Eschatology change

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is that B H Carroll on your profile pic? He's been really helpful to me in working out a recapitulative historicism.

To my mind, "things which must shortly come to pass" rules out idealism and futurism. And I think the structure of the book clearly indicates recapitulation. I think those are the simplest indicators of how the book is meant to be understood. The only options left at that point are recapitulative historian and preterism, and preterism seems like a very "forced" way of reading the book.
Listening to three youtube vids of Thomas Gentry convinced me that partial preterism is valid. I'm a neophyte in this argument, so while i lean toward amil I'm impressed with 70 AD as being at least part of what our Lord was prophesying in Matthew 24.
https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...-on-partial-preterism-by-dr-ken-gentry.84775/

I was reading Martin Lloyd-Jones on the 'last things' and he dismissed post mil theory on the basis of the events of the 20th century. I agreed with him for a time, but then came to the realization that with God all things are possible, and perhaps the signs of the times are not a barometer to measure by.
 
Listening to three youtube vids of Thomas Gentry convinced me that partial preterism is valid. I'm a neophyte in this argument, so while i lean toward amil I'm impressed with 70 AD as being at least part of what our Lord was prophesying in Matthew 24.
https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...-on-partial-preterism-by-dr-ken-gentry.84775/

I was reading Martin Lloyd-Jones on the 'last things' and he dismissed post mil theory on the basis of the events of the 20th century. I agreed with him for a time, but then came to the realization that with God all things are possible, and perhaps the signs of the times are not a barometer to measure by.
Our Lord was definitely talking about AD 70 (as well as the end of the world) in Matt 24. No argument there.

I agree with you regarding Lloyd-Jones' mistake. I am a Postmillennialist.
 
Idealism's fatal flaw is that Revelation (and prophecy in general) has concrete referents.

Historicism is at least tied to history. I have problems with how historicists might identify this or that referent, and I have some questions on their interpretation of Matt. 24.

Futurism needs to have better answers on the "soon" passages.
I agree with pretty much all of the above.

Re: Matt 24, I'm of the opinion that the whole passage deals with both AD 70 and the end of the world, one coming out more prominently in some places and the other in other places.
 
Is that B H Carroll on your profile pic? He's been really helpful to me in working out a recapitulative historicism.

To my mind, "things which must shortly come to pass" rules out idealism and futurism. And I think the structure of the book clearly indicates recapitulation. I think those are the simplest indicators of how the book is meant to be understood. The only options left at that point are recapitulative historian and preterism, and preterism seems like a very "forced" way of reading the book.
Yes, that is BH Carroll. Which work of Carroll's helped you with historicism?

Thanks
 
Do we have any info on how he reconciled Yahweh with the worship of Jahbulon?
I meant that comment more tongue in cheek...

Jahbulon is a mispronounced form of Jehovah , it's not found in any approved ritual of Masonry but it has been associated with Scottish Rite. (Wikipedia) For all we know Carroll was Craft Lodge only, I didn't see any mentioned of him belonging to Scottish or York Rite. Carroll was a member of Waco Lodge No. 92 and Herring Lodge No. 1224 in Waco, Texas.

Some quotes from B.H. Carroll:

“Keep the Seminary lashed to the Cross. If heresy ever comes in the teaching, take it to the faculty. If they will not hear you and take prompt action, take it to the trustees of the Seminary. If they will not hear you, take it to the Convention that appoints the Board of Trustees, and if they will not hear you, take it to the great common people of our churches. You will not fail to get a hearing then.” – deathbed commission to Lee Scarborough, his successor as president of Southwest Baptist Theological Seminary.

“These modern devotees of higher criticism must wait each week for the mail from Germany to know what to believe or preach, to find out how much, if any of their Bibles remains.” – Theological Seminaries and Wild Gourds

“The modern cry ‘less creed and more liberty’ is the degeneration from the vertebrate to the jelly fish, and means less unity and less morality, and it means more heresy.” – An Interpretation of the English Bible

“It is a positive and hurtful sin to magnify liberty at the expense of doctrine.” – An Interpretation of the English Bible

Speaking of his false conversion as a child: “I did not believe, in any true sense, in the divinity or vicarious sufferings of Jesus. I had no confidence in professed conversion and regeneration. I had not felt lost, nor did I feel saved. There was no perceptible, radical change in my disposition or affections. What I once loved, I still loved. What I once hated, I still hated.” – My Infidelity and What Became of It

Speaking on the humanistic philosophies he studied before his true conversion: “They were destructive, but not constructive. They overturned and overturned and overturned; but, as my soul liveth, they built up nothing under the whole heaven in the place of what they destroyed. I say nothing. I mean nothing.” – My Infidelity and What Became of It

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
I meant that comment more tongue in cheek...

