The Spurgeon Archive—Main Menu

The link below will take you to an excellent site on Spurgeon’s eschatological views located on I have merely summarized what is stated there below. But don’t take my word for it be sure to visit this site it is full of interesting Spurgeon quotes.

Spurgeon views are supported by his own teachings by this sites author Dennis Swanson. Interesting site, and interesting are the views of Spurgeon. He is classified as a historic premillennialist. He sees Israel and the church as one people of God, with Israel being added to their Messiah even as we are. Swanson writes: “Spurgeon rejected any notion which separated the people of God into separate camps, as taught by Darby and dispensational teaching.”

He sees a future Millennium and our inclusion in the promises made to be carried out during a Millennial reign following Christ’s return. He is post-Trib in his view on the second coming. Swanson states that:

“Spurgeon said little, if anything, about the rapture. He seems to have most likely equated this with the Second Coming. However, he did believe that the church would pass through a tribulation, thus any “rapture” in his thinking would be posttribulational. He said, “we must regard the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple as being a kind of rehearsal of what is yet to be.”343

Spurgeon did not minister with a future Israel in site, yet he must have understood based on scripture that her salvation as a nation was well supported. Scripture without manipulation certainly leads one to a premillennial and post trib coming of our Lord.

Why do I point his position out? — Primarily because the historic premillennial view is a very minority position in our Day when dispensational pre-Trib Theology has taken over. Spurgeon throughly rejected this theological mindset.

Swanson states: “Spurgeon rejected any notion which separated the people of God into separate camps, as taught by Darby and dispensational teaching.”

Obviously when one places all of God’s people into one body and bride there can be no chance of a premature Rapture dividing the bride of Christ. Yet all of scripture leads one in that direction. We are recipients of their promises and are one with them (Eph 2). We are in the Olive tree with Them excluding their unbelievers (Romans 11). We are both seen in His bride the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21). The new covenant was their promise and still is (Jer. 31). Couple all this with the fact that there is no Scriptural support for the resurrection occurring at any other time than the Second Coming, nor is there Scriptural support for dividing the Second Coming into two parts. And I’ll end on this post with the fact that the Rapture must follow the resurrection of all of God’s people who are in Christ. There is absolutely no way for Israel to enter into the new covenant promise other than through Christ the provider of the New Covenant in His blood. Being in Christ is one’s only hope of salvation.

Historic premillennialism still is the teaching of scripture taken literally. It was the teaching of the early church known as Chiliasm — meaning 1000 years. It’s teaching actually nullifies the idea that the Church was intended by Christ to replace Israel, after all Christ was and is Israel’s Messiah. His Church was built upon that fact. Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God.

But neither did Christ, Israel’s Messiah, intend to build a New faith separate and apart from Israel. Instead His intent was to add all to His Church who would believe; both Jews and Gentiles creating one new man. Prophetically the addition of Israel the nation will be the final capstone on this structure (the Church) after the last Gentile is saved.