Why am I so passionate about premillennial eschatology? Because the Jewish apocalyptic hope offered in the Scriptures anchors my heart to the age to come like no other story can. It is not a vague, foggy “future,” but the promised Davidic Kingdom spoken of throughout the Bible in concrete, flesh-and-blood language: the Son of David reigning from Zion (Isaiah 9:6–7; Jeremiah 23:5–6), the nations streaming to Zion to learn His ways (Isaiah 2:2–4), war finally brought to an end among the peoples of the earth (Micah 4:1–4), the world filled with the knowledge of YHVH as the waters now cover the ocean floor (Isaiah 11:6–9), the meek and forgotten inheriting the land (Psalm 37:9–11), and the righteous flourishing under the Branch who builds the temple of the Lord and rules upon His throne (Zechariah 6:12–13). 

This is a hope textured with real geography, palpable justice, resurrection, peace, and a real embodied life—a Kingdom you can see, touch, taste, and live in (Daniel 7:13–14; Ezekiel 37:24–28). A future untethered from these promises—reduced to abstractions and hazy metaphors—they just cannot steady the soul in the same way. Whatever theological system one ultimately embraces, it is difficult to deny that premillennialism tells the fuller, richer, and best story. And if beauty has any evidentiary power at all, it is awfully hard to believe that the inferior story is the true one. -Joel Richardson 

If you live in a time of apostasy, you may be tempted to think that the primary battlefield is doctrinal. But is that really the case? 

When we look at the passages that deal with apostasy and last-days living, we see that things are more complex. Apostasy doesn’t come about as a result of intense and learned debates that produce a change in one’s thinking. It comes from what we give heed to, and how we hear. Paul tells Timothy, “Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons…”

Is apostasy then a matter of beliefs only, or of what we give heed to?

Paul also connects it to “speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron.” Notice: he mentions all these things before he comes to mentioning any particular items of false teaching. (See 2 Tim 4). So, have we been focused on the facts of apostasy, what constitutes it, or have we focused on what drives it, and what are the dynamics of falling away?

Apostasy is not a matter of the mind—whether one can sign off on a statement—but of the heart. Missing this has been a colossal pastoral failure in the Western church. In 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul says that people will be deceived and then deluded “because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.”

In our day, truth is plastic, even elastic, and molded like Play-Doh to serve one’s desired narrative.

The fear of the Lord, which is to hate all evil, includes valuing the truth — because God is true and all liars will have their part in the lake of fire. We are constantly told by Jesus and His apostles to “take heed.” Those passages, always so vital, are today more critical than ever. To guard our hearts against the inroads of easy grace (sin without consequence) and the world’s powerful and incessant drumbeat, we need to listen to Solomon:

Buy the truth and do not sell it! - Nick Uva

"Moreover, a man among us named John, one of Christ's Apostles, received a revelation and foretold that the followers of Christ would dwell in Jerusalem for a thousand years, and that afterwards the universal, and in short, everlasting resurrection and judgment would take place" -Justin Martyr (Dial. 81).

Simply put, in no way would first-century Jewish or Christian readers familiar with Enochic imagery have drawn the conclusion that the language and imagery of Revelation 20:1-3 portrayed anything other than Satan's total incapacity--utter removal from the inhabited creation. Because Satan and his demons are not, in fact, imprisoned in a place that is cut off from this present world, Revelation 20:1-3 must await a future fulfillment. -Dr. Michael Svigel, The Fathers on the Future, p.136

For most people, for much of the history of the church, this background literature [Enochic] - which would have shed light on the original understanding of the binding of Satan in Rev 20:1-3- was unavailable. Just as adjustments to biblical interpretation and theology occurred in the Reformation with the recovery of ancient biblical texts and writings of early church fathers, perhaps some age-old assumptions about the original meaning of Rev 20:1-3 should have been revisited in light of the restoration of these important texts. Alas, Protestant Reformers mostly adopted and adapted the old Augustinian amillennial reading of the text, doubling down on the partial, limited binding of Satan in the present church age This failure of recovery and reassessment led to the perpetuation of weak exegesis of the passage, which in turn codified an anti-premillennial eschatology for centuries. But if we read the passage in light of its original historical-theological-literary context, a blurry picture that can be manipulated in a number of ways becomes more focused and defined. -Annette Yoshiko Reed

Prioritizing the Muslim World • INTRO TO THE EMMAUS TABLE • MARANATHA G...