Jahbulon is a mispronounced form of Jehovah , it's not found in any approved ritual of Masonry but it has been associated with Scottish Rite. (Wikipedia) For all we know Carroll was Craft Lodge only, I didn't see any mentioned of him belonging to Scottish or York Rite. Carroll was a member of Waco Lodge No. 92 and Herring Lodge No. 1224 in Waco, Texas.

Some quotes from B.H. Carroll:

“Keep the Seminary lashed to the Cross. If heresy ever comes in the teaching, take it to the faculty. If they will not hear you and take prompt action, take it to the trustees of the Seminary. If they will not hear you, take it to the Convention that appoints the Board of Trustees, and if they will not hear you, take it to the great common people of our churches. You will not fail to get a hearing then.” – deathbed commission to Lee Scarborough, his successor as president of Southwest Baptist Theological Seminary.

“These modern devotees of higher criticism must wait each week for the mail from Germany to know what to believe or preach, to find out how much, if any of their Bibles remains.” – Theological Seminaries and Wild Gourds

“The modern cry ‘less creed and more liberty’ is the degeneration from the vertebrate to the jelly fish, and means less unity and less morality, and it means more heresy.” – An Interpretation of the English Bible

“It is a positive and hurtful sin to magnify liberty at the expense of doctrine.” – An Interpretation of the English Bible

Speaking of his false conversion as a child: “I did not believe, in any true sense, in the divinity or vicarious sufferings of Jesus. I had no confidence in professed conversion and regeneration. I had not felt lost, nor did I feel saved. There was no perceptible, radical change in my disposition or affections. What I once loved, I still loved. What I once hated, I still hated.” – My Infidelity and What Became of It

Speaking on the humanistic philosophies he studied before his true conversion: “They were destructive, but not constructive. They overturned and overturned and overturned; but, as my soul liveth, they built up nothing under the whole heaven in the place of what they destroyed. I say nothing. I mean nothing.” – My Infidelity and What Became of It

Yours in the Lord,

jm

I am very familiar with the Carroll quotes. I can grant that he was probably only a nominal member. Most Masons don't get high enough where they swear blood oaths to Lucifer.

I do dispute, however, that Jahbulon is simply a mispronunciation of Jehovah. When you add "Baal" or Zebulon variants to the name, it's past the level of pronunciation.
 
I am very familiar with the Carroll quotes. I can grant that he was probably only a nominal member. Most Masons don't get high enough where they swear blood oaths to Lucifer.

I do dispute, however, that Jahbulon is simply a mispronunciation of Jehovah. When you add "Baal" or Zebulon variants to the name, it's past the level of pronunciation.
Well, my source was Wikipedia so...lol
 
Pike's Morals and Dogma is probably the classic text. I wouldn't actually bring it into your house, though, as it is probably charged with demonic energy.
I own it and have read sections of it. Pike makes it clear that M&D are his philosophy and his alone, it is often given out to Scottish Rite members in "some" lodges in the Southern Jurisdiction but not in the Northern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite. Pike was a racist so as you can imagine his works were rejected by Prince Hall Masons Scottish Rite Jurisdictions. So, M&D does not represent Scottish Rite but many do read and make use of it.

I wrote a local history book on the Prince Hall Masons that is in the final phases now. (I need an editor, badly) Most black churches in my area were founded by Prince Hall Masons....rambling on now.

I don't want to get too far off topic but I have a large collection of fringe, occult and esoteric works. If you'd like to continue this discussion we could exchange messages.

Yours in the Lord
 
Hello Jacob,

RE: your four points in the OP:

1) As a staunch amil proponent myself, I heartily concur: a future antichrist / the man of sin (though there have been many little ones so far).
2) Ditto on late date of Revelation
3) Likewise on “realist” amil
4) Recapitulation readings of Revelation are modified when the text specifies otherwise. Take the binding and loosing of Satan for instance: he is bound as regards from deceiving the nations as nations, for the preached Gospel throughout the world sheds a great light within nations which binds this power that held the ancient world in its thrall, although at the determined end of the age – as a prelude to Armageddon’s deceiving-and-gathering-of-the-nations to destroy the New Jerusalem citizens still present on the earth – he is loosed to accomplish this final assault, according to God’s trap to gather the reprobate for destruction after He calls His people up to Himself at the resurrection, in the midst of the horrific global assault.

