Potential informal debate between Partial Preteristic Postmill, Historic premill, Dispensational Premill!

[Ianterrell]

My friends alerted me to a potential debate on eschatology that I may be able to get in on in a couple of weeks. Their pastor is a historic premillennialist and will be debating a dispensational premilleniallist. I would love to participate even though nothing is set in stone as of yet.

I will probably argue mainly exegetically, showing evidence from the bible of the postmill view. I think this is important because of the overwheming sense of most evangelicals today that postmillennialism is a nice idea, but as one southern baptist theologian put it "not based on any scriptures". Eesh.

Because I take the "amill" approach to Revelation 20 I will also focus a considerate amount of energy on the spiritual nature of Christ's reign. Conversely I will take the verses that Premillenialists take as speaking of Christ's physical reign on earth and show how they describe the consumation of Christ's Kingdom.

The Pastor whom I simply know as Harry is a nice guy but has a very caricatured look on Postmillennialism. I don't know much as of yet of the other participant.

Are there any Premillennial works I should examine in preperation that you guys could recommend. If you have any other suggestions or comments I would be very grateful.

Grace and Peace.

[Edited on 20-11-2004 by Ianterrell]

 

[Scot]

Maybe the book "Revelation: Four Views" would be helpful. I don't have it but have heard good things about it.

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=6678#pid100679

 

[Scot]

there is a book by Vern Poythress called "Understanding Dispensationalism."

Don't know why I didn't think of it since I have it. It's probably been four years since I've read it. From what I remember, it was good.

 

[RamistThomist]

Originally posted by Ianterrell
but as one southern baptist theologian put it "not based on any scriptures". Eesh.


[Edited on 20-11-2004 by Ianterrell]

Pray tell, who is the theologian that said that?

[Edited on 16-12-2004 by Draught Horse]

 

[Ianterrell]

Jacob,

He teaches at The Southern Baptist Theologyical Seminary in Kentucky. I'll have to give my friend a ring to get the name, because...I forgot.

 

[RamistThomist]

I know Al Mohler is post-trib. That is suprising coming from Southern. I was expecting Paige Patterson to make a claim like that. Is it a rule that leaders in SBC institutions accept premillennialism?

 

[blhowes]

Ian wrote:
My friends alerted me to a potential debate on eschatology that I may be able to get in on in a couple of weeks. Their pastor is a historic premillennialist and will be debating a dispensational premilleniallist. I would love to participate even though nothing is set in stone as of yet.

Ian,
Just wondering if you'll still have the opportunity to participate in the debate? Have they set a date yet?
Bob

[Edited on 12-16-2004 by blhowes]

 

[Ianterrell]

Bob,

I'm not sure if the debates still a go. I haven't heard anything about it.

 

[BlackCalvinist]

Originally posted by Paul manata
there is a book by Vern Poythress called "Understanding Dispensationalism." Poythress (teaches at WTS east, preuppositionalist, amillenialist, idealist in his interpretive scheme (as opposed to, say, preterist or historicist) seeks to be very fair and this may help you avoid some stawmen arguments on your part.

there are plenty of preill books. I think (though may be confusing) that Ladd is an historic premillennialist. For Dispensational premill you can maybe look at the works of Ice and, or, Craig Blaising.

Blaising is progressive dispensational (which is much closer to covenant theology and historic premill). Ice is revised or normative dispensational. Two different views, though they do agree on some things.

 

[Len]

Is it a rule that leaders in SBC institutions accept premillennialism?

Not a rule, but definitely the predominate view - at least at NOBTS.

 

[blhowes]

Originally posted by Ianterrell
I'm not sure if the debates still a go. I haven't heard anything about it.

Oh...guess ya musta scared 'em off.

 

[Ianterrell]

I wish.

 

[RamistThomist]

Is it a rule that leaders in SBC institutions accept premillennialism?

Not a rule, but don't think of bringing another eschatological position to the table. I have yet to meet a modern prof who didn't accept some form of premillennialism. Not that they do not exist, I just haven't seen them.