Audio file. 

Paul was a Jewish apostle to the Gentiles. He often self-identified with his "fellow Jews" (Rom 11:14), his "kinsmen according to the flesh (Rom 9:3). He was a "descendant of Abraham" (Rom 11:1; cf. 2 Cor 11:22), "a Hebrew of Hebrews" (Phil 3:5). Being a Pharisee (a group that numbered relatively few), Paul might have viewed himself as even more Jewish than the elders in Jerusalem. - John P. Harrigan, Extending Mercy to the Gentiles. p.193

According to the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus kept the purity regulations and taught others to do the same. Contemporary claims to the contrary typically reveal modern confusion over basic issues from Leviticus and Deuteronomy rather than well-founded conclusions about either the Law or the Gospels. - Paul T. Sloan, Jesus and the Law of Moses

Thus with Justin, Irenaeus, and Hippolytus- and many others from the early church -I understand the book of Revelation to refer primarily to future things. -Dr. Michael Svigel, The Fathers on the Future, p119

It isn’t the only time Scriptures speak of creation parting wide to save Israel’s children from armies crowding them into vulnerable corners and corridors, of an eleventh-hour intervention saving the covenantal nation from certain death. Zechariah wrote it will happen again, but with the dirt of the hill facing Moriah—the mount of the promised provision—instead of waters along Egypt’s borders. The LORD who will provide Himself a lamb will also “gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle,” and it will not look pretty: “the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped.”

It’s gnarly. And it’s glorious—because this is the moment “every eye will see Him.” - Stephanie Quick, The Son Not Spared

But the firstborn sons of Abraham’s promise were spared, provided they adhered to the Word of the LORD and painted their doors with the blood of their stand-in lamb, marking their homes like a gruesome circumcision. That night, Death passed over all of Jacob’s sons. While Egypt grieved the following morning, the covenantal nation “consecrated all [her] firstborn sons” to the LORD. Every firstborn was preserved by the blood of the lamb; every one of them now belonged to the LORD. - Stephanie Quick, The Son Not Spared

The great irony of realized eschatology is that it relies on texts which in truth perfectly contradict its message. Realized eschatology argues that the debatable texts (Matt. 4:17; 11:11; 12:28; 13:31; Luke 17:21; John 3:3) communicate

(1) a good thing of divine blessing, 

(2) aimed at believers, 

(3) individually, 

(4) in the present. 

However, the kingdom being at hand, coming upon you, and coming into your midst is very much

(1) a bad thing of divine judgment, 

(2) aimed at unbelievers, 

(3) corporately, 

(4) in the future. 

In truth, realized eschatology turns Jesus’ message on its head and robs it of its strength and conviction. - John P. Harrigan

"In light of the theological anti-Judaism that flowed forth with dominant influence out of Augustine's eschatology, it is easier to understand how premillennialism suffered Cinderella-like belittlement as a consequence." - Barry E. Horner, Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged

The coming kingdom portrayed in picturesque, figurative kingdom oracles in the book of Isaiah entails a glorious future. In an undefined time in the future (Isa 2:1: 9.1). God's people, having suffered just judgment for their covenant unfaithfulness (Isa 1:2-24; 27:7-11; 31:6-9), will turn again to God in repentance and will be called back from their places of exile around the world to be restored to their own land in a kind of ultimate exodus (Isa 2:1-4; 4:4; 11:11-12; 27:12-13; 30:18-19; 32:16-18: 35:10; 41:8-9; 43:5-7, 11-17; 49:9-13; 52:11-12). This restoration will be through the enthronement of the anointed and Spirit-empowered king in Jerusalem -the ultimate Servant of the Lord -who will rule with justice, righteousness, peace, and equity, along with a plurality of rulers reigning with him (Isa 2:4; 9:6-7; 11:1-16 16:4-5: 32:1; 42:1; 52:13; 53:1-12: 60:15-18). -Micheal Svigel, The Fathers on the Future, p.67

