PREMILLENNIALISM AND MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT PROPHECY

[sparkman]

Most American Evangelicals don't even understand the four different views regarding end-time events. They have been taught one view, and don't even realize there are at least 3 other views.

The four traditional options are dispensationalist premillennialism, historic premillennialism, amillenialism, and postmillennialism.

Most American Evangelicals fall into the dispensationalist premillennialism camp. However, I find the amillenial position to be more coherent with the rest of the New Testament books.

The amillenialist position teaches that Christ is reigning now, and that the New Heavens and the New Earth will be inaugurated at that time. The position does not propose that there is no millennium, like the name suggests, but that in a sense Christ is reigning now, in this "present evil age".

The vocabulary of Scripture talks about two different ages..the "present evil age" which is characterized by the effects of the Fall and the curse, and the "age to come" which is characterized as a restored Paradise, a better version of the Garden of Eden.

The bookends approach to Scripture describes redemptive history in this manner: Creation (Genesis 1,2), Fall (Genesis 3), Rescue (Christ and his atoning sacrifice to undo the works of the Devil), and Restoration (Revelation 21-22 and the New Heavens and New Earth).

The amillenial view falls into line with this narrative of Scripture very well.

There are a ton of questions related to these views, and I can't address them all except to say that I don't believe the premillennial dispensationalist view. I was a historical premillennialist for the majority of my Christianity, and I do not hold that view now either.

I would suggest the book The End Times Made Simple by Sam Waldron, as well as Paradise Restored by David Chilton. Paradise Restored is a postmillennial view, and I don't agree with this view exactly either, but it gives a good background into the bookends approach to Scripture.

At any rate, you should examine the options. Don't assume that premillennial dispensationalism is true. It often leads to millennial madness and playing the game of "pin the tail on the antichrist". I see so much speculation amongst Christians that is basically related to assumptions they are making because of the end-times view they've been taught by their organization. Additionally, your view of end-times actually does have some effect on your view of the rest of Scripture. So, it is an important topic.

 

[sparkman]

WHY I CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT THE MILLENNIUM, SAM STORMS

Editors' Note: What doctrine or issue have you changed your mind about? TGC posed that question to several pastors, theologians, and other thinkers in order to gain a better understanding of what leads to shifts along the theological spectrum. Sam Storms launches this new series with an explanation of how he changed his views on the millennium.
[HR][/HR]
Although I grew up in a Southern Baptist church and was regularly exposed to Scripture, I can't recall ever hearing anything about a “millennial” kingdom, much less the variety of theories regarding its meaning and relationship to the second coming of Christ. Like many of my generation, my initial exposure to biblical eschatology was in reading Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth during the summer of 1970.

Not long thereafter I purchased a Scofield Reference Bible and began to devour its notes and underline them more passionately than I did the biblical text on which they commented. No one, as I recall, ever suggested to me there was a view other than that of the dispensational, pretribulational, premillennialism of Scofield. Anyone who dared call it into question was suspected of not believing in biblical inerrancy.

Questioning Premillennialism

Upon graduating from The University of Oklahoma in 1973, I began my studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. My professors were a Who's Who of dispensational premillennialism: John Walvoord (then president of DTS), Charles Ryrie (author of Dispensationalism Today and The Ryrie Study Bible), and J. Dwight Pentecost (author of perhaps the most influential text on the subject at that time, Things to Come), just to mention the more well-known. Anything other than the dispensational premillennial perspective as found in Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology and taught in the many DTS classrooms was considered less than evangelical. The only thing I recall hearing about amillennialism, for example, was how dangerous it was given the fact that it was popular among theological liberals who didn't take the Bible very seriously.

Robert Gundry's book The Church and the Tribulation was released in 1973, the same year I began my studies at Dallas, and it fell like a theological atom bomb on the campus. Everyone was reading it, and more than a few were being drawn to its post-tribulational perspective on the timing of the rapture. Debates in the classroom, cafeteria, and elsewhere were abundant and quite heated. Someone obtained a copy of Daniel Fuller's PhD dissertation in which he critiqued the hermeneutics of dispensationalism, and more gasoline was thrown on the fire.