In Rev 13:7 there is given to the devil (note: it is given by the Sovereign) – through the little beasts he uses up through the church age, the “42 months” / “1,260 days” – to kill them; although Rev 13:7 is a panoramic view because at the end of the age he fully does this by means of his being loosed to deceive nations again. The same ending is shown in more detail in Rev 11:7, for it is at the finish of the two witnesses’ testimony he is given “to make war and to overcome them” – note the identical wording between Rev 11:7 and Rev 13:7!

You are also correct when you say, “Idealism’s fatal flaw is that Revelation (and prophecy in general) has concrete referents.” Even Beale / DE Johnson /Hendriksen don’t discern the “concrete referents”, although Beale allows for it, as I note below in these previews of an attached paper, along with my positing some distinct and some likely historical referents:

An Amillennial Journey Through the Howling Wilderness; and an Overview
With James White’s coming out as Postmil (and possibly “Theonomic”?) new trials will beset the bands of amil believers as they make their respective ways to the glorious but sometimes fearsome End, be it THE end or simply the end of their lives as individuals in this world.​
“New trials”?​
When simple and clear Biblical eschatology becomes confused with unbiblical “end-times theories” — be they of the premil, postmil, or historicist varieties — there won’t be a common understanding among believers about where they are in the general timeline of the end, what is coming, and — most importantly — how to prepare for it. This latter — preparation — is of great importance, for only a prepared people can be of a mind to focus on gathering those things to help them get through a coming severe tribulation. What things? First and foremost is a close, intimate, friendship / relationship with the risen Jesus, and in/through Him the power and comfort of our almighty God, which is greater than outward painful circumstantial experience.​
Second of “those things” to be “gathered”, is a tight-knit close-at-hand community of like-minded believers able to gather together when communications / electricity / transportation / and access to finances / and other necessities of life (food, water, hygienic supplies, medicines, and — of prime importance — corporate worship of our Saviour God) are scarce, and hard to access.​
Third, a glad willingness to share our goods — spiritual, as well as material — with those outside the Faith suffering from the common privation resulting from a societal collapse when our infrastructures are demolished, through divine judgments on the wicked culture, whether directly or through the various enemies of that Babylonian headquarters nation(s) we are living in. In ancient Rome, when plagues decimated the population — families taking their loved ones outside to die on the streets, afraid of being infected themselves — the Christians, who were unafraid to die, tended to them, and many, seeing this courageous, fearless love, turned to the God of these people — thus widely spreading the Faith of the true God in the ancient world. . . .​

Second part of paper:

An Overview of the wilderness terrain, and some near events upon it
Going back a little over half a century we have the first appearance of a prophesied event in history discernable in hindsight and noted in John’s Apocalypse, that being the 5th trumpet in Revelation 9:1, 2, where an angel fallen from heaven was given the key to the bottomless pit, and upon its being opened, “there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit”.​
This is a symbolic image (of which there are many in Revelation) given us as prophetic, and to be understood when we are able. An important note on this discernment: Geerhardus Vos, although speaking of discerning the Antichrist, enunciated a principle applicable here,​
“[It] belongs among the many prophecies, whose best and final exegete will be the eschatological fulfillment, and in regard to which it behooves the saints to exercise a peculiar kind of eschatological patience.” (The Pauline Eschatology, p. 133)​
O.T. Allis in his book, Prophecy and the Church, expressed the same sentiment:​
“The usual view on this subject [‘the intelligibility of prophecy’] has been that prophecy is not intended to be fully understood before its fulfilment, that it is only when God ‘establishes the word of his servants and fulfills the counsel of his messengers,’ that the meaning and import of their words become fully manifest.” (p 25)​
Stuart Olyott in his, Dare to Stand Alone: Daniel Simply Explained, thinks likewise:​
“We must realize that some of the Bible’s teachings relating to the very last days will not be understood until we are in those days. That is why it is both unwise and dangerous to draw up detailed timetables of future events. Some parts of the Word of God will not become obvious in their meaning until the days of which they speak have dawned.” (p 166)​
With regard to G.K. Beale’s view on Revelation’s prophecies – he is among the foremost of commentators on this book – it is accepted that the “eclectic” or “modified idealist” view (Beale)[1]allows some departure from the idealist, though as to where the line is drawn there is no clear consensus. Beale himself says, “...certainly there are prophecies of the future in Revelation. The crucial yet problematic task of the interpreter is to identify through careful exegesis and against the historical background those texts which pertain respectively to past present and future.” [2]​
[1 G.K. Beale, New International Greek Testament Commentary: Revelation (Eerdmans 1999), pp 48, 49.​
2 Ibid., p 49.]​
The term “idealist” in eschatology refers to non-historic patterns or dynamics recapitulated throughout the symbolic “thousand years” of the church age, such as the church bearing its witness of Christ and His kingdom, resulting in persecution, resulting in warning judgments from the Lord, which are often ignored, resulting in destruction judgments. Also, the church becoming worldly, hence idolatrous, and it being subjected to warnings and to disciplinary judgments, by which the believing remnant is awakened to its danger and repents, returning to godliness. Such dynamics are repeated throughout the church age as depicted in Revelation.​
Going back to the “prophesied event in history discerned in hindsight” . . . .​

