Posted on 03/02/2010 7:59:21 AM PST by Gamecock
While the bible does clearly teach against the Dispensational variety of premillennialism (see questions 18-21 above), it is much more open to historic premillenialism, postmillennialism, and amillennialism. Both premillennialists and postmillennialists will look to Old Testament prophecies of a golden age of gospel success on the earth (e.g. Psalm 22:25-31; Psalm 72; Isaiah 2:1-5), and say that the nature of these prophecies requires a time in which the earth will not be in its eternal state, when no one marries or dies any more, but vastly more prosperous than it is now, when the Church is always afflicted and persecuted. Amillennialists, on the other hand, look to the many New Testament passages that suggest that, when Christ returns, he will at once raise the wicked and righteous dead, enact his final judgment, dissolve the old heavens and earth, and bring in the new, eternal state. When he comes, the Church will still have her enemies and persecutors, and evil men and imposters will be waxing worse and worse (see Dan. 12:1-2; Mat. 24:29-31; 25:31-46; John 5:28-29; 2 Thes. 1:6-10; 1 Cor. 15:51-57; 2 Pet. 3:3-14). All of the Old Testament prophecies they would see as having either a spiritual fulfillment, so that the prophecy of a lion's lying down with a lamb, for instance, could be fulfilled by the gospel's bringing together in peace and love representatives of two different tribes that had historically hated and killed each other. Of course, this sort of thing is happening all over the world, wherever the gospel is going out. And then, amillennialists see the nature of some of those prophecies employed by post- and premillennialists as demanding a final fulfillment in the eternal state. Today in the Church, we receive a foretaste of those prophecies; but we will not see them perfectly fulfilled until God creates the new heavens and the new earth, where righteousness dwell.
Amillennialists probably have the most solid case for their interpretation of Revelation 20. Passages such as 2 Thes. 1:6-10, which clearly teach that Christ's coming and eternally judging the wicked, while glorifying the saints, will take place at a time when there is persecution of the Church. Against premillennialism, Christ's coming demands an immediate and final judgment and establishment of the eternal state. Against postmillennialism, his coming will not be after a golden era, but in the midst of the same sort of persecution that the Thessalonian church was even then experiencing. Then, the mention of Satan's binding, in Revelation 20, corresponds well with related New Testament teaching (see Mat. 12:26-29; Luke 10:17-18; John 12:31-33; 16:8-11; Heb. 2:14-15). And it is only reasonable that the highly symbolic, and most likely recapitulatory visions of John's Apocalypse should be interpreted in light of the clearer didactic teachings of the New Testament epistles. However, it should also be acknowledged that historic premillennialists and postmillennialists have reasonable arguments for their convictions, which should not be scoffed at.
GRPL Ping
There’s an “Apocalypse” going on in Washington DC...that’s for sure!
Some theologian once said if he unexpectedly found himself being raised before Christ’s reign, that he would change his theology on the way up!
#101 What is Replacement Theology?
Judging by all the religious threads I’ve read here over the years, with all the animosity and all the different views, I’d say few of the teachings are really that clear...otherwise, it seems, there would be more agreement.
If anything breaks you get a free replacement.
Most assuredly. While I lean to the Amillennial senario, the Premillenial and Postmillenial senarios do have some things to offer for consideration. But overall, the exegesis of Amillennialism seems the best. The 1,000 years of Revelation 20 seems to be relied upon by Pre and Post Millennial theories more than its worth. For one thing, the Greek of Revelation 20 doesn't use the term for a single, solitary 1,000 year senario, but for an unknown time. The term 1,000 in Revelation is a plural adjective, not a singular term. It, according to many Greek Scholars, should have been rendered "thousands" of years, not "a", "the", or "one". But "tradition" on this came early, and is so held to by many translators, even though they know it is a plural term. Sort of sad, to say the least.
LOL—that is a better guarantee than replacement theology.
The Bible clearly teaches a premillennial return of Christ.
a) Revelation plainly states that Christ’s thousand year reign begins after the devil is bound for a thousand years. Some claim this could be poetic language, not to be taken literally, but that is nonsense. To paraphrase A.W. Tozer, if your sweetheart wrote you a love letter filled with literal statements and poetic metaphors, it would be easy to tell which are which, and the same is true of the Book of Revelation.
b) It is prepostrous to think that THIS is the millennial reign of peace and holiness described in the OT and NT prophecies. Can anyone honestly say they believe the devil is currently bound and exercising no influence over the world? If THIS is the 1,000 year reign of Christ, I’m afraid it was highly overrated.
c) Far too many OT prophecies could only be fulfilled with a premillennial return of Christ.
Post-millennialism is pure nonsense. Amillennialism is slightly less ridiculous, but still clearly wrong.
This is not to be confused with the timing of the rapture, in relation to the return of Christ, which I believe is uncertain, quite possibly intentionally so, on God’s part.
You are absolutely correct. The only way to get post- or a- out of Revelation 20 is to distort the plain meaning of the Biblical text.
The the Church is heir to all the promises God gave the Jews, who have been replaced as God’s people is my understandin. but I’m not a theologian.
Amillenialism. It neither denies nor ignores any part of the Scriptures, nor does it pit certain verses against others.
Actually, the Bible doesn’t “clearly teach against” Dispensational Premillennialism. LOL Although, I know many Bible students who are convinced it does. Boy are they gonna be surprised!
Pre-trib, pre-mil rapture is my theological position...and I am sticking to it!
I’m sure we’ll all find out eventually. Until then, I don’t see the need to get into arguements over it.
We should spend less time worrying over when God will do what and more time concerned what God will do with us.
“c) Far too many OT prophecies could only be fulfilled with a premillennial return of Christ.”
This to me is the “Rosetta Stone.” It unlocks the puzzle. This is the missing piece to the jigsaw puzzle of prophecy.
I believe this “premillennial” period of time is the kingdom of God - here on this earth. But during this “eon” (the kingdom of God), Jesus Christ governs from His throne in heaven, with earth as His footstool. This is the time when I believe many OT prophecies will be fulfilled.
The “return” of Jesus Christ results in His Parousia, His personal presence because of who He is, in light of His many offices. This period, I believe, will last for the “millennium,” or the “thousand years,” or thereabouts. I’m not sure if it’s just one thousand, or a few thousand. Makes no difference. He will return, and He will be present. (I hate it when the translators set forth “coming” for the meaning of “parousia.” His coming again will result in His Parousia.
The game the Amillennialists play is to point out the errors of Dispensationalism, and then present their doctrine as the only alternative. Never mentioning there is another view that is not Dispensational - Historic Premillennialism. They want prospective converts to be kept in the dark about it.
Historic Premillennialism, by the way, is Post-trib, and believes the church is to play the central role in the tribulation and the millennial.
Historic Premillennialism is “historic” because it represents the view of such early post-Apostolic church fathers as Justin Martyr, Ireneaus, Tertullian, Hypollutus, Lactanius, etc. Dispensationalism, on the other hand, is a modern invention, early 19th century Britain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.