Recent Posts

Topics

Older Posts (by Year)

Older Posts (by Month)

Archive for the 'Amillennialism' Category

Dominionism

Thursday, March 31st, 2011

I do not exaggerate when I say that I’ve never seen the prophetic portions of scripture handled more irresponsibly. This writer distorts and goes beyond the most extreme forms of non-millennial and anti-futurist viewpoints of preterism and / or amillennialism. At least those schools recognize a great tribulation and some form of Antichrist. Even if they interpret this to be Nero, or the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem, still, they understand that any “dominion” that Christ secured at the cross did not mean that the early church would not face a future falling away and Antichrist persecution. Even on amillennial terms, Satan’s “little season” is still future, as this is where many amillennialists locate a future Antichrist, just prior to what they see as a general resurrection, with no millennium to follow.

Even in the view of preterists and amillennialists, the early church is not so completely ‘done with the devil’, as to be exempt from what was certainly to them a future tribulation and Antichrist (2Thes 2:3-4). The “dominion” of the fourth beast was not so completely broken, as to exempt the early church from its expectation of a future tribulation of unequaled severity (Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21; Rev 7:14).

    The Near-Far Interpretation of Prophecy

    Sunday, March 6th, 2011

    [...] In every context where the eschatological day of the Lord is in view, there is usually a near and a far fulfillment. This is seen most clearly by the simple fact that the messianic salvation, everywhere identified with a climactic post tribulational day of the Lord, simply did not happen. A view of the inerrancy of the inspired scripture, will, of course, demand that a gap be recognized between the past, near and partial fulfillment, and a future fulfillment that is complete and exhaustive.

    Even if you happen to deny a distinct future for natural Israel, and even if you are prone to interpret scripture allegorically, one is still obliged to recognize that the promised messianic salvation did not come until much later with the advent of Jesus. Beyond the earnest and first fruits (the “already”) of Israel’s promised salvation, there remains the “not yet” of a yet future day of the Lord that will accomplish “the restoration of all things spoken by the prophets” (Acts 3:21; Ro 11:25-29).

    [Note: The difference between pre-mill and a-mill eschatology is simply the question of how much of Israel's promised salvation came in with the revelation of the gospel? All or part? [...] [...]

      Why Amillennialism or Why No Millennium?

      Monday, October 25th, 2010

      [...] To be “in Christ” is to be “in Israel”. To belong to Christ is to belong to Israel. To be born into Christ is to be grafted into the Israel of God, the Israel of the new creation. En-grafted gentiles are equal heirs of Israel’s covenants of promise, since the covenants and promises were not made with any other people. The seed of faith, the children of Abraham, the circumcision of the Spirit etc. are one regenerate people of God, whom Paul calls, “the election” (Ro 11:7). This is the “holy nation” to whom Jesus said the kingdom would be given (Mt 21:43; 1Pet 2:9). It is the Israel of the new creation, which must extend to the regeneration of an elect number of the natural branches at the coming day of the Lord in fulfillment of the demands of the covenant (Ro 11:26-27). “The election” must at length include a surviving third of Israel, when the nation will be born in a day (Isa 66:8; Zech 3:9; 13:8-9). [...]

        Will Jews be expelled again from their Land?

        Saturday, August 28th, 2010

        that ill-prepares the people of God for what is ahead for both Israel and the church. Preterism puts the tribulation in the past. Amillennialism conceives of a “little season” of Satan’s release at the end of this age, with little specificity, and certainly no definite relationship to Israel. Historicism, with its often failed ‘year day’ theory, spreads the tribulation out over history, with an intensive resurgence at the end, while Pre-tribulationism exempts the church from any presence or role in the tribulation, so that “Jacob’s trouble” is only “Jacob’s problem”, since the church is in heaven at the wedding feast while Israel suffers the Antichrist. Hence, ours is a comparatively rare perspective that sees both Israel and the church together in a literal tribulation of 3 ½ years of unequaled affliction, as the church is engaged in prophetic witness and intercessory travail for the final redemption of the covenant nation, amid a common experience of world wide flight and persecution.

        When aware of a future great tribulation, the primary concern has been the purification of the church through persecution. This is true, and we believe the church will be greatly transformed, but the primary purpose of “the tribulation, the great one” is to accomplish the historic fulfillment of what the prophets call, the ‘everlasting covenant’ (Isa 59:21; Jer 32:40; Ro 11:27), which necessarily requires the full coming in of “all Israel”, whom Paul identifies as the “natural branches” of present enmity (Ro 11:21, 24, 28). In conjunction with Christ’s return, the restoration of Israel finishes the mystery of God (Rev 10:7) and begins the millennial reign of Christ. [...]

          The Fundamental Error of Amillennialism

          Thursday, June 24th, 2010

          [...] How we read Daniel and Revelation is first an issue of whether we can trust what Luther called, the priesthood of every believer, or whether we can only safely follow the tradition of interpretation that has come down to us through many of the churchs theological heroes, such as the famed magisterial Reformers, Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli, and their vast theological progeny, as also the popes and bishops of the church of Rome. For the larger part, all have been Augustinian in their interpretation of the Daniel and the Apocalypse. This is why amillennialism has dominated most of Protestant and nearly all Roman Catholic eschatology. It is well known that St. Augustine of Hippo is the father of the a-millennial interpretation of the thousand years (i.e., that the church is the kingdom of God on earth and the millennium is symbolic of the church age).

          Augustinian denial of a future millennium is not the only system of interpretation that denies the literal interpretation of the many prophecies that depict the post-tribulational salvation of a surviving remnant of the Jewish people and the restoration of the nation as a distinctly Jewish nation (Dan 2:44). Simply put, if there is no millennium, there can be no literal fulfillment of the vast amount of prophecy that depicts a glorious future for benighted and beleaguered Israel after the unequaled tribulation at the coming day of the Lord, which the New Testament equates with the time of Christs return [...]