Working through eschatological evolution (amillennial futurist)

Status
Not open for further replies.
RamistThomist

RamistThomist

Puritanboard Clerk
I was originally a partial-preterist postmillennial theonomist. When I left that view I went to post-tribulationism (it seemed the most natural and sequential reading of NT texts). I did see some of the problems with a millennial kingdom. So a few years ago I backed off (if not denied) that view.

I found myself floating in amil land, but I never could get a grip on specifics. Everything seemed to be a type of something. On one hand, that's obvious. Melchizedek and all. But it wasn't always clear on how some random prophecy in Isaiah, which seemed to promise a physical (read-non Platonic) blessing, was "spiritual of the church," or something.

The amillennial timeline on the millennium seems to be accurate, though. That being said, I am finding myself holding to some form of futurism, perhaps even seeing a future tribulation, yet all within an amillennial time scheme regarding the millennium/church age.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
I was originally a partial-preterist postmillennial theonomist. When I left that view I went to post-tribulationism (it seemed the most natural and sequential reading of NT texts). I did see some of the problems with a millennial kingdom. So a few years ago I backed off (if not denied) that view.

I found myself floating in amil land, but I never could get a grip on specifics. Everything seemed to be a type of something. On one hand, that's obvious. Melchizedek and all. But it wasn't always clear on how some random prophecy in Isaiah, which seemed to promise a physical (read-non Platonic) blessing, was "spiritual of the church," or something.

The amillennial timeline on the millennium seems to be accurate, though. That being said, I am finding myself holding to some form of futurism, perhaps even seeing a future tribulation, yet all within an amillennial time scheme regarding the millennium/church age.
Click to expand...
You sound like someone is is getting close to the Historical Premil viewpoint based upon this posting.
 
Dachaser said:
What were the main passages that persuaded you from a Mil position?
Click to expand...

Two resurrections strains the other resurrection language in the NT, which only mentions 1. I used to argue as a premil that when the NT speaks of resurrection, it means bodily resurrection. I'm not so sure now. Col. 3:1 speaks of our being raised in the heavenly places, yet we aren't bodily in heaven.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
The amillennial timeline on the millennium seems to be accurate, though. That being said, I am finding myself holding to some form of futurism, perhaps even seeing a future tribulation, yet all within an amillennial time scheme regarding the millennium/church age.
Click to expand...

I too have struggled with eschatology, and interestingly enough, I have found myself to be almost exactly in the same place as you.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Two resurrections strains the other resurrection language in the NT, which only mentions 1. I used to argue as a premil that when the NT speaks of resurrection, it means bodily resurrection. I'm not so sure now. Col. 3:1 speaks of our being raised in the heavenly places, yet we aren't bodily in heaven.
Click to expand...
I see but 2 resurrections in the Bible, one would be the one to eternal life, at time of the Second Coming, and other to eternal death, at the Great White Throne.
 
Do a word study for ‘parousia’ and note everything that is said to take place when the parousia occurs.

That for me made futurism/earthly millennium quite untenable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dachaser said:
I see but 2 resurrections in the Bible, one would be the one to eternal life, at time of the Second Coming, and other to eternal death, at the Great White Throne.
Click to expand...

I also believe that there are two resurrections - but I think that the 1st is to spiritual life (i.e., salvation), while the 2nd occurs at the end of time. Likewise, I believe that there are two deaths; the 1st is physical (of which all taste) and the 2nd is eternal (Rev 21:8). Here is a brief excerpt from a booklet I wrote years ago that provides an overview of this perspective.
 

Attachments

  • The Millennium.pdf
    177.8 KB · Views: 6
Last edited:
Seems a fair amount of the OT prophecies if not related to Christ are fulfilled in that that frame if one only looks.
 
KGP said:
Do a word study for ‘parousia’ and note everything that is said to take place when the parousia occurs.

That for me made futurism/earthly millennium quite untenable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
You would still see it as an upcoming/future event though, correct?
 
A lot of amils like to say they are "optimistic amils." Not me. If I am amil, I am *not* optimistic. Doom and gloom all the way. I like how Van Til puts it:

"But when all the reprobate are epistemologically self-conscious, the crack of doom has come. The fully self-conscious reprobate will do all he can in every dimension to destroy the people of God. So while we seek with all our power to hasten the process of differentiation in every dimension we are yet thankful, on the other hand, for the "day of grace," the day of undeveloped differentiation. Such tolerance as we receive on the part of the world is due to this fact that we live in the earlier, rather than the later, stage of history. "

I am glad Trump won. Hillary would have been a nightmare. But everytime Trump does something good, the unhanged traitors in the Deep State block him. We simply can't be the Deep State by ourselves.
 
With the amount you have read, I am sure you have already taken up Hoekema's Bible and the Future. I appreciate how he tried to point to more specifics (tangible, physical realities) as being fulfilled in the New Heavens and New Earth.

I am also kind of in the same place as you - amillennial-ish (without all my questions answered).
 
TheInquirer said:
With the amount you have read, I am sure you have already taken up Hoekema's Bible and the Future. I appreciate how he tried to point to more specifics (tangible, physical realities) as being fulfilled in the New Heavens and New Earth.

I am also kind of in the same place as you - amillennial-ish (without all my questions answered).
Click to expand...

Hoekema is good on seeing New Creation and the earthiness thereof. That's a welcome corrective.
 
I don't understand your dilemma. At the end of the mil ( Rev 20:7), Satan is unloosed and the nations are gathered for Gog- Magog. That is a future tribulation.

