3 Millennial Views
- Thread starter Desdichado
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
K
I'm a petrib which could also be classified as a premill.
1. I do not believe that God would put the people that love Him through the things that He (not Satan) is going to do by pouring out His wrath.
2. I know the word rapture is not in the bible but the definition is. The dead in Christ shall rise first and we which remain will be caught up to meet Him in the air. If we meet Him in the air then it is not His Earthly return.
3. When Jesus returns to Earth, the bible describes that Earth will be quaking and the stars will fall and so much turmoil. Jesus said I come as a thief in the night. A thief don't come making a whole bunch of noise, he sneaks in and sneaks out and is quite as a mouse.
4. As in the days of Noah. In the days of Noah, wickedness was continually on the minds of men and were pretty close to that now. When Jesus returns to Earth, armies will be marching against Israel and almost have them defeated.
Conclusion
The rapture (caught up) is a separate event from the return of the Jesus.
1. I do not believe that God would put the people that love Him through the things that He (not Satan) is going to do by pouring out His wrath.
2. I know the word rapture is not in the bible but the definition is. The dead in Christ shall rise first and we which remain will be caught up to meet Him in the air. If we meet Him in the air then it is not His Earthly return.
3. When Jesus returns to Earth, the bible describes that Earth will be quaking and the stars will fall and so much turmoil. Jesus said I come as a thief in the night. A thief don't come making a whole bunch of noise, he sneaks in and sneaks out and is quite as a mouse.
4. As in the days of Noah. In the days of Noah, wickedness was continually on the minds of men and were pretty close to that now. When Jesus returns to Earth, armies will be marching against Israel and almost have them defeated.
Conclusion
The rapture (caught up) is a separate event from the return of the Jesus.
I uploaded to YouTube a video called "An Evening of Eschatology" which is a round-table discussion on the three main views of the Millennium. The participants are Jim Hamilton (defending Premillennialism), Douglas Wilson (defending Postmillennialism), Sam Storms (defending Amillennialism), and the discussion is moderated by John Piper.
I found this discussion extremely helpful in understanding the different views of the Millennium found within Christianity, and I hope it can be helpful for this thread as well.
[video=youtube_share;W75bzrvJtLs]http://youtu.be/W75bzrvJtLs[/video]
I found this discussion extremely helpful in understanding the different views of the Millennium found within Christianity, and I hope it can be helpful for this thread as well.
[video=youtube_share;W75bzrvJtLs]http://youtu.be/W75bzrvJtLs[/video]
1
Yeah all millennial views seem to have glaring weak spots.
Amill....The binding of Satan has strong imagery that he's totally locked up unable to do anything. But the concept of binding in the greater context of the Bible allows for an amill understanding of binding.
Post-mill has the binding of Satan issue, along with a pie in the sky interpretation of the advance of the gospel and cultural change.
Pre-mill..Most passages used to support this are really better interpreted in light of the actual new heavens and new Earth. The strongest point for pre-mill to me is the fact that 1000 is repeated over and over again.
When I weigh all of the options, amill seems the closest to being correct, but I wonder if there is another option outside of the box.
Amill....The binding of Satan has strong imagery that he's totally locked up unable to do anything. But the concept of binding in the greater context of the Bible allows for an amill understanding of binding.
Post-mill has the binding of Satan issue, along with a pie in the sky interpretation of the advance of the gospel and cultural change.
Pre-mill..Most passages used to support this are really better interpreted in light of the actual new heavens and new Earth. The strongest point for pre-mill to me is the fact that 1000 is repeated over and over again.
When I weigh all of the options, amill seems the closest to being correct, but I wonder if there is another option outside of the box.
L
None of them, they are all wrong.
All of them ignore the facts:
(Mat 24:14 KJV) And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
(Col 1:23 KJV)............the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
(Rom 10:18 KJV) But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound [n]went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.[/b]
All of them ignore the facts:
(Mat 24:14 KJV) And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
(Col 1:23 KJV)............the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
(Rom 10:18 KJV) But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound [n]went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.[/b]
L
It does matter - because if the "end time" view is incorrect then the wrong gospel is being presented - we've got zillions of people looking for signs of the end in the newspapers and the TV - not only that they don't have a clue what to look for anyway.
How many people have had the anti-christ hat plonked on them - no wonder non-Christians shake their heads at these futurists....
Any day now...
How many people have had the anti-christ hat plonked on them - no wonder non-Christians shake their heads at these futurists....
Any day now...
Regarding the Millennium, their are oodles of OT prophecies describing the Millennium.
The difference is that much of the Church chooses to spiritualize or allegorize them (Amillennial)
while the rest of us (Premillennial and some Post-) will take those promises literally.
I have seen that the prophecies pointing to Christ's First Coming were fulfilled literally; there is no good reason for me to switch to an allegorical/spiritual fulfillment regarding prophecies dealing with His Second Coming.
The difference is that much of the Church chooses to spiritualize or allegorize them (Amillennial)
while the rest of us (Premillennial and some Post-) will take those promises literally.
I have seen that the prophecies pointing to Christ's First Coming were fulfilled literally; there is no good reason for me to switch to an allegorical/spiritual fulfillment regarding prophecies dealing with His Second Coming.
John 4:24 God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
Galatians 4:24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.[SUP]25 [/SUP]Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. [SUP]26 [/SUP]But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. [SUP]27 [/SUP]For it is written,“Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear;
Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor;
For more numerous are the children of the desolate
Than of the one who has a husband.”
[SUP]28 [/SUP]And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. [SUP]29[/SUP]But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. [SUP]30 [/SUP]But what does the Scripture say?
“Cast out the bondwoman and her son,
For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.”
[SUP]31 [/SUP]So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.
1 Corinthians 2:13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
Galatians 4:24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.[SUP]25 [/SUP]Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. [SUP]26 [/SUP]But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. [SUP]27 [/SUP]For it is written,“Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear;
Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor;
For more numerous are the children of the desolate
Than of the one who has a husband.”
[SUP]28 [/SUP]And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. [SUP]29[/SUP]But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. [SUP]30 [/SUP]But what does the Scripture say?
“Cast out the bondwoman and her son,
For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.”
[SUP]31 [/SUP]So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.
1 Corinthians 2:13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
Last edited:
He is asking about millennial views. You are saying that spiritualizing scripture is wrong. I would say that that is what the thread it about.
I am not attacking, nor am I upset. I enjoy discussing scripture and I hope that what I am saying is not coming across aggressive or in anger. That is not the way that it is intended. That is one of the problems with conversing without tone and facial expressions.
I am not attacking, nor am I upset. I enjoy discussing scripture and I hope that what I am saying is not coming across aggressive or in anger. That is not the way that it is intended. That is one of the problems with conversing without tone and facial expressions.
Last edited:
He is asking about millennial views. You are saying that spiritualizing scripture is wrong. I would say that that is what the thread it about.
I am not attacking, nor am I upset. I enjoy discussing scripture and I hope that what I am saying is not coming across aggressive or in anger. That is not the way that it is intended. That is one of the problems with conversing without tone and facial expressions.
I am not attacking, nor am I upset. I enjoy discussing scripture and I hope that what I am saying is not coming across aggressive or in anger. That is not the way that it is intended. That is one of the problems with conversing without tone and facial expressions.