The hope in a thousand-year reign of happiness preceding the final denouement of history was widely shared by the first Christians. ... It still clearly dominates in Saint Irenaeus. It will be profoundly relativized from the fourth century onward in favor of a symbolic reading of the book of Revelation. This reversal will be carried out mainly under the influence of Saint Augustine, though also by Tyconius, who appears to us in this matter to have been a true "Augustine before Augustine." The rejection of a literal understanding of Revelation 20 became the dominant position of the Church and then, after the Reformation, of the main churches." -Bernard Hort

My teaching of an introduction to an ancient Hebrew worldview. Notes. Audio 1. Audio 2. Video

This survey of voices... reveal a few important points regarding the early precedence of Irenaean premillennialism. First, when they were not silent on the issue of the millennium, first-century and second-century Christian texts espoused a premillennial perspective (Didache Barnabas. Papias of Hierapolis, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian, Hippolytus). This premillennial perspective was not isolated to one place but was geographically widespread (e.g., Didache in Antioch, Barnabas in Egypt, Papias in Asa Justin and Hippolytus in Rome, Irenaeus in Gaul, and Tertullian in western North Afríca), Also, premillennialism was presented in diverse texts and traditions-from the allegorizing of Barnabas to the careful, almost systematic articulation and defense by Irenaeus, By the time we reach Irenaeus in the late second century, premillennialism is fairly well developed, exhibiting all the signs of a well-thought-out eschatological system, From where did Irenaeus get such teachings? By his own words, he claims to have received them from his own teachers who had received them from the apostles themselves (Haer, 5.33.3; Epid, 61) - Dr. Michael Svigel, The Fathers on the Future, p.62

“To seek to interpret the various Old Testament documents for themselves and apart from the vantage point of the New [Testament] exposes one ultimately to misinterpreting them.” —Richard B. Gaffin Jr. 

Gaffin’s a brilliant man, and I’ve loved a host of things he’s written— but I can think of few concepts in the evangelical theological world that are more erroneous than this. This is the basic claim of “New Testament Priority” hermeneutics, which in the name of Christocentricity opens the door for all kinds of misinterpretation while crowning itself a safeguard against misinterpretation. (It’s also a system that often fuels supersessionism, since it fails to be adequately mindful of authorial intent in the OT.) 

Of course Christ is the τέλος of the law, the One to whom Moses and the prophets pointed, the One to whom belongs the preeminence. Yet we must hold not merely to NT priority, but to the priority of whatever biblical passage is in view. We must revere and hold high the irreplaceable value of authorial intent (both the human and Divine authors), and the God-breathed authority and usefulness of every passage, whether in the Old or New Testament. 

Everyone claims to do that, but who’s really doing it? There are times when the Old sheds light on the New and times when the New sheds light on the Old. The analogy of Scripture is REAL. The NT Priority proponent claims to value the OT (and many do in significant respects), but his hermeneutical system actually fails very often on just this point. Authorial intent is pushed to the periphery, even blacklisted (perhaps unconsciously), and misinterpretations ensue— most often in handling OT texts. And if one twists the meaning of OT texts (which the NT authors revered and were immersed in), how trustworthy is one’s handling of the New? It is worth asking. 

Hebrews 1:1-2: “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.” 

Yes, “in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,” and we are humbled and grateful to see the mystery kept hidden for ages now revealed. All praise to the slain and risen Lamb! Yet and still, “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets.” The OT authors (just like the New) wrote WITH INTENT, and God spoke through them WITH INTENT. And there were those who heard and read and believed before the NT was written— that is, there were those who understood and felt and obeyed the authorial intent of the Hebrew Scriptures. 

The arrival of the New and better covenant doesn’t mean the belittling or downgrading or redefining of the authority of God’s speaking “by the prophets.” God spoke then. And God has spoken in/by His Son. And to this day He is still speaking through the whole counsel of Scripture. 

The New Testament Priority approach, while held by many sincere believers and many learned scholars, is simply not the view held by Christ or the apostles. “The Scripture cannot be broken”; “all Scripture is God-breathed and profitable.” Let us return to “rightly handling the Word of truth.” Let us return to Christ-exalting exegesis and interpretation, placing hermeneutical priority on the passage before us, 

1. with authorial intent in view— discovering what it meant to them before asking what it means for us, 
2. being mindful of how the immediate text contributes to and harmonizes with the grand revelation of Scripture as a whole, 
3. glorying in all the ways the Scriptures anticipate or articulate the Gospel (which includes the 1st and 2nd advents, by the way), 
4. remembering that “all Scripture is God-breathed.” We need only to give each passage the attention it deserves. Doing so will not make less of Christ, but enable us to get closer to how He and His apostles understood and treasured “the sacred writings.” 

