe.

He spoke and the universe slept into existence.

God alone is the one who has the authority to determine the boundaries of men's

actions and thoughts and lives.

And if you're a lawbreaker, you need to repent and trust in Jesus Christ.

Repent from your sins, believe in him only and be forgiven.

And all of us are united on this.

I guarantee if you repent and trust in Jesus, you will not be disappointed in

finding him to be anything less than a perfect savior.

And this is Tim for Eschatology Matters.

Thank you, Keith.

Thank you, Doug.

Bye for now.

Thank you.