Upon my graduation from Dallas Seminary in 1977 I immediately immersed myself in a study of all aspects and schools of eschatological thought. Over the next few years, the two most influential and persuasive volumes I read were The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism by George Eldon Ladd (himself a historic premillennialist), and Anthony Hoekema's book The Bible and the Future (Hoekema was an amillennialist). It is worth noting here that the distinction between Israel and the church, on which dispensationalism is largely based, could not withstand either Ladd or Hoekema's relentless assault.

My Unpardonable Sin

It wasn't long before Ladd, Hoekema, and Gundry, together with a few others, had persuaded me that there is no basis in Scripture for a pre-tribulational rapture of the church. That was, in the eyes of many, bad enough. Indeed, I distinctly recall the horror (trust me, “horror” is by no means an exaggerated term to describe the reaction I received) in my church when I made it known that I could no longer embrace a pre-tribulation rapture. More than a few were convinced that I was well on my way into theological liberalism! But when in the early 1980s I abandoned premillennialism in all its forms, public reaction was such that you would have sworn I had committed the unpardonable sin. I'm not suggesting that all or even the majority of dispensational premillennialists feel this way today (I hope and pray that few do), but the atmosphere in the 1970s and 1980s was something less than amicable for those who departed from the accepted eschatological faith.

My departure from premillennialism and embrace of amillennialism was gradual and came as a result of two discoveries as I studied Scripture. First, I devoted myself to a thorough examination of what the New Testament said would occur at the time of Christ's second coming (or parousia). What I found was a consistent witness concerning what would either end or begin as a result of our Lord's return to the earth. Sin in the lives of God's people, corruption of the natural creation, and the experience of physical death would terminate upon the appearance of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, the resurrection of the body, the final judgment, and the inauguration of the New Heavens and New Earth would ensue. But why is this a problem for premillennialism? Good question.

Scriptural Challenges for Premillenialists

If you are a premillennialist, whether dispensational or not, there are several things with which you must reckon:
• You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ's second coming.
• You must necessarily believe that the natural creation will continue, beyond the time of Christ's second coming, to be subjected to the curse imposed by the Fall of man.
• You must necessarily believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.

So what's wrong with believing these things, asks the premillennialist? What's wrong is that these many things that premillennialists must believe (because of the way they interpret Scripture), the NT explicitly denies. In other words, in my study of the second coming of Christ I discovered that, contrary to what premillennialism requires us to believe, death is defeated and swallowed up in victory at the parousia, the natural creation is set free from its bondage to corruption at the parousia, the New Heavens and the New Earth are introduced immediately following the parousia, all opportunity to receive Christ as savior terminates at the parousia, and both the final resurrection and eternal judgment of unbelievers will occur at the time of the parousia. Simply put, the NT portrayals of the second coming of Christ forced me to conclude that a millennial age, subsequent to Christ's return, of the sort proposed by premillennialism was impossible.

The second factor that turned me from premillennialism to amillennialism was a study of Revelation 20, the text cited by all premillennialists in support of their theory. Contrary to what I had been taught and long believed, I came to see Revelation 20 as a strong and immovable support for the amillennial perspective.

My eschatological journey and biblical defense of amillennialism may now be examined in greater detail in my book, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative (Mentor, 2013).


https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-the-millennium

 

[Locutus]

Apparently David Chilton changed his views to full preterism before he died, his "Days of Vengeance" is a good read, but was written while a partial preterist.

 

[sparkman]

Cults play into the "millennial madness" hype in order to provoke fear in seekers so that they accept their belief system.

I remember that my Armstrongite pastor mentioned this with regards to church publications. He said that they intentionally placed articles in the church's magazine concerning prophecy to attract seekers into the church.

I realize that the judgment to come is a real thing, and that the seeker should understand that the Day of the Lord is coming, so I have no issue in regards to teaching about it, but almost always there is an imbalance in certain quarters concerning this, and the imbalance is largely in the premillennial dispensationalist camp.

I would also like to address one common accusation. Premillenial dispensationalists will often claim that believers who don't hold to the premillennial dispensationalist view lack a sense of the imminent return of Jesus Christ, so will live in a manner that is morally lax because they don't live in constant fear of Christ's return. I don't know how they could hold that position, since every believer should be aware that he may be breathing his last breath in the next minute. He could have an aneurism and die in the next moment. Additionally, many believers have had serious auto accidents that could have ended their lives. So, I find the assertion that the premillennial dispensationalist view engenders needed fear into the believer that keeps him from falling into moral laxity to be uncompelling.

