Eschatology

[Stephen]

Alright, I'll be honest. I know next to nothing about eschatology. Could someone help me out here and explain to me the different belief "isms" and a brief summary of them?

Thanks,
Stephen

[studyhound]

Stephen:

Alright, I'll be honest. I know next to nothing about eschatology. Could someone help me out here and explain to me the different belief "isms" and a brief summary of them?

Thanks,
Stephen

Sure I'll give to a swing,

Basically there are two different groups of "isms".

One has do deal with the timing and nature of the Millennium (Revelation chapter 20) in relation to the coming of Christ,




preillermial Approach:

The binding of Satan is yet future. It will take place when Christ returns. ~-ie 1,000 years is a literal period during which Christ will reign on earth "om Jerusalem, with His people.

The loosing of Satan will bring the Millennium to its climax, followed by the resurrection and judgment of the wicked at the Great White Throne.

The new heavens and new earth will be created after the Millennium, i.e.,1,000 years after Christ's Second Coming.

Amillennial Approach:

The binding of Satan represents the victory of Christ over the powers of darkness accomplished at the cross.

The 1,000 years is symbolic of a long, indeterminate period, corresponding to the age of the church (now).

Satan will be loosed briefly to wreak havoc and to persecute the church in the end of the present age.

The fire coming from heaven and consuming the wicked is symbolic of Christ's Second Coming.

A general resurrection and judgment of the evil and the good will occur at Christ's coming, followed by the creation of new heavens and a new earth.

Postmillennial Approach:

Some interpret the chapter essentially as do the amillennialists, but with an added note of optimism about the success of the gospel in the present age.

Others see the binding of Satan to represent a future point in time when the successful preaching of the gospel will have effectively reduced Satan's influence to nothing.

The 1,000 years may or may not be a literal duration, but speaks of the future glorious age, prior to the Second Coming, in which the influence of the gospel will have universal sway.

A final attempt on the part of a loosed Satan at the end of the age will get nowhere.

A general resurrection and judgment will occur at the coming of Christ.

taken from four views of Revelation Edited by Steve Gregg


I'll try and get to the other "ism" which deals mainly with the timing and the nature of the "tribulation"


Also try going to the Eschatology wrestle fest here:

http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7004

<><

[Stephen]

Hey, thanks studyhound. :teeth:

[studyhound]

Stephen:

Hey, thanks studyhound. :teeth:

You bet, I'll try to make my responces as middle of the road as I can. OK :evil: :pepper:

[Rev. Watch]

studyhound,

Nice summary.

RW

[Stephen]

While we're at it, can someone explain covenant vs. dispensationalism and preterism and all that good stuff?

Don't know why, just got a sudden urge to get familiar with more subjects than theology 201

[studyhound]

Rev. Watch:

studyhound,

Nice summary.

RW

Thanks RW but I cant take all the credit I snached it from a commentary on Revlations I have


Stephen:

While we're at it, can someone explain covenant vs. dispensationalism and preterism and all that good stuff?

Don't know why, just got a sudden urge to get familiar with more subjects than theology 201


Stephen I will deal with preterism in the other big group of "ism's"
I'll try and post that later to day or tomorro.

ANd I may take a swing at the covenant vs Dispensatioalism towards the weekend

<><

[studyhound]

Ok now I will deal with the other large group of ”ism’s” the timing and the nature of the "tribulation".

Here there are two main views the futurists and the preterist, there are other groups that have particular view of The Revelation but are less about the tribulation, i.e. historicist view and the idealists or spiritualist view. I will define these as we go.

I am going to start with simple definitions of these views. There are splinter groups in each of the groups and there are minor differences of each view from person to person.

I the area of eschatology there are groups of scripture that have a great deal to do with the tribulation, Daniels 70 weeks, Matt. 24 (and its parallels) and the revelation are the best well known and most often referred to when dealing with and debating about end times.

Futurists

The futurists are commonly defined in relation to the rapture of the church verses the tribulation. This futurists view is often referred to as the 70th week of Daniel or the time of Jacob’s trouble. These are Old Testament references to cataclysmic event that happens to the Jews.

Pre-tribulation, they see the rapture of the church happening before the tribulation.