I have to some degree floated in post mil land ( I like your wording) but keep coming back to amil. It would not surprise me at all if I see the end of the mil and Gog-Magog (whatever that means, there are various interpretations) in my lifetime. As far as the final unloosing of Satan to deceive the nations goes, I think it is underway. Just my opinion.
 
lynnie said:
I don't understand your dilemma. At the end of the mil ( Rev 20:7), Satan is unloosed and the nations are gathered for Gog- Magog. That is a future tribulation.

I have to some degree floated in post mil land ( I like your wording) but keep coming back to amil. It would not surprise me at all if I see the end of the mil and Gog-Magog (whatever that means, there are various interpretations) in my lifetime. As far as the final unloosing of Satan to deceive the nations goes, I think it is underway. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Do you still see a future Great tribulation, or was that all in AD 70?
 
Dachaser-

Amils believe that the mil of Rev 20, where Satan is bound to not deceive the nations, begins with Jesus, and after that the gospel goes out to essentially the whole world. The same Greek word for bound is used where Jesus speaks of binding the strongman.

I can't speak for all amils, but at the end of that period in Rev 20 is a final unbinding of Satan before Gog-Magog. I have read enough about 70 AD to believe a lot of Jesus' prophecy did refer to that event. But I don't think AD 70 was the time of this final unloosing of Satan and Gog-Magog before the return of the Lord. I think there will be future great troubles.

I think you can be a partial preterist and see many of the parables in Luke pointing to AD 70 ( book- Jesus vs Jerusalem) as well as part of the famous Matthew 24 passage referring to that time (I do), while still being amil and thinking the mil ends before the return of the Lord with a final time of great deception as Satan is unloosed and the world gathers for war.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
He is saying there is only one bodily resurrection. Other resurrection language means martyrdom or new birth or something.
Click to expand...
The problem with that view though would seem to be that the Scriptures indicate just saved resurrected bodily fashion at Second Coming, so the Last would have to wait until the Great White Throne event.
 
lynnie said:
Dachaser-

Amils believe that the mil of Rev 20, where Satan is bound to not deceive the nations, begins with Jesus, and after that the gospel goes out to essentially the whole world. The same Greek word for bound is used where Jesus speaks of binding the strongman.

I can't speak for all amils, but at the end of that period in Rev 20 is a final unbinding of Satan before Gog-Magog. I have read enough about 70 AD to believe a lot of Jesus' prophecy did refer to that event. But I don't think AD 70 was the time of this final unloosing of Satan and Gog-Magog before the return of the Lord. I think there will be future great troubles.

I think you can be a partial preterist and see many of the parables in Luke pointing to AD 70 ( book- Jesus vs Jerusalem) as well as part of the famous Matthew 24 passage referring to that time (I do), while still being amil and thinking the mil ends before the return of the Lord with a final time of great deception as Satan is unloosed and the world gathers for war.
Click to expand...
The main differences between Amil and premil views regarding the End times would seem to be in the areas of just how is Satan being bound,just what are the 2 resurrections, and is there a literal future man of Sin?
 
Dachaser said:
The main differences between Amil and premil views regarding the End times would seem to be in the areas of just how is Satan being bound,just what are the 2 resurrections, and is there a literal future man of Sin?
Click to expand...

How/when Satan is bound is the main issue, and not necessarily the millennium. The future man of sin has nothing to do with it, as all three views can hold to that.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
How/when Satan is bound is the main issue, and not necessarily the millennium. The future man of sin has nothing to do with it, as all three views can hold to that.
Click to expand...
The Amil position would be that Satan is bound since the time of Christ in the sense of God will not allow Him to hinder the movement of the message of the Gospel of Jesus, while premils see it as being His binding means no more wickedness/evil/sinning going on in the world, correct?
 
Dachaser said:
The Amil position would be that Satan is bound since the time of Christ in the sense of God will not allow Him to hinder the movement of the message of the Gospel of Jesus, while premils see it as being His binding means no more wickedness/evil/sinning going on in the world, correct?
Click to expand...

It just means he won't deceive the nations anymore.
 
Dachaser said:
He seems to be a really good job of that today in North Korea, and among fanatical Muslims though.
Click to expand...
In other words, all kinds of men will know the Gospel of God, not just Israel, since it cannot be stopped. Look how it spread through out the world and was accepted and took over nations (though not all) and cultures.
 
Last edited:
Dachaser said:
The problem with that view though would seem to be that the Scriptures indicate just saved resurrected bodily fashion at Second Coming, so the Last would have to wait until the Great White Throne event
Click to expand...
Could you please cite these passages and share your interpretation of them?
 
Dachaser said:
Which passages would that be?
Click to expand...
The passages you allude to in your post:
"the Scriptures indicate just saved resurrected bodily fashion at Second Coming, so the Last would have to wait until the Great White Throne event"

It would help if you would bolster your views with actual citations from Scripture from time to time so that we can all be on the same page.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JM
Futurist Resources
Replies
0
Views
420
JM
JM
R
  • Locked
Amillennial help
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Adam Olive
Adam Olive
Kaalvenist
  • Locked
Amillennial Historicist
Replies
7
Views
4K
WrittenFromUtopia
W
A
  • Locked
Eschatological Universalism
Replies
3
Views
3K
Ed Walsh
Ed Walsh
R
  • Locked
Amillennial Eschatology Chart!
Replies
6
Views
6K
turmeric
turmeric
Back
Top