Isn’t that what hermeneutics is all about? - BA Purtle

When his Son comes, he will abolish the season of the lawless one, he will judge the ungodly, and he will change the sun and the moon and the stars, then he will truly rest on the seventh day. -Epistle of Barnabas 15.5

But when this present fashion of things passes away, and man has been renewed, and flourishes in an incorruptible state, so as to preclude the possibility of becoming old, then there shall be the new heaven and the new earth, in which the new man shall remain continually, always holding fresh converse with God. - Irenaeus (Haer. 5.36.1)

Resurrection is not reanimation or resuscitation. When we meet the resurrected Jesus, we meet someone who has been transformed. He has not just been brought back to life. He has been raised to a new kind of life. 

Resurrection is also not about souls going to heaven. Instead, resurrection is for whole people, body and soul together. The church has sometimes highlighted this truth -the resurrection is about hope for bodies-by confessing belief in the resurrection of the "flesh." Flesh is a strong word, one that works against any tendency to cut our hope off from muscles and marrow. In the resurrection, we have meaty hope, hope that extends into every part of creation and every aspect of human being. -Beth Felker Jones

What Jesus did to His apostles' minds was open them to see what was in Scripture — not to pour new meaning into Scripture (Luke 24:45). - Dan Phillips

The covenant which “is becoming obsolete and growing old” and “is ready to vanish away” in Hebrews 8 is the Sinaitic Covenant, not the Abrahamic nor Davidic covenants. It’s astounding how often believers assume everything in the Tanakh is obsolete.

Read more carefully, saints. - BA Purtle

God hath given to man a short time here upon earth, and yet upon this short time eternity depends. ~ Jeremy Taylor (1613-1667)

Scripture says that the Kingdom of Heaven is like a wedding banquet a King prepared for His Son. Psalm 2 records the conversation of a Father promising His Son all the nations as His inheritance. In the best way possible, the ultimate rescue, reconciliation, and redemption of humanity says absolutely nothing about us. However, it says everything about the Son. In that Day, every accolade and every idol will be brought low. Jesus alone will be exalted. Maranatha. - Grayson Borders, CS Lewis and the Controversy of Zion   

It’s hard to fully appreciate the utter humility and mercy the apostles demonstrated at the Jerusalem Council. Led by the Spirit, they reduced 613 laws to just 3 for the Gentiles to keep. When some within the council protested at how absolutely unfair this was, Peter responded:

Why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

Much could be said about the gratitude we owe our older brother for such a generous acceptance to the Father’s house. However, much more could be said about how God’s masterful plan to save every nation, through the Seed of one nation, ultimately exalts only One Man. - Grayson Borders, CS Lewis and the Controversy of Zion   

Asking someone to teach the Bible without mentioning Israel is a bit like asking a professor to teach the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe without mentioning Narnia. - Grayson Borders, CS Lewis and the Controversy of Zion   

Theology 101: Tradition without truth just means the error is old. -Dr. Micheal Svigel

When Jesus used metaphors, it doesn’t mean the real things no longer matter. His references to the Temple, Passover, and more point us deeper into their meaning, not away from them. - Jacob Fronczak

Irenaeus's eschatological vision includes many details which we will explore and fill out in due course. However, we will see that his eschatological perspective may be described as premillennial and futurist, as he believed in a 7 year tribulation period at the end of the age, climaxing in the return of Christ as king, the resurrection of the righteous as well as a remnant of mortal survivors of the Antichrist reign left to repopulate the Earth, followed by a 1000 year intermediate Kingdom and concluding with the resurrection of the wicked and ushering in of the eternal renewed creation. Though he claimed to have received this foundation in structure of his eschatology from his previous generation, - the students of the apostles- this eschatology took different paths after the second century. - Michael J. Svigel, The Fathers on the Future, p.8 