 

[RamistThomist]

That question was hinted at to Al Mohler at Piper's pastor conference. It went along the lines of "amillennialism was the historic view of the Reformed Church until this century. Wouldn't you say that premillennialism is the unquestioned view among Baptists today." Before Mohler answered, he caught the "spirit of the age" mentality of the questioned-that the Baptist church adopted a view that was culturally expedient--annoyed, Mohler answered,

"no, I don't think that is the case."

Please do not misunderstand, I have the deepest respect for Al Mohler.

[Edited on 16-12-2004 by Draught Horse]

 

[Puritanhead]

You mind my asking Ian-- if you're historicist, idealist or what is your amil take on Revelation. I noticed dispie James Walvoord has rendered famous the assertion that all amil "spiritualize" prophecy... but the more recent popular Riddlebarger book on the subject claims "spiritualizing" isn't characteristic of all amil proponents but just a straw man purported by Walvoord and itinerated by dispensationalists.

I'd be curious what amillenialists have to say about their "spiritualizing" prophecy.



I'm somewhat of an "eschatological agnostic"-- pardon my pun-- I've read a broad spectrum of eschatological works and I tend to know what I am not. I'm not a gleefully-optimistic theonomic postmil nor I'm I a radical futurist premil dispie who interprets prophecy with a twentieth-century newspaper nor am I a heretical full preterist who says the resurrection has come to past. I lean toward historic premil view as of lately. Though, I'm not dogmatic now--- I want to grow in knowledge rather than be a twentysomething know-it-all "eschatological curmegeddon" who purports to have all things figured out.



[Edited on 12-21-2004 by Puritanhead]

 

[Ianterrell]

Ryan,

I think the term spiritualizing is probably inadequate though I admittedly may lapse into using it sometimes myself. I think that it would be more proper to say that Amillenialism whether pessimistic or optimisitic is treats prophetic literature the way it ought to be. As a distinct form of literature that sometimes employs figures and pictures that are not always easy to understand. This is not then an argument between a literal side and a loose spiritualized side. Both sides claim to take to scriptures literally, and I would argue that BOTH sides take the pictures figuratively.

As Gentry and others have pointed out Premill Dispensationalists interpret swords and arrows as missiles quite easily. This is not a "literal" approach as they try to strictly define it. Close examination of the scriptures will find that the Amill/Preterist-Postmill approach to the prophecies places more emphasis on the clearer passages which should be taken "literally", and lets those verses define the more obscure prophetic language.

In any event I don't consider myself someone who has it all figured out. I think we share a desire to remain in the students chair. Having stood in most eschatological views myself I try to be simple and modest about my position.

 

[Puritanhead]

Well I never exactly know what dispensationalists mean when they purport to take a "strict literal interpretation" considering Scripture makes use of parables and literary devices like hyperbole (i.e. 1 Cor. 13, Mrk. 9:43)... Prophecy is wrought with symbolism--- The "strict literal" Dispensationalists manage to turn locusts into Cobra helicopters and tanks (i.e. Hal Lindsay), fire into nuclear weapon blasts, etc.. Probably better not to fall into reductionism with hermneutical abstractions-- i don't really know what a strict literal or a spiritualized interpretation constitutes... I know, so called, idealists take a warm and fuzzy approach finding no real prophetic meaning in the book of Revelation, but only some bold pronouncement about the slain lamb's victory over sin. I digress.

 

[Ianterrell]

This idealist view sounds like a liberal one.

 

[RamistThomist]

Although I do not agree with Riddlebarger on some accounts, he states it very well in his book on amillennialism, "The dispensationalist often accuses the amillennialist of "spiritualizing the text." Well, if this charge is true, then the Apostle Peter is guilty of it in Acts 2."

 

[Ranger]

Paige and the other "elite" leaders at Southwestern are premills, but I know of at least two amills, and am taking an I-Term on the Revelation from a guy who I've heard is a partial preterist, but I don't know for sure. We'll see.