Mid tribulation, they see the rapture of the church happening mid way through the tribulation, usually before the trumpet judgments of Revelation or the last three and a half years.

Post tribulation, they see the rapture of the church happening after the tribulation.

These views tend to agree on many of the major points, like centrality of the Jewish state, the need for a future temple, the rise of an end times figure often called the anti-christ, or the beast of revelation.

Most but not all futurists are a flavor of pre-millenialism, with A-millenialism having some who hold this view.

Preterists

The preterist view commonly holds that the events in Matt. 24 and in the Revelation to chapter 20 and the related passages are fulfilled in the past, more specifically in 70 a.d. with the destruction of Jerusalem. So simply the tribulation was fulfilled in the past.

Preterist is a Latin (I believe) words, Preter or past.

In this view many of the passages in revelation is seen either as fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem, the Roman Empire, or the Christian persecutions by the Jews and the Romans.

Most preterists are Post-millennial or A-millennial, with some small amount being Pre-millennial.

[Stephen]

Hey studyhound, I just wanted to thank you again for taking the time to explain the different branches of eschatology to me.

[studyhound]

Stephen:

Hey studyhound, I just wanted to thank you again for taking the time to explain the different branches of eschatology to me.

Hey you, bet I enjoy talking about this stuff. Any question go ahead and fire them my way. :smile:

[Stephen]

Alright, I was mainly wondering, how can one be both a preterist and a premillenialist? That is, they believe the tribulation happened in 70 A.D, but the millenium, a literal 1000 years, and Christ's return has not happened yet?

Sorry, not well aquainted with many preterists, so its difficult to understand

[studyhound]

Stephen:

Alright, I was mainly wondering, how can one be both a preterist and a premillenialist? That is, they believe the tribulation happened in 70 A.D, but the millenium, a literal 1000 years, and Christ's return has not happened yet?

Sorry, not well aquainted with many preterists, so its difficult to understand


Like I said one deals with the timing and nature of the millennium, while the other deals witht the timing of the tribulation, not all Pre-millennium beleive that there is a 7 year tribulation, some historic Pre-mill, held the Jesus will return and start his kingdom. And that the tribulation was in 70 ad. But like I said its few and far between. I personaly only knew one or two who held this view.

Here's a link to the boards preterists Princess and a breif overview of preterism

http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?postid=209937#post209937

[elysian]

I would definitely be amillennial then. I pretty much take Matthew 24 as a roadmap for what will happen. I do believe Jesus was talking about two different points in time. Matthew 24:2 does refer to the destruction of the Temple in 70AD, but from that from 24:3 forward, Jesus is referring to the end of days and final judgment.

I believe that the "tares will be separated from the wheat" first- that judgment will fall before believers will be taken up to Heaven. We will be just as subject to "tribulation" as everyone else. Jesus uses the example of Noah- the flood came and swept away the unrighteous, not the other way around.

The most important thing in all of this is to be ready:

"So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him." Matthew 24:44 (NIV)

The end of days may still be a ways off, but I could drop dead- or any one of us could drop dead- tomorrow!

So Jesus' point I believe is not to be so preoccupied with the end that you forget to live or you're obsessed with trying to figure out the exact date, but to live in such a manner that glorifies Him.

I do find the guys who tried to figure out the date fascinating- even though Jesus specifically tells us we have no way of knowing there are some who think they have it all figured out. Go figure. I can't remember who it was but there was one guy who convinced people to sell all of their stuff and go into the mountains or some crazy thing like that and they all starved to death. Then there was the Heaven's Gate thing. So we are getting to see a lot of the "false Christs" Jesus talked about.

Be ready.

:nsm:

[Paul]

Eschatology is about the eschaton or the end. I think one can become caught up in the various controversies present in those communities which identify themselves as Christian or even within one of those communities (for example in the Catholic Church, there is some bubbles in the broth if you will about whether there will be a 3 Days of Darkness or even about whether a single future Pope will be the false prophet or even the Antichrist or if that is even a possibility).

