The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum LIKE A DEER CAUGHT IN THE HEADLIGHTS!

Just for a little background info... I was raised in an Assemblies of God type church and came out of it in 1999. I was introduced to the Doctrines of Grace through the minsitry of John MacArthur about 5/6 years ago, and I am so grateful to God for allowing me to learn these wonderful truths...

Up until about a few years ago, I had never heard of any other eschatology view outside of Premil Despensationalism, but since realizing other views exist, I've been trying to learn a little bit more about them to draw comparison and find out what the Bible really teaches... I want to know the truth!!! And the more I read and listen to different Bible teachers, the more I see the Premill Dispy view has a whole lot of holes in it... I want to know why I believe what I believe by setting all I've ever known aside/all my presuppositions etc and seriously looking at what the Bible teaches on this subject... Some of the things which really stand out to me thus far are as follows:

The following scriptures need to be carefully considered and explained if one is going to hold to Premillennialism which believes Christ will resurrect the righteous dead 1000 years prior to the resurrection of the wicked dead. How can this be so in light of the following texts wherein the Bible refers to ONLY ONE ressurection for the just and the unjust?

Acts 24:15 "And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be "A" resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust." Note "A resurrection" implies ONE resurrection only, not two.

I cannot see how we can interpret the verse in Acts along with the following texts to reflect two separate resurrections, 1000 years apart. It's just NOT possible, but again I am looking for respectful dialogue here. I want to learn and all my chips are still sitting on the table:

John 5 :28-29
"All that are in the grave shall hear his voice and shall come forth; the good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

John 11:24 speaking of Lazarus, Martha says "I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day." AT THE LAST DAY, not 1000 years before.

John 6:39 Jesus said "all which he hath given me, I shall lose nothing but raise it up at AT THE LAST DAY." Once again, not 1000 years before last day.

John 6:40 Jesus said again "I will raise him up AT THE LAST DAY"

Righteous and wicked will live together until the end of the world according to Jesus himself in Matt 13:36-43 The wheat and the tares live together until the end of the world according to Jesus. They grow together until harvest time when they are separated. The tares first and then the righteous. Verse 40 says "So shall it be in the end of this world..." How can this be 1000 years before?

Matt 13:47-50 - Jesus speaks about the net which is cast into the sea to gather every kind, good and the bad... And he says "so shall it be at the end of the world: the Angels shall go forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." How can this be 1000 years earlier?

Luke 17:26-30, Jesus compares it to Noah and Lot, wherein the righteous and wicked dwelled together until the day Noah entered into the ark, the flood came and destroyed the wicked on the same day. The same happened when Lot went out of sodom, God rained fire and brimstone , and Jesus said "even so shall it be when the son of man is revealed." The wicked are destroyed and the righteous are saved "at the end of the world."

Then there is the Historical Premil view and they believe we are raptured right before the MIllenium and immediately return with Jesus (at the exact same time) to spend 1000 years here with him... This also means there would be people with glorified bodies walking around the earth for 1000 years with those who have corrupt bodies. I was told Jesus did this also after he was resurrected for 40 days before he ascended to heaven. Jesus did this, yes, but I find this a hard one to believe that we will do this also--how can this be? How would you refute this?

I've been listening to a wonderful preacher named Arden Hodgins (Trinity Reformed Baptist church, La Mirada CA) and he has raised many interesting points for me with regards to the Amil view (which he believes the Bible teaches). I've also listened to several lectures by Riddlebarger, and he is excellent also. I'm beginning to think the Amil view is the right one also. The Premil Dispensationalist friends on my FB page keep talking about a literal interpretation of Revelation 20, but I am not so certain this is correct anymore. I posted all those scriptures above and ask them for feedback, but not one of them responded with anything to support their position.

Patrice suggested I post this here and so I am hoping some of you will share with me. I have other points to ask about, but I don't want to bombard you with them all at the same time... They will come later, providing you are up to the job! Ahahahaha!

So can we talk? I am feeling a bit like a deer caught in the headlights and I am so hungry to learn. Looking forward to hearing from you all. Thanks!

Just a very quick reply to all that you wrote. I'll plan on returning to first read what you wrote carefully before making any further comments.

1. On The Highway Website there is a dedicated section just for "Eschatology" which you can find by first clicking on the "Calvinism and the Reformed Faith" link and then the "Eschatology" button on the left. LOTS of good stuff there, e.g., Literal Interpretation, Rapture, etc., etc...

2. One of the best books on Eschatology that presents and defends the Amillennial view is William Hendriksen's More Than Conquerors. This book is his interpretation/exegesis of the book of Revelation which is one of the best ever written, IMO. Another very good book that deals with the wider subject of Eschatology in general comparing views, etc., is The Promise of the Future by Cornelis P. Venema. There are a couple of chapters from that book in the Eschatology section too.

Back later...... D.v.

Thanks, Pilgrm... Still trying to figure all this out over here.

1. There is a "FAQ" section on the main Menu Bar.

2. We have a "Help" forum in the Resources category on the main page of the board.

3. Send me a PM if you are stumped.

1. Go to the main website The Highway main page.

2. Scroll down to "Articles on Important Topics":



3. Click on "Calvinism and the Reformed Faith" link:



4. On the navigation menu on the left click on "Eschatology":



FYI, this board is the only place you can post comments, start new 'threads/discussions', etc. The Highway website is where all the 1600+ articles, sermons, books, etc., are found.