 

[sparkman]

Apparently David Chilton changed his views to full preterism before he died, his "Days of Vengeance" is a good read, but was written while a partial preterist.

I don't agree with full preterism but I do agree that the "bookends approach" to Scripture is a good one, and his book lends a lot of support to that view...Paradise Restored..

 

[sparkman]

Here's a link to purchase "The End Times Made Simple" by Sam Waldron:

https://www.amazon.com/End-Times-Ma...578&sr=8-1&keywords=The+End+Times+Made+simple

Here's a link to purchase "Paradise Lost" by David Chilton:

https://www.amazon.com/Paradise-Res...=8-1&keywords=Paradise+restored+david+chilton


The main reason that I think it is valuable is providing support for the bookends approach to understanding Scripture - Creation, Fall, Rescue, Restoration. This view is the "spectacles" that I think makes the message of Scripture coherent.

 

[Locutus]

I already believe that "man" in Christ is restored to paradise - so no need to read Chilton's book on it....

 

[miknik5]

Is satan bound now?
And if so, why and when is he let loose again?

 

[miknik5]

Also, has the false prophet and the beast (false christ) been cast into the lake of fire?
If so, can you please tell me who these two were?

 

[miknik5]

I also would like to know when the three frogs which came out of the mouths of these three will work in the "kings of the earth" to gather them for the great battle?

 

[miknik5]

Most American Evangelicals don't even understand the four different views regarding end-time events. They have been taught one view, and don't even realize there are at least 3 other views.

The four traditional options are dispensationalist premillennialism, historic premillennialism, amillenialism, and postmillennialism.

Most American Evangelicals fall into the dispensationalist premillennialism camp. However, I find the amillenial position to be more coherent with the rest of the New Testament books.

The amillenialist position teaches that Christ is reigning now, and that the New Heavens and the New Earth will be inaugurated at that time. The position does not propose that there is no millennium, like the name suggests, but that in a sense Christ is reigning now, in this "present evil age".

The vocabulary of Scripture talks about two different ages..the "present evil age" which is characterized by the effects of the Fall and the curse, and the "age to come" which is characterized as a restored Paradise, a better version of the Garden of Eden.

The bookends approach to Scripture describes redemptive history in this manner: Creation (Genesis 1,2), Fall (Genesis 3), Rescue (Christ and his atoning sacrifice to undo the works of the Devil), and Restoration (Revelation 21-22 and the New Heavens and New Earth).

The amillenial view falls into line with this narrative of Scripture very well.

There are a ton of questions related to these views, and I can't address them all except to say that I don't believe the premillennial dispensationalist view. I was a historical premillennialist for the majority of my Christianity, and I do not hold that view now either.

I would suggest the book The End Times Made Simple by Sam Waldron, as well as Paradise Restored by David Chilton. Paradise Restored is a postmillennial view, and I don't agree with this view exactly either, but it gives a good background into the bookends approach to Scripture.

At any rate, you should examine the options. Don't assume that premillennial dispensationalism is true. It often leads to millennial madness and playing the game of "pin the tail on the antichrist". I see so much speculation amongst Christians that is basically related to assumptions they are making because of the end-times view they've been taught by their organization. Additionally, your view of end-times actually does have some effect on your view of the rest of Scripture. So, it is an important topic.

You listened to men.

 

[sparkman]

Is satan bound now?
And if so, why and when is he let loose again?

In one sense. He cannot hinder the gospel message significantly as he did before. The Gentiles especially were pretty much totally blinded until Christ came.

 

[Denadii]

Has anyone actually asked the Holy Spirit to show them which is right? And if you did, did you listen for the answer? I think not. because if you had there would not be so many different answers.

 

[miknik5]

Satan is a great imitator.
It's why though he cant reveal himself fully in one, he will imitate the trinity with a very unholy trinity...the false prophet, the false christ/beast and the dragon who gave his power to the beast.

and in that time, men will be found worshipping both the false christ and the the dragon who gave his power to the beast.

now, I don't take that literally but symbolically.
I know that the dragon is satan and the beast is the false christ and the false prophet also is one who is ruled by the wrong father....

but when were these made manifest.