To continue reading see the attached pdf.
 

Attachments

  • An Amillennial Journey Through the Howling Wilderness; and an Overview.pdf
    323.9 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Another doubt I had: Acts 15 and rebuilding the booths of David seems to suggest the church fulfills Israel. I would rather say fulfill than replace or strictly identify.
 
Another doubt I had: Acts 15 and rebuilding the booths of David seems to suggest the church fulfills Israel. I would rather say fulfill than replace or strictly identify.
I have fluctuated a bit over time, starting as an amil, renaming to "optimistic amil," to accepting being a "postmil" of some kind, to being (once more) an amil, confident only of the long term downgrade of history within this age while expecting a few upticks (very few) to disrupt that trend as the Lord tarries.

I, too, would use "fulfillment" language, but take all emphasis off the church as a fulfilling entity.

For a long time I lacked the proper vocab and frame of reference to express myself. Having now preached on a good bit of the Bible in the past 2 decades, I'm now clear on the terms I choose. I have always detested the Romanesque language of "replacement." Not only do I not mean what Rome (and their Dispensational echo) mean; I find that error as pernicious as the Dispensational premil.

There are no more promises for a separate ethnic Israel to inherit. Jesus alone has inherited. "His father has given him all that he has." He is an Israel-of-one. He is the Israel of God (and so are his people as his seed, plural). Paul places national Israel in exactly the position of Ishmael, the elder brother, Gal.4. All the sons have been disinherited, Act.2, all but One. But there is one way back, returning as servants of the Seed, and to be made members of his house on the same basis as everyone else, and to be raised from there to the position of sons again by grace.

The fulfillment is Jesus, the Vine, the olive Tree. The church is simply the NT era expression of all--those of the ages prior to Jesus as well as those of the present age--the branches that have ever been or ever will be grafted into him. Talking about future fulfillments that are coordinated to a separatist expression presupposes that all the promises are NOT in him yes and in him amen.

It is retrograde, in my opinion, to later choose some branch or stock from out this forever-company, and reserve for them some special answers. That would necessarily involve 1) taking some of the fulfillment completed in Christ away from Christ at some moment in time; and 2) yet again privileging one branch of the common race of men for no new purpose, the original purpose of bringing Christ into the world being a singular success in all respects.

The church, with ethnic Israelites/Jews included, fulfills the Abrahamic promise in this sense: that he would be the father of many nations and the whole world (all the families of the earth) be blessed through him, a host of descendants who all serve the One Seed. He stands to the fore before God Almighty to declare, "Behold, I and the children whom the LORD has given me."
 
While we are on the subject of the conversion of the Jews, Richard Sibbes said, "There is to come the conversion of the Jews. Many good souls desire that. There is to come the confusion of antichrist, and many good things that God will bring to pass in another age." (Works, 7: 421)
 
Good question. But I wonder what it means that Jesus bound the strong man and is that related to rev 20.

The imagery certainly fits, but exegetically I find it a hard move to exchange one concept from Mathew to another from John. They could be the same thing, but that's the thing one needs to prove. I only see it asserted.
 