But these things for the most part are really just details it seems to me. They can sometimes be important details, especially if an opposing theory contradicts or is hard to reconcile with the word of God and God's purposes for his creation. But if one gets caught up in whether the witnesses will be Enoch and Elijah or Moses and Elijah or Paul and Peter etc without seeing the larger context and higher realities of which those facts speak, one can lose sight of eschatology's relationship to theology. Eschatology is a branch of economy, not theology proper, since it deals with God's relations to the created order, not Who God is in his essence and within the triune Godhead. But like all things, it should lead to a greater awareness or understanding of Who God is and a greater thanksgiving for what God has done and done in Christ Jesus.

So all I'm saying is that eschatology is more than just about the arguments over details as important or as heretical as they may be. It, like all things, is about the One we love. And as St Maximilian Kolbe says the only knowledge that is of value is a knowledge which proceeds from love.

[studyhound]

Hey Stephen,

Here the post I promised you at pal-talk.

Covenant vs. dispensationalism

Like I said on pal-talk there are 4 distinctive of dispensationalism (but after thinking I added one sub-group):

A note of introduction, I will be giving a general overview of the 2 views, I know some people will say, “well I am a __________ and I don’t believe that!!”. But Like I said this is a general overview. Hitting every facet of both views would take more than the text limit and then some.

Ok, lets do it!!

1
Literal hermeneutics, i.e. they take a literal understanding of the word of God or more simply they go with the plain understanding of the text, the plain definition of the word(s) is the correct way to interpret the word(s).

This understanding is mostly found in the area of the issue of who is Israel, dispensationalists hold that every mentioning of Israel (national), Israel (birthright), or Jews are always speaking of literal Israel in the middle east or of the line of Abraham. Or Jerusalem is always understood as the city in the Middle East not anything else. Also in the apocalyptic literature they often take many of the visions as literal, i.e. the sun will literally turn black.

They do recognize the poetic and symbolic nature of some of the parts of the bible but often say there are markers to indicate the upcoming symbolic section.

2
Dispensationalists are Pre-millennial, this fairly self-explanatory, but there are some points of uniqueness in the dispensational system.

There is another Pre-millennial system, historical premillennial, these are more commonly found in the Early church fathers (ECF), and later theologians. Dispensationalists try to claim them but the ECF often, the ECF’s, fail to fall in to the other categories of the dispensational view.

Ok but back to the dispensational view, the unique view of the millennium is the centrality of the Jews. They are restored to their land and the temple is re-built. From this temple Jesus reigns and is for lack of a better term the capital of the world. Some of the older and some of the current radical Dispensationalists held/hold to a reinstitution of the sacrificial system with actual sacrifices going on. For the most part current dispensationalists hold to either a symbolic, i.e. the sacrifices are just a memorial, while others hold that they wont happen at all.

This distinctive of the dispensational view is the Pre-tribulational rapture (it is really a sub-group of the distinctive groups). This is quickly becoming one of the minor and negotiable points of dispensationalism. With many adherents moving to the post-trib view, mid-trib, and other minor (but growing) points of view. And many non-dispensational groups are teaching a future tribulation. So this is in fact becoming less and less of a distinctive and rather a default teaching in Christian churches.

The pre-trib is by far one of the most popular and one the most controversial. Even a cursory view of any Christian, for that matter any bookstore, shows the marketing power of the pre-trib theory. With the left behind series popular with Christian and non-Christian and the movies and other merchandise the theology is often lost to the hype.

The Pre-trib view is most commonly viewed as the 70th week of Daniel, the time of Jacob’s trouble. The view is commonly seen as the church being raptured out of the world and then Satan is given run of the planet. This leads to the rise of the anti-christ/beast of revelation. Often the teachers of this view state that the Holy Spirit is removed from the earth and this signals the end of the dispensation of grace. There is far too many varying viewpoints on the particulars of the tribulation, simply because the dispensational teachers use revelation as a guide and each one sees the events in a slightly different view.

This view I add was because of the rise of this view (if not creation) in dispensational thought. So I thought it only fair to add it to the list.

3
Dispensationalism gets its name from the way they see biblical history, in dispensations. What is a dispensation? Well this is a sticky point, there are many views on this subject, and even some of the teachers can’t agree. Most can usually agree on the definition given by C.I. Scofield in his 1909 Scofield reference bible :


"A dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God. Seven such dispensations are distinguished in Scripture.