1. Hermeneutics and exegesis are vital for understanding and obeying Scripture. 

2. Prayer and the work of the Holy Spirit are vital for understanding and obeying Scripture. 

3. Points 1 and 2 should never be pitted against each other. They work in harmony by God’s design. 

- BA Purtle

Everything that Jesus sealed and guaranteed at His first coming, He will bring to completion when He returns. At the cross and through His resurrection and ascension, Jesus secured every promise of God—our forgiveness, our future resurrection, the restoration of all things, and the coming Davidic kingdom of righteousness and peace. What He accomplished in His first coming is decisive and irreversible, but the fullness of those promises awaits His second coming. This is the hope of the Gospel. What Christ began, He will finish. Far too many in the Church fail to emphasize His return with the same urgency and centrality that the New Testament does. Scripture does not treat the second coming as a marginal doctrine. It is the blazing, glorious center and focal point of all Christian hope. Until then, we wait with confidence and expectation—because the One who guaranteed every promise is coming back to make them all a reality. Maranatha. - Joel Richardson

The present circumstances can either prepare us to stand in coming trials, or they can make us resistant to the grace of God. My exhortation is to not waste your peacetime. Don’t waste your minor trials. Lean into God with humility, submit to Him in the trial, grow in integrity and faith. Horses and thickets are approaching. - Bill Scofield, Anticipating Horses and Thickets

The atrocities of northern Nigeria, Mozambique, and across much of the Middle East seldom make their way into our newsfeeds because the algorithms know—they know that we find these things weird and abnormal. They are uncomfortable to us because deep down we suspect, we hope, that our discipleship setting in the West is the new normal. Spoiler alert: it isn’t.

I am certainly as guilty as my neighbor of subconsciously exempting myself from suffering for the Gospel. I don’t reject it. I believe it when I read it. Yet, most of my days are spent trying to figure out how to walk with Jesus as though my current setting was going to be my context for following Jesus forever. And herein lies the warning: horses and thickets are coming. As Jeremiah was busy trying to figure out how to get the bad guys out of power, God interrupts to remind him that things aren’t going on like this forever.

Jesus and His apostles framed life in the same way for those who took the plunge of becoming His disciples. James began his letter with a well-known statement,

Consider it a great joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you experience various trials, because you know that the testing of your faith produces endurance.

Endurance, of course, is only valuable if you know that you will be encountering greater difficulties than you are now. James placed value on present difficulties precisely because greater trials were coming, and the current problems were the way disciples might prepare for them. This passage in James concludes with,

Now if any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God—who gives to all generously and ungrudgingly—and it will be given to him.

If peace is temporary, and security is certain to dissipate, then wisdom beckons that we use this time to prepare for more difficult times ahead. Projecting the current peace and security onto the future is folly. - Bill Scofield, Anticipating Horses and Thickets

These themes (the Day of the LORD, divine judgment, resurrection of the dead, and the coming Messianic Kingdom) are shown to have continuity from the Hebrew Bible into later apocalyptic writings and into the New Testament, particularly in the teachings of Jesus and Paul. - John P. Harrigan, Discipling the Gentiles into the Hope of Israel

Apocalypticism is not a break from the Hebrew Scriptures but their natural progression, amplifying prophetic themes like exile, judgment, and restoration. It introduces a two-age framework: the current age marked by evil, and the age to come defined by justice, resurrection, and divine rule. - John P. Harrigan, Discipling the Gentiles into the Hope of Israel

The word “apocalyptic” is popularly associated with fanatical millenarian expectation, and indeed the canonical apocalypses of Daniel and especially John have very often been used by millenarian groups. Theologians of a more rational bent are often reluctant to admit that such material played a formative role in early Christianity. There is consequently a prejudice against the apocalyptic literature which is deeply ingrained in biblical scholarship … Whatever we may decide about the theological value of these writings, it is obvious that a strong theological prejudice can impede the task of historical reconstruction and make it difficult to pay enough attention to the literature to enable us even to understand it at all. - John J. Collins 

Central to this worldview (Jewish Apocalyptic) is a linear view of history moving toward a climactic “Day of the LORD,” involving judgment, resurrection, and the restoration of Israel. Far from myth or metaphor, Jewish apocalyptic literature reinforces and intensifies prophetic themes. Understanding these expectations is critical to interpreting Paul’s writings within their native Jewish framework rather than through later theological innovations. - John P. Harrigan, Discipling the Gentiles into the Hope of Israel

Life is a privilege undeserved,

Sin has warped our view of all;

Hold fast, soldier, do not swerve,

From the path, the upward call.