My own take is that Jesus' death/resurrection removed the legal right Satan/principalities had over the nations (but it didn't displace them). If that's what people want to mean by "binding the strong man," I'm okay with that.
 
The imagery certainly fits, but exegetically I find it a hard move to exchange one concept from Mathew to another from John. They could be the same thing, but that's the thing one needs to prove. I only see it asserted.

The imagery certainly fits, but exegetically I find it a hard move to exchange one concept from Mathew to another from John. They could be the same thing, but that's the thing one needs to prove. I only see it asserted.
Yeah, true. But I guess another way of seeing satan's binding would be in terms of
My own take is that Jesus' death/resurrection removed the legal right Satan/principalities had over the nations (but it didn't displace them). If that's what people want to mean by "binding the strong man," I'm okay with that.
Yeah, true. Also, Rev 13 doesn't say anything about deceiving the nations into the final war. But deceiving them into Satan worship. So there maybe 2 different deceptions. Rev 20 seems to be tied to deceiving the nations into the final war.
 
Actually, the "ditch" pastor Sheffield was referring to I think was the Postmil, whereas Jacob was tentatively writing from the Amil.

About the binding: during our King's walk on the earth among us what was it that bound the devil and his legions of spirits? It was His word, in the power of God's Spirit. And after His death, resurrection, ascension, and enthronement what was it? It was the word of our mighty Redeemer's deliverance of His people from sin, Satan, and death — the Gospel — in the power of His Spirit through the testimony of His people across the world. The Gospel is the power of God (1Cor 1:18; Rom 1:16).

When His people "shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them" (Rev 11:7). At this point the witness of the church shall be at or near its end — all or most of the elect called in — and the Gospel witness silenced. To preach it is to die. And many of us die gladly, bravely, by His grace. No more are Satan and his hordes impeded by the mighty Spirit of Christ in the Gospel of His almighty power.

Evil rises to its height — the entire world now unafraid to oppose the Truth, the man of sin lulling them all with his wicked charm — turning on the meek of the earth, who have been purified in the furnace, the chaff blown away, the LORD of hosts now arising to the final Day of Vengeance, manifesting the fury of His wrath, as it is written, all the wicked left on earth after abusing His bride, saying

"...to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?" (Rev 6:16-17).​

The bride of Christ, glorious in her beauty of furnace-refined holiness, having been called up to her Beloved, now preparing for her unending honeymoon with the Son of God.
_______

HIS BRIDE

a man…shall be joined to his wife,
and they two shall be one flesh.
This is a great mystery: but I speak
concerning Christ and the church.
— Paul to the Ephesians​

She is the knock-out of the ages, His bride;
even the angels are astonished, wide-eyed
at a beauty beyond what they see in themselves
and seeing such mysteries desire to delve
into how it could be, this shining like deity
in one once consort with the dark prince, in infamy
before she was redeemed, and party to the deicide.

The price He paid to win her back was steep,
a horrid cost much wondered at in glory’s Keep,
but He got her, and led her through the wilderness
of hearts, through enemies and great distress;
He taught her to stay near to Him,
hold to His word and heart when the way grew dim,
to trust Him, her friend in trouble, her guard in sleep.

It is the story of God the Son’s bride;
she is many, male and female, for whom He died;
she is rugged soldier, little child, woman fair,
all one they are, all dependent on His care.
Safe now in the Kingdom, His glory their reward,
she shines full back the glory of her Lord,
He who ever lives, and for her was crucified.
 
Actually, the "ditch" pastor Sheffield was referring to I think was the Postmil

685d63c091739c08df91fbc8375ae119.jpg
 
Actually, the "ditch" pastor Sheffield was referring to I think was the Postmil, whereas Jacob was tentatively writing from the Amil.

I know.

My tongue was in my cheek as I pointed out that Jacob had missed the straight path of postmillennialism and joined Rev Sheffield in the gloomy ditch of amillennialism.

Loses something when you have to explain it though.
 
With regards to Amil, I've been thinking about how a spiritually minded OT Jew would have viewed prophecies like Isaiah 65-66, Ezekiel's Temple, etc. Is there any sound principle of interpretation they might have used to realize that the kingdom was spiritual but being spoken of in earthly and Jewish-centered terms? Or was there no way for them to know that until Christ came and revealed that? There seems to have been some way for them to have known (and I have a hunch how) based on what Hebrews tells us about Abraham.

Thoughts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top