The last part is the one that is usually disagree on, I have seen as few as 4 dispensations and as many as 24 by different authors. Much is depended on the authors/teachers own view of scripture.

Most hold to the seven-dispensation view: (I’ll give the names of the dispensations and the length of the dispensation and the “testing”)

1. Innocents – from the creation to the fall man – Innocents or sole trust in God.
2. Conscience – from the fall to the flood – man was to use their moral Conscience to guide them
3. Government – post-flood to the call of Abraham – man was subject to government, this was illustrated by God giving the mandate for capital punishment.
4. Promise - From the call of Abram until Sinai – This is a time of new relationship between God and man, i.e. God’s promise to a man.
5. Law – From Sinai to Church – The law was given to guide and govern the Jews
6. Grace – From Pentecost to the rapture – The coming of the holy spirit being given, and simple faith
7. The kingdom – From the rapture to the eternity – this was the kingdom Jesus brought to the Jews in the first century realized. Jesus rules from the throne. (And depending on the under standing the reinstating of the law.)

4

The distinction of the church and Israel, this is the true distinctive of the dispensational view. While others groups may teach one or more of the others this one is truly unique. This view is that the church and Israel are different groups in God’s plan. Both have their unique role in history. But the two groups are separate, and the church is a totally separate from Israel.

Often Dispensational authors explain the church as a parenthesis in the plan of God. This was caused by the Jews rejection of Christ and the postponement of the Jewish kingdom. So the prophetic clock as it were was stopped, in respect to passages like the 70 weeks of Daniel. So the church is a “mystery” to the old prophets, or they have no knowledge of the coming church. Because of this the Old Testament prophets all their prophecies are of the future Jewish reign.

John N. Darby the father of dispensationalism made it clear of the separation of the church and Israel:


“The Jewish nation never entered into the Church.”

Also Charles Ryrie also said in Dispensationalism Today that the:


“ basic promise of dispensationalism is two purposes of God expressed in the formation of two peoples who maintain their distinction throughout eternity.”

The time of the church is now but his will end at the rapture, and the Jews will be returned to God’s chosen people on earth and the servants of the millennial kingdom. This is to fulfill prophecies and the covenants that the dispensationalists feel are unfulfilled.


This is like I said a brief over view. And I am sure I ruffled a few feathers and raised some more questions, and I am sorry if some points are not as clear as others, but like the saying says strike while the Iron is hot and my was at 11’oclock.

Studyhound

:Studyhound:

[kofh2u]

09-29-2003 @ 03:57 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=224782#post224782)
Stephen:

Alright, I'll be honest. I know next to nothing about eschatology. Could someone help me out here and explain to me the different belief &quot;isms&quot; and a brief summary of them?

Thanks,
Stephen

A wise man will hear, and will increase learning....that seems to fit you.

The verse continues:..." and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels"... that could be me, in that I submit this rather idiosyncratic answer to you.

My "ism" is one you will discover has NEVER been suggested by the current "isms" which are the foundations of traditional and dogmatic speculations . Those ideas originated centuries ago by the various denominational churches who have constructed them. (You seem to have received numerous explanations from other pertaining to those "isms.")

What I say here is NOT an "ism," ...yet...

An "ism" apparently requires more than one weak voice shouting in the wilderness of other acclaimed and much hearlded views.

The ONE fundamental an undeniable FACT is that only one entity has EVER reigned (to date) over the people who respect the Word, that is Western Culture.
(Rome last about 500 years, the previous empires didn't fare as well.)

No entity of social control except Catholicism, ONLY the early christian church that succeeded the fall of Rome,...
... has maintained sovereigny for 1000 years to date,... only THE CHURCH held sway during the 1000 years of the DARK AGES.

That we realize that Christ truly reigned over our entire culture. That the satanic lust found in Rom DID disappear, was "thrown into the bottomless pit of history for 1000 years supports this point, as does this age, satanic lust so prevalent today in our pornographic enculturation.

That Satan HAS returned for the little while, since The Renaissance, and that The Beast of commerce which utilizes the power of Mammon's gold in those currencies which float through our communities, all has been fulfilled in accord withn Revelation.

Money and wanton sexual license were NOT present during those DARK 1000 years of that AGE... this is the only intelligent basