James White is Postmil

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
 
So, what's your point? There are lots of people who are postmil. The question is, is it the biblical postmil position or the unbiblical one? :)
 
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.
 
If Amillennialism was good enough for John then it’s good enough for me:cool:
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:

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.​
 
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.
 
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.
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
 
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.
...and Doug Wilson...I'm post-mill as well...
 
Why? Our eschatology is not determined by what we see around us, but by what we read in Scripture.
Folks don't seem to grasp the concept of God's timeline, and that things are fluctuating throughout history, bad to worse, then good to better, but incrementally over the generations the Gospel is like leaven, slowly spreading throughout the whole earth... it doesn't seem that complicated once you step back and take a macro/meta view of time...
 
I would like to see White debate someone like Alan Kurschner. In any case, I wonder if he adopted the traditional postmil view or the partial preterist variety.
 
No way with the technology and depraved elite - this planet needs a complete makeover at this point. No way things are getting better. Satan runs this place..... at least temporarily. If he’s bound now.....
Amillennialism appears the most universally held by theological giants and the most logical, scriptural view but I’m pretty new to this area of study myself.
 
Last edited:
this planet needs a complete makeover at this point.
I can't help it. You mean we need a great reset? ;)

If you had to pin me down, I'd have to say I'm a pessimistic postmil. Short-term crash, long-term blossoming. Beyond that I don't want to get into it.
 
Amillennialism appears the most universally held by theological giants...
:scratch: Many Puritans, Edwards, virtually all the Princetonians through Warfield, R. C. Sproul, Kenneth Gentry, Iain Murray? Either way, counting the noses of of the adherents of a position is hardly the right way to determine the correct view of anything.

No way with the technology and depraved elite - this planet needs a complete makeover at this point. No way things are getting better.
Again, eschatology is formed through exegesis of Scripture, not our worldly circumstances. And do you really think we live is a worse situation than Rome at the time of the Apostles, or Europe at the time of the Reformation, or Protestants under the reign of Mary? Even with all the troubles afflicting us, it is a difficult argument to make that we live in anything but one of the best times, if not the best time, in world history. The gospel, and thus the Kingdom, has farther reaches than it arguably ever has had.
 
:scratch: Many Puritans, Edwards, virtually all the Princetonians through Warfield, R. C. Sproul, Kenneth Gentry, Iain Murray? Either way, counting the noses of of the adherents of a position is hardly the right way to determine the correct view of anything.
Martyn Lloyd-Jones held to an optimistic Amill view. This gives you the best of both worlds - the realism of Amillennialism, and the optimism of Postmillennialism. Surely it is safe to have your feet in both camps. :stirpot:
 
Martyn Lloyd-Jones held to an optimistic Amill view. This gives you the best of both worlds - the realism of Amillennialism, and the optimism of Postmillennialism. Surely it is safe to have your feet in both camps. :stirpot:

I don't know how optimistic he was, since he told Carl F Henry he wasn't going to get too involved in culture since Israel was reinstated and the end times are probably near.
 
While I believe things are getting worse--much, much worse--and postmil is mistaken, they aren't mistaken because of cultural reasons, but Scriptural.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top