James White is Postmil
- Thread starter JM
- Start date
Joshua Davis
Puritan Board Freshman
The correct view
SeanPatrickCornell
Puritan Board Sophomore
James used to be an Elder at my church, and I've discussed the issue with him several times in the past. He always claimed that eschatology wasn't his strong suit, but he still went at Ken Gentry once in a back forth online discussion about Amill vs. Postmill.
Anyway, I am glad he's given the topic of eschatology a proper study but it's hard to not imagine that the shift was due primarily to pressure from Jeff Durbin.
I say this as someone who is tentatively Postmillenial myself.
Anyway, I am glad he's given the topic of eschatology a proper study but it's hard to not imagine that the shift was due primarily to pressure from Jeff Durbin.
I say this as someone who is tentatively Postmillenial myself.
TheInquirer
Puritan Board Freshman
You wonder how many will, literally overnight, change their eschatological position "cuz James White."
Is there ever a danger with folks like James White, and others like him, that such people are speaking on way too many topics you can't realistically have that much in-depth knowledge about? I ask in objective fairness due to my first statement of how many people are influenced by White (and other popular figures) and tend to follow whatever they believe and teach due to their respect and trust of such figures. I would put John MacArthur and John Piper in the same category.
Is there ever a danger with folks like James White, and others like him, that such people are speaking on way too many topics you can't realistically have that much in-depth knowledge about? I ask in objective fairness due to my first statement of how many people are influenced by White (and other popular figures) and tend to follow whatever they believe and teach due to their respect and trust of such figures. I would put John MacArthur and John Piper in the same category.
I know you are joking here, but I actually found Robert Letham's comments here really helpful. He argues that the distinction we often assume exists between amillennialism and postmillennialism is not a distinction but actually more of a continuum of postmillennialism:If Amillennialism was good enough for John then it’s good enough for me
In contrast to premillennialism is postmillennialism, which argues that Christ will return after the millennium. Here we enter rather slippery territory. Historically, postmillennial advocates have expected that there will be a period during which the gospel will take root to the extent that the world would be effectively Christianized. When Christ returns, it will be to a world ready and waiting to receive him.
However, postmillennialism has taken other forms. Many believe that the reference to one thousand years in Revelation 20 signifies the entire period between the ascension of Christ and his parousia, seen from the angle of the saints living and reigning with Christ. From this, Christ’s return will be after (post) this figurative thousand years. In this they are at one with most amillennialists. In fact, amillennialism was commonly termed postmillennialism, since it held that the parousia comes after the time Christ reigns as depicted in Revelation.
I find it hard to distinguish the two in a way that does justice to the concerns of both. There are three basic positions. First, there is the idea that a privileged period exists within the time between the ascension and the parousia, in which the world will largely be Christianized. Christ will return some time after or toward the end of this golden age. The expectation is for the gospel to triumph more or less universally in the future before the parousia. Second, at the other end of the scale are the convinced amillennialists who—perhaps influenced by the pessimism of premillennialism—teach that evil will grow worse and worse, the church will have a hard time, and eventually there will be a large-scale persecution, after which Christ will return. Here there is no period before or after the parousia corresponding to any visible millennium on earth. Third, between these poles are those who believe that the reference to the thousand years in Revelation 20 is to the whole period between the ascension and the parousia, during which the bulk of the world will become Christian. Christ will return after the metaphorical thousand years. However, within the ongoing history of the world, between ascension and parousia, there is no specially privileged time distinct from any other time, no golden age as such, but the whole period is one in which the church preaches and witnesses, the world persecutes but Christ reigns. Some might call this “postmillennialism”; others, “optimistic amillennialism.” There is a continuum, clearly distinguished from all premillennialism.
—Robert Letham, Systematic Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 848-9; italics original.
ZackF
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I have been leaning more in the postmill direction in the past few years. I'm still not there though. Dr. White has handled himself respectfully on this issue for decades. There will be some who adopt the his new position because White has. Sadly, there are those who respond that way to any number of public figures. In most cases that is not White's or any other public pastor-intellectual's fault. Individuals in multiple fields have over zealous fans. That's humanity.
JM
Puritan Board Doctor
Same here. Since the first lockdown I've been reading and studying eschatology, reading and re-reading Daniel and Revelation, in different translation, listening to dramatic readings, etc. I posted a chart I made of where I'm at so far and will link it here if you want to peek at it. I'm still working on it.
Yours it he Lord,
jm
Joshua Davis
Puritan Board Freshman
...and Doug Wilson...I'm post-mill as well...