We have union with our God,

For the blood of Christ prevails;

Bright communion, bottomless, broad,

Love from Him, it cannot fail.

Let us then look unto Jesus,

Clinging firmly as He guides;

Through bleak gales or tranquil breezes,

In our Saviour's Word, abide.

-BA Purtle

When there is not a constant course of mortification set up, but lust is let alone to reign without control, you have no interest in Christ. —Thomas Manton, Works 16:103

People often claim that when Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world..." (John 18:36) he was emphasizing the heavenly, non-earthly nature of his kingdom, which, historically, has also led many Christians to disconnect the land of Israel, and even the entire physical earth, from their eschatology. 

What these people miss, however, is that the Greek word for world (kosmos) can have either a geographical/territorial meaning or a qualitative/ethical meaning in the NT.  

For example, when Paul says that God made the world (kosmos) (Acts 17:24), he is  using kosmos in a basic, geographical sense to refer to the material world. 

On the other hand, when Paul says, "The wisdom of this world is foolishness" (1 Cor. 3:19), he is not saying that the mountains and the oceans are stupid. 

He is saying that the values, ways of thinking, and qualities of people in this world do not bring them to an understanding of the Gospel. 

That's the second way the NT authors will often use the word kosmos. 

Again, the usage there is more qualitative and figurative, not geographical. 

So when Jesus says, "My kingdom is not of this world" (Jn. 18:36), he is not saying that his kingdom will never be established on this earth, nor is he saying that his kingdom will never be established in Israel, because we know that's not true (see Luke 1:32, for example, where Gabriel says Jesus will inherit "the throne of his father David," which is in Jerusalem, not in heaven."  

The point of John 18:36 is simply that Jesus' kingdom was not going to be instituted through worldly means.  

This is why he follows up by saying: 

"If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews." (Jn. 18:36b) 

All Jesus is saying here is that his kingdom was not dependent upon his followers engaging in worldly violence to stop him from being crucified. 

His kingdom was going to advance in spite of his crucifixion, and in reality, because of it.  

Notice the direct connection in the context between "this world" and "fighting."  

Thus, in no way does John 18:36 provide a repudiation of the first-century, Jewish expectation that the Messiah would reign  *on this earth, from Jerusalem.* 

Jesus is simply saying here that his kingdom would come first through his suffering, as well as through the suffering of his followers. 

This entire statement needs to be understood as an explanation of why Jesus was submitting to crucifixion at that time. 

And, just as a sidenote, this verse also does not justify total Christian pacifism in the face of evil, and it also doesn't cancel out the idea that Jesus will return as a man of war at the time of his second coming (see. Rev. 19:11). 

Again, Jesus is not giving us a comprehensive political philosophy here, and nor is he giving us a comprehensive eschatology as it relates to what he will do when he returns. 

He is simply saying, "My kingdom must advance through my suffering first, not through my disciples taking up arms in an attempt to violently stop my crucifixion." 

Now, of course, there are applications of this statement for us in the modern day as well. 

Maybe we can glean from this verse that as much as we should try not to lose in the political sphere, we shouldn't try to win at the expense of following Jesus, or at the expense of picking up our cross. 

Furthermore, as much as we should not become self-appointed martyrs, and as much as we should hope that the people who hold governmental power are either Christians or at least friendly to Christians, and therefore willing to implement Christ-honoring policies, maybe John 18:36 is there to remind us that sometimes, the people of God simply cannot avoid losing and suffering in this world, and that when we do, God is still in control and His kingdom is still advancing nonetheless.  

Indeed, the Messianic kingdom is not of this world. 

It is not dependent upon us engaging in every worldly methodology to only win and never lose, or to only triumph and never suffer. 

Rather, the Messianic kingdom is solely dependent on the crucified Son of Man who went to the cross so that he can return with a sword. 