Because those who are alive during and in the 1000 year reign were those who were not either cast into the lake of fire (like the false prophet and the beast) , or killed...

And we know, according to Revelation 19, (which mirrors John 5) that the rest of the dead did not rise again until AFTER the 1000 year reign

 

[miknik5]

In one sense. He cannot hinder the gospel message significantly as he did before. The Gentiles especially were pretty much totally blinded until Christ came.

He can't hinder the GOSPEL message significantly?

Is there degrees or levels of hindering the TRUTH? Can one be half in and half outside and still be IN...THE RIGHT DOOR?

Either one has THE TRUTH and holds to THE TESTIMONY of JESUS
Or one doesn't.

Either in THE DOOR
Or outside

 

[miknik5]

Isaiah 8 is sufficient.
If all would hold to that, they won't when the day of evil comes, run to any other whispering spirit who will tell them what their itchy ears want to hear.

That will be the issue and the reason why many will flock to the false prophet who will offer soothing words to appeal to worldly man who will be looking for an immediate "fix up" for the trouble that will overflow upon the earth in that day.

Who will cause "ahab" to fall will still be the very thing that will cause "ahab" to fall...

 

[sparkman]

You listened to men.

Which men? You do realize that premillennial dispensationalism came about with men like Scofield in the last 200 years?

There was some evidence of premillennialism within 200 years of Christ's death but it DEFINITELY was not premillennial dispensationalism.

Therefore, the accusation that I listen to men can most certainly be leveled against premillennial dispensationalism. It's a silly remark.

How do you explain Matthew 25 and the sorting of the wheat from the chaff, and the goats from the sheep AT CHRIST'S RETURN?

Reading the clear Scriptures first, and basing one's view of end-time events on them, renders a far different result than premillennial dispensationalism. I see the resurrection and reward of the just, and the punishment of the unjust, happening at Christ's return, at the same time.

Revelation 20 is not clear and to base one's view of end times on it, prior to viewing the clearer Scriptures, is unwise. A solid principle of hermeneutics is to look at the clear Scriptures, and interpret Scriptures in light of them, before looking at the unclear Scriptures. Yet that is what premillennial dispensationalists have failed to do.

Show me verses that indicate there is a long time gap between the resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous. I don't think you can do it without dipping into Revelation 20, which is unclear.

 

[miknik5]

In one sense. He cannot hinder the gospel message significantly as he did before. The Gentiles especially were pretty much totally blinded until Christ came.

Wait til he is released again and how those who enjoyed a time of peace will make manifest that they had no one to blame their rebellion and iniquity on but themselves...

Since satan was bound during that time...

 

[miknik5]

Which men? You do realize that premillennial dispensationalism came about with men like Scofield in the last 200 years?

There was some evidence of premillennialism within 200 years of Christ's death but it DEFINITELY was not premillennial dispensationalism.

Therefore, the accusation that I listen to men can most certainly be leveled against premillennial dispensationalism. It's a silly remark.

How do you explain Matthew 25 and the sorting of the wheat from the chaff, and the goats from the sheep AT CHRIST'S RETURN?

Reading the clear Scriptures first, and basing one's view of end-time events on them, renders a far different result than premillennial dispensationalism. I see the resurrection and reward of the just, and the punishment of the unjust, happening at Christ's return, at the same time.

Revelation 20 is not clear and to base one's view of end times on it, prior to viewing the clearer Scriptures, is unwise. A solid principle of hermeneutics is to look at the clear Scriptures, and interpret Scriptures in light of them, before looking at the unclear Scriptures. Yet that is what premillennial dispensationalists have failed to do.

Show me verses that indicate there is a long time gap between the resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous. I don't think you can do it without dipping into Revelation 20, which is unclear.

I don't know anything about these manmade terms...I know what I know...
And I know there are those who will have a part in the first resurrection and that there will be those who wont.


And I know that those who hear the VOICE of the SON of GOD and those who believe have passed from death to life now...and won't come under condemnation...

It is only those who died outside of faith in CHRIST who will rise in the final judgment to be judged according to their works...
And those whose names are not found in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire where the false prophet and the beast are.

No one has yet been cast into the lake of fire

 

[miknik5]

And remember, to GOD a thousand years is as one day, and one day is as a thousand years.

So, not sure "1000 years" is actually and literally "1000 years"...


Could be symbollc!