Posted on 08/17/2014 10:21:22 AM PDT by wmfights
While amillennialism has its influence in all areas of theology, it is natural that it should affect eschatology more than any other. As a form of denial of a future millennial kingdom on earth, it stands in sharp contrast to premillennial eschatology.
In previous discussion of amillennialism, it has been brought out that amillennialism is by no means a unified theology, including within its bounds such diverse systems as modern liberal theology, Roman Catholic theology, and conservative Reformed theology. It is therefore impossible to generalize on amillennial eschatology without dividing it into these major divisions. Aside from various small sects who include within their tenets the premillennial concept, premillennialism for the most part presents a united front on eschatology in all major areas. Amillennialism, however, disagrees within itself on major issues. Modern Liberal Eschatology
Modern liberal eschatology almost without exception follows the amillennial idea. Modern liberalism usually disregards postmillennialism, or the idea of a golden age of righteousness on earth, as well as premillennialism which advances such an age after the second advent. For them, all promises of ultimate righteousness are relegated to the life after death.
Homrighausen has called the idea of a millennium on earth “a lot of sentimental heavenism.”1 He goes on to denounce both millennial otherworldliness and the idea that this world is heaven as well: “Millennialists are right in their basic discoveries that this world is fragmentary and needs re-creation. They are right in their insistence that this is an ‘end’ world; things here come to an end and have a limit. They are right in their insistence upon the other world, and in their emphasis upon the pull of God’s power of resurrection. But their abnormal interest in the other world, their reading of eschatology in mathematical terms of time, their otherworldliness and consequent passivity as regards this world, is wrong. But Christians need to be saved, too, from that modern dynamic materialism which romantically sentimentalizes this world into the ultimate. This identifies the time world with the eternal world. This paganism is a hybrid attempt on the part of man to make the creature into the creator. In Christian circles it makes the Kingdom of God a blueprint for a world order. We admire this vehement realism, but we absolutely reject its presumptions that this world is a self-contained and a divine heaven. We live on earth! One world at a time.”2 In other words, there will be no millennium of righteousness on earth either before or after the second advent.
In modern liberalism, there remains a form of postmillennialism which believes that the kingdom of God in the world is advancing and will be ultimately triumphant. In one sense this can be regarded as amillennial in that it denies any real fulfillment to millennial promises. It is dyed in bright hues of optimism and visionary idealism. Its doctrinal background is postmillennialism rather than amillennialism even though amillennialism often has an optimistic note as well. In modern liberal eschatology, the idea of progress and improvement is treated with some skepticism even as it is in modern philosophy. The trend is that indicated by Homrighausen—”one world at a time.” spiritual terms, rather than in bodily terms. This is not to say that there will be no judgment, and no rewards or punishments awaiting us. Indeed, we are being judged all the while, and the rewards and punishments can be seen even now. Every day is Judgment Day.”6 In other words, Harner believes there will be no future judgment and no future resurrection of the body. The principle of spiritualizing Scripture is carried by the modern liberal to its ultimate extreme unencumbered with any idea of inspiration of Scripture and need for literal interpretation. Such is the legacy of spiritualization and unbelief as they combine in modern liberal amillennialism. Roman Catholic Eschatology
It is not within the scope of this discussion to treat the large area involved in Roman Catholic eschatology. The objections of Protestant theology to Roman eschatology have been the subject of voluminous writings ever since the Reformation. In general, however, it may be said that Roman eschatology tends to take Scripture more literally than modern liberal amillennialism. A vivid doctrine of judgment for sin after death, of resurrection of the body, and ultimate bliss for the saints are central aspects. Protestant objection has been principally to the doctrine of purgatory with all its kindred teachings and to the denial of the efficacy of the work of Christ on the cross, making unnecessary any purgatory or any human works whatever to qualify the believer in Christ for immediate possession of salvation, and security, and immediate entrance into heaven upon death. As in modern liberal amillennialism, however, Roman theology would be impossible if a literal method of interpretation of Scripture was followed. Roman theology concurs with amillennialism in denying any future kingdom of righteousness on earth after the second advent, and in its essential method follows the same type of spiritualization as modern liberalism. Amillenarians group together the judgment of the nations (Matt 25:31-46), the judgment of the church (2 Cor 5:9-11), the judgment of Israel (Ezek 20:33-38), the judgment of the martyrs (Rev 20:4-6), the judgment of the wicked dead (Rev 20:11-15), and the judgment of the angels (2 Pet 2:4; Rev 20:10). It is not the purpose of the present discussion to refute the amillennial position on the judgments nor to sustain the premillennial, but the wide divergence of the two viewpoints is evident.