His kingdom was inevitable even in the face of his suffering, defeat, and loss, and it is inevitable even when we experience the same. - Travis M. Snow

Don't blur the Cross of Christ with the daily cross of the disciple. You cannot carry Christ's cross. You cannot die as a "ransom for the many." Your cross does not make atonement, nor is it a penal substitution or propitiatory sacrifice. You can't even justify yourself, much less "the many." His Cross redeems sinners. His Cross "purchased" the church (see Acts 20.28).

Our cross is derivative. It exclaims His worth and reminds us to die to ourselves for the sake of His name and for others.

Don't conflate the two. Rest in His Cross-work and carry your daily cross in worship and witness. Therein is the pilgrim way. -BA Purtle.

Galatians 2:19 is then logically linked with 2:18, which itself expresses Paul’s conviction that he tore down the Law as the basis of justification, implying that 2:19’s “death to the Law” is not a death to Law-observance in itself, but a death to the Law as the basis of eschatological righteousness. - Paul T. Sloan, Jewish Law-Observance in Paul

Eventually, all of mankind will learn the difficult lesson: We all yearn for Eden, but for now, we must patiently endure the status quo of this age until Yeshua, the King returns, crushes His enemies like grapes, and establishes righteousness on the earth.

On the side of this narrow road of patient endurance are two ditches: One refuses to wait for Jesus and seeks to establish a theocracy now, leading to untold human suffering. The other just lies down in total resignation, leading to untold human suffering. - Joel Richardson

"This message is from the LORD, who stretched out the heavens, laid the foundations of the earth, and formed the human spirit. I will make Jerusalem like an intoxicating drink that makes the nations drunk when they send their armies to besiege Jerusalem and Judah. On that day I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock. All the nations will gather against it to try to lift it, but they'll give themselves a hernia." - Zechariah 12:2–3

With sincere respect for many fine brethren who would disagree, I believe the false hope of postmillennial Christian Nationalism, as well as the false hope of a pretributional rapture (on the other end of the spectrum), will both be agents of the falling away of many in the events leading up to Christ’s return, when things don’t unfold as each of these views posited that they would.

Better to be anchored in the truth that there are two comings of Christ in Scripture— the first to make atonement, the second to judge the nations (which means they won’t all be Christian nations) and restore all things (which means restoration will be necessary).

Until that Day, let the Church grow in holiness and joy, stewarding well the responsibilities God had given us, advancing the Gospel among all peoples whether we prosper or suffer, laboring and longing for His blessed return. 

I believe “New Covenant Premilennialism” (or the kind of historic premillennialism held by men like Spurgeon, McCheyne, Bonar, Ryle, etc.) is most in keeping with Scripture, and is a safeguard against false hopes and misguided aims that cause the church to swerve from “the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.”

Again, I acknowledge that many godly men see things otherwise, but that is my firm and longstanding conviction. -BA Purtle 

My teaching on Zechariah 12-14. Notes. Audio 1. Audio 2. 

Contrary to the dominant Christian tradition that views Paul as leading Gentiles away from Jewish identity and expectations, Paul actually discipled Gentiles into the knowledge and hope of the God of Israel, rooted in the Jewish apocalyptic worldview. - John P. Harrigan, Discipling the Gentiles into the Hope of Israel

COVENANT AND CONTROVERSY: THE GREAT REIGN

For Paul, one way that ethnic particularity is expressed is by not doing (gentiles) or doing (Jews) the Mosaic Law. Though that Law-keeping (or not) does not save, it marks them out as those whom God has saved as Jews (or gentiles). Said differently: such Torah-observance by Jews did not earn their salvation, but it was the expected practice of Jews whose Lawkeeping expresses their Jewish nature, which God did save. That is, God through Christ is saving gentiles as gentiles, and he is saving Jews as Jews. 

Consequently, gentiles ought not Judaize by circumcision, and the logic that compels Paul to prohibit gentile Judaizing by circumcising specifically and whole-Torah-observance generally, which is partially based on God’s promise to save the gentiles qua gentiles, likewise compels him to expect Jewish Law-observance as a second-order good that expresses their Jewish nature in view of his conviction that God will justify “the circumcision” and those “of the Law”, i.e., Jews, as Jews. - Paul T. Sloan, Jewish Law-Observance in Paul