Archive for July, 2010

¬†One thing that I’ve been guilty of throughout my Christian walk is that I place so much of what I think and believe on what the Pastor or Sunday School teacher says. I am also guilty of being too lazy to search out things for myself. One particular issue that I’ve stood¬†on without actually studying is my Eschatology (end times). I have always considered myself to be a dispensational¬†premillennailist¬†based solely¬†on what I’ve heard in my Sunday School class and from reading the “Left Behind” series. I have recently been turned on to the Amillennialist¬†point of view, and I must admit, I’m intrigued. I am slowly (and I mean slowly) working my way through Kim Riddlebarger’s “A Case for Amillennialism¬†“. Have I changed my point of view? Not necessarily……….But I think I owe it to myself to study at least the 3 main historic views of the end times that have been held by the church and form¬†my eschatology from that and not on popular opinion. I know this is not an important issue to a lot of people and that’s fine, but I would like to know where you stand on this. I’m not looking to debate. just trying to learn so feel free to leave a comment.

¬†I’m going to post a couple of blog post that¬†Matthew Svoboda¬†has put up on the SBC Voices page. I agree with a lot¬†of Matthew’s points and would rather you see an educated person’s thoughts than my ignorant opinions to maybe jump start the discussion. So here we go…………

Why I believe Amillennialism–Matthew Svoboda

This is a blog.  This will not be an exhaustive argument for Amillennialism.  This post will merely be a small argument as to why I believe that Scriptures teach an Amillennial understanding of the Lord’s Return.  Maybe I should do a post about what I actually believe because many Amillennials disagree on a number of different things… But, I’m not going to, if you want me to clarify something just ask me in the comment thread.

I am going to write a post after this one titled, ‚ÄúProblems with Premillennialism.‚ÄĚ ¬†In that post I will deal with more passages and by default will be a further continuation of why I am Amillennial. ¬†This post will not deal with a lot of different texts, but rather principles that lead me to Amillennialism. ¬†The next post will deal more deeply with specific passages.

Also, some of my arguments are not completely restricted to Amillennials. ¬†In fact, some of them I learned from Grant Osborne who is a Historic Premillennialist. ¬†It is when I put all of these things together that force me to hold to an Amillennial position. ¬†Like Graeme Goldsworthy, I am not a big fan of the term ‚ÄúAmillennial,‚ÄĚ but it is just easier to use it than to fight the system. Read the rest here

Problems with Premillennialism–Matthew Svoboda

reminder- not a divisive issue. We can disagree and still love each other very much. Don’t be a jerk or your comment will be deleted.

 I don’t know how long this will be, so let’s get to it.

Problems with Premillennialism:

I used to go back and forth between Amillennialism and Historic Premillennialism… Now, because of many of the reasons below I am seeing any form of Premillennialism as less and less of a viable option.  I know that highly offends some people, but let’s be graceful and deal with the points I raise below.

1) Premillennials¬†insist on a ‚Äúliteral interpretation‚ÄĚ of Eschatological/apocalyptic literature. ¬†It is my belief that not only is this wrong, but they cannot even hold true to their own convictions. ¬†Premillennials¬†want to take some of Revelation(chapter 20 for instance) literally, while they easily allow for other parts of Revelation to be interpreted symbolically. ¬†Revelation should have a balance of literal and symbolic-¬†but it seems silly to me to be someone who always harps and insists on ‚Äúliteral‚ÄĚ when, at times, you dont¬†think twice about interpreting symbolically. ¬†How about some consistency? ¬†According to biblical and non-biblical apocalyptic literature the genre demands symbolism. ¬†Most Premillennials¬†simply do not do justice to Revelation when they insist on all of the literalism(especially since they dont¬†necessarily follow through on their own claims). ¬†To be fair-¬†this isnt¬†every Premillennial. ¬†If someone is absolutely convinced that Revelation 20 occurs after Christ‚Äôs return I suggest Dr. Grant Osbornes¬†commentary- he at least does justice to the symbolic nature of the book of Revelation.

As I will demonstrate in a few points below-¬†when I deal with certain texts-¬†¬†that Premillennials¬†want the ‚Äúplain, straightforward, literal interpretation of Revelation 20,‚ÄĚ yet, they reject a plain, straightforward, literal interpretation of many other New Testament texts that deal with Eschatology. So, Premills¬†insist on a literal interpretation on apocalyptic literature, which is meant to be symbolic, and yet reject a straightforward reading of texts that are not apocalyptic. ¬†Obviously, no Premill will say that is what they do, but as I will demonstrate it seems to me that is exactly what they do. Read the rest here

Advertisements

This is the first video from Trip’s new¬†project “Between Two Worlds”…….