Of major importance in arriving at the respective doctrines characterizing the amillennial and premillennial concept of the judgments is the determining factor of spiritualizing versus literal interpretation. The amillenarian can deal lightly with the various Scripture passages involved, and with no attempt to explain them literally. The difference in character between the church being judged in heaven and the living nations being judged on earth as in Matthew 25 is glossed over and made the same event, even though there is no mention whatever of either the church or of resurrection in Matthew 25. The judgment of martyrs before the millennium and the judgment of the wicked dead after the millennium as outlined in Revelation 20 is brought together by the expedient of denying the existence of the millennium after the second advent.
It is obvious that the amillennial viewpoint is a combination of spiritualizing and literal interpretation. While they believe in a literal second advent and a literal judgment of all men, they do not apply the form of literal interpretation to the details of the many passages involved. It is because the premillenarians insist on literal interpretation of the details as well as the event that they find the various judgments differing as to time, place, and subjects.
The extent of spiritualization being used by amillenarians in eschatology is highly significant, as has been noted in previous discussions. The spiritualizing principle has been excluded so far as robbing eschatology of any specific events such as the second advent or a literal resurrection of the dead. On the other hand the spiritualizing method has been used whenever the literal method would lead to the premillennial viewpoint. It is precisely on the points at issue between them that the spiritualizing method is used by the amillenarians. The premillennial interpretation is thus waved aside as inadequate, confused, or contradictory not by sound exegetical methods but by denial that the passages in question mean what they seem to mean if taken literally. It is for this reason that the controversy between the millennial views often has more sound and fury than facts, and in the minds of many scholars the matter is settled before it is fairly examined.
Even Louis Berkhof who is notably lucid and factual in his treatment of theological disputes writes concerning premillennialism: “In reading their description of God’s dealings with men one is lost in a bewildering maze of covenants and dispensations, without an Ariadne thread to give safe guidance. Their divisive tendency also reveals itself in their eschatological program. There will be two second comings, two or three (if not four) resurrections, and also three judgments. Moreover, there will also be two peoples of God, which according to some will be eternally separate, Israel dwelling on earth, and the Church in heaven.”7
We can hardly expect those who admittedly are bewildered and confused to be able to debate the issues, though Berkhof does much better than most amillenarians. The attitude of Berkhof, however, is significant. To him it is transparent that any doctrine other than the amillennial interpretation is simply impossible. But should amillennialism be taken for granted? Why should there not be three or four resurrections instead of one? What is wrong with there being two peoples on earth? Why on the face of it should we dispute the distinction between the rapture and the second coming? The answer is simply that it contradicts amillennialism, but it does not contradict the Bible literally interpreted. Certainly if one is to reject a doctrine because it is complicated, no theologian could for a moment accept the doctrine of the Trinity or debate the fine points of the relation of the two natures in Jesus Christ.
The doctrine of the eternal state, however, is for the most part one of agreement rather than disagreement. Those who distinguish the program of God for Israel and the church find them fulfilled in the eternal state in the respective spheres of the new earth and the new heavens. While this is rejected by the amillenarians who merge all the saints of all ages into one mass of redeemed humanity, it is not of the same importance theologically as other points of divergence. Reformed amillenarians and premillenarians unite on the important point of a literal eternity, in which both heaven and hell will be peopled.
The millennial controversy can only be dissolved by a careful analysis of the details of premillennialism. The amilliennial contention is, in brief, that premillenarians do not have a case, that their interpretations are confused, contradictory, and impossible. The answer to these charges has, of course, already been made in the abundant premillennial literature available today. It is the purpose of the discussion which will follow, however, to take up the mainsprings of the premillennial interpretation of Scripture and to establish the important and determining interpretations of Scripture which underlie premillennialism as a system of theology. Amillennialism has failed to present any unified system of theology or eschatology. Within its ranks, consistent with its main principles, are the widest divergences on every important doctrine. The purpose of the further discussion of premillennialism is to show that a consistent premillennialism can be erected with principles embedded in its system of interpretation. These at once are determining and corrective so that a premillenarian is always properly a conservative and Protestant theologian. The issues raised briefly in the survey of amillennial theology which is here concluded will be considered again seriatim as they come in conflict with tenets of premillennialism.
This article was taken from the Theological Journal Library CD and posted with permission of Galaxie Software.
1 Elmer G. Homrighausen, “One World at a Time,” Contemporary Religious Thought, Thomas S. Kepler, editor, p. 372.
2 Loc. cit.
6 Nevin C. Harner, I Believe, p. 83.
7 Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, p. 710.
1 Thes. talks about the people who have already died. And the end of the world. Nothing about any rapturing here. The earth will be destroyed by fire on the last day.
1 THESSALONIANS, CHAPTER 4
Hope for the Christian Dead.
13We do not want you to be unaware, brothers, about those who have fallen asleep, so that you may not grieve like the rest, who have no hope.
14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose, so too will God, through Jesus, bring with him those who have fallen asleep.e
15Indeed, we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord,* will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep.f
16For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first.g
17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together* with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord.
18Therefore, console one another with these words.
It’s helpful to read the entire epistle at once, if understanding is your goal.
You skipped much of the discussion with your post.
Verse clipping is the heart of cultism.
.
I would say the same thing to someone who quotes only 1 Thes. 4:17 — they take that one verse entirely out of context.
I think I need to correct one misconception you have that I see others making sometimes and that is that Israel was a "chosen people" out of the rest of humanity - as if God did an eeny, meeny, miny, mo and landed on Israel. That is not true. Remember, that it all started with Abraham and God's promises to him and his "seed". Abraham had a son, Isaac, and he had a son, Jacob, who fathered twelve sons who are called the twelve tribes of Israel (Jacob's name was changed by God to "Israel" which is why the descendants were called the nation of Israel). It is to THIS nation that God gave specific promises - some conditional and others, unconditional. It is the nation of Israel that God "betrothed" to Himself and gave a covenant of marriage.
So, there are promises to the nation of Israel and there are promises to Abraham's "seed" and they ARE differentiated. As a Christian, I am a "by faith child of Abraham" - God said his seed would be as numberless as the sands of the sea - and I have been grafted into the branch of spiritual Israel. Many Jews were and are part of the Bride of Christ during this church "age", but the nation as a whole has rejected Jesus as Messiah - as prophesied. They WILL one day return to God at the end of the Tribulation, accept Jesus as their promised Messiah and be given the inheritance of the physical land God promised to them.
The Greek word for church is "ecclesia" and it does mean the called-out ones. But this doesn't mean that the church has replaced Israel. For this time, we (the wild branch) are grafted into Christ, but we did not take the place of Israel - they are the natural branches. They will be grafted BACK in through faith.
Another thing — Everyone will be caught up to the Lord, but then the Lord separates the sheep from the goats and not all will go to heaven.
Paul covers that too.
As do the Gospel writers in the Last Judgment descriptions.
>> “So where is it in the Bible?” <<
.
The “First Resurrection.”
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days...”
.
book and verse?
>> “Another thing — Everyone will be caught up to the Lord,” <<
.
That is false!
Only the elect will be resurrected at the trump, the rest remain as the bowl judgments are unleashed on the world for ten days, then Yeshua returns to Earth with his elect to rule for 1000 years.
Then after the 1000 years comes the resurrection unto death, where he separates the sheep from the goats, and renders unto them all “according to their works.”
.
This is talking about the Last Judgment correct?
Are you mixing Revelation with First Thessalonians? Goodness, what would St. Paul say? LOL!
Matthew 24, the Olivet!
Matthew 24:
[29] Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
[30] And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
[31] And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
After the 1000 years is the last judgment.
His elect have no part in that judgment, they already have had their celestial body for 1000 years by then.
That is why Amillennialism fails. Nobody denies that IN THIS CHURCH AGE anyone who would be saved must receive Jesus Christ as Savior and they become a part of spiritual Israel, grafted into the branch of Jesus Christ and be part of the Bride of Christ. But the PHYSICAL nation of Israel (the unfaithful wife of Jehovah) who at this time has been blinded "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled", will return to Almighty God in repentance and will be grafted BACK into the branch at the end of the Tribulation. It is then that God will fulfill His promises to them of a 1000 year kingdom on earth where Christ, upon the throne of David in Jerusalem, will rule the nations with a rod of iron.
>> “Are you mixing Revelation with First Thessalonians? “ <<
.
No, I am mixing Matthew 24 with 1Corinthians 15:51-58.
They are about exactly the same event.
.
That horse is dead!
Sure thing.
Latin Vulgate Bible 1 Thessalonians 4:17
deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus
KJV 1 Thessalonians 4:17
Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
The origin of the English use of Rapture comes from the Latin Vulgate.
Why should anyone "take" you up on your inane questions? You need to get over yourself. We aren't a bunch of trained monkeys sitting around waiting to cater to your every curiosity! It's funny but you seldom answer any questions given to you but jump at the chance to come up with posers you probably imagine will stump everyone and you will be thought a brilliant theologian. Well, you're not.
I Thessalonians 4 is definitely speaking of the Rapture, where Jesus descends from heaven with the souls of those believers who have died and catches up the believers in Christ still alive and together our bodies are changed into our glorified resurrected bodies to meet the Lord in the air. We are taken to heaven as the Bride of Christ and so shall we ever be with the Lord. That is consolation indeed!
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.