Thank you, Pilgrim. I found all the resources in the Eschatology section. Lots of reading to do for sure.

God bless.

Leah
I don't want to weigh you down with reading maturial, but your mentioning John MacArthur and Dispensationalism brought to memory a short article by Samual Waldrom about a silly statement MacArthur made.
https://www.monergism.com/legacy/mt/sitepages/short-response-dr-macarthurs-comment-amillennialism

Tom

Hi
I was wondering what you think about how Samual Waldron answered John MacArthur's statement?
Tom

I thought it was quite good. His response to the land promises:


was lacking in the beginning. I do think he could have driven a wooden stake through the heart of that claim made by Dispensationalists that Israel has never occupied the land promised by simply noting that the conquest of the land was to be gradual (Ex 23:29ff) and was finally accomplished during the time of Solomon:


However, the rest of his refutation of the land claim was quite good. I too like to point out that Dispensationalists hold that the animal sacrifices will be re-introduced during the alleged literal 1000 year Millennium, which would be a regression of God's progressive revelation and make the atonement of Christ of secondary value at best.

Overall, I think he did a nice job.

I thought he did a good job as well, just thought I would get another opinion.
That is true, but unless I am mistaken I doubt someone like MacArthur would believe that. I believe MacArthur called himself a "leaky Dispensationalist." Though I am certainly not saying that to defend his Dispensationalism.

Thanks
Tom

I did a "quick comparison" of the different schools of eschatology in four posts under the "Theology Thursday" column at http:keachfan.wordpress.com that might be a little helpful. The best thing is not to let all that overwhelm you. These posts are just quick side-by-side comparisons:

First: https://keachfan.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/theology-thursday-thy-kingdom-come/

Second:
https://keachfan.wordpress.com/2016/01/28/theology-thursday-they-kingdom-come-part-2/

Third: https://keachfan.wordpress.com/2016/02/11/theology-thursday-thy-kingdom-come-part-three/

and last one: https://keachfan.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/theology-thursday-antichrists/

-Robin

Dear friends, I haven't been back in since I posted the other day. Lots for me to read over and check out here. Thanks so much for sharing with me.

Let me just make mention -in all my years in the dispy camp (prior to my recent departure from it) I never ever heard anyone teach that animal sacrifices would be reinstituted. Never heard MacArthur make this claim either. I'm not saying it's not out there, but I have never heard of it before until I heard Arden Hidgins mention it when I listened to one of his messages this week. It really shocked me. Yikes.

Robin, just based on what I've read so far... I am somewhat familiar with the NAR Movement, Rick Joyner, and Morningstar Ministries, but I don't understand why they are included in any way in a description of the post millennialist position. I realize they believe in a post trib rapture, but I'm not sure why the writer would even bring the NAR into the post trib view conversation.

From what little I have learned to date, my understanding of historic Amil is that is is completely different from Preterism, so I'm not quite understanding the article which reads that most Amils are Preterists. This is confusing to me.

I used to hear it a lot growing up. But truthfully, I can think of nothing that would be more offensive to the Lamb of God than to preside over animal sacrifices as if His own sacrifice was insufficient!

Basically there are "millennial" and "non-millennial" schools of eschatology. Meaning those that believe in a literal thousand-year earthly and political reign of Christ (millennial) and those who view "the millennium" figuratively rather than literally. Is Christ not now ascended and seated on His throne? Are we not now ruling with Him, holding the keys of the Kingdom (Matthew 18) and having authority and power to preach and make disciples? I'm among those who believe that "the millennium" began with the Lord's first advent and ends with the second.

Like you, I never heard of any other eschatology besides the popular "left behind" scenario until I started college and met some believers outside my little narrow circle. I was also suprised and shocked to learn that the "majority report" (secret rapture, tribulation, return of Christ and "Jewish"-like 1000-year reign) is actually little more than 200 years old! None of the Puritans, Reformers, or founders of the American colonies ever heard or taught any such thing! There is Historic Premillennialism, which is much older and orthodox, but the modern "Left Behind" science fiction is pretty recent; the invention of revivalists who hoped to wake a sleepy Church from her doldrums and create a sense of urgency as if the gospel itself isn't compelling and urgent enough!

Lots of reading to do, but take your time. Three of the schools of eschatology are completely orthodox (well-supported from Scripture and within the bounds of the ancient Creeds and Confessions): Historic Premillennialism, Amillennialism, and non-Charismatic Postmillennialism. Two of the three are "wrong," but I believe the whole point of it all is be ready, not figure out God's ordained timeline.

-Robin

Most Amils, such as myself, are not Preterists, i.e., we do not believe that the majority of what is found in the book of Revelation took place in 70 A.D. +/-. Many modern Post Millennialists, however, hold to "partial Preterism" sometimes referred to as Orthodox Preterism vs. Hyper Preterism.

Amillennialism is sometimes unfairly called "non-millennial" which is a misnomer. Even the name Amillennialism is unfortunately easily misunderstood. A more accurate name for the view is "Realized Millennialism" for the view believes that the millennium spoken of in Rev. 20 is now here. It began at the appearing of Christ and will last until His return at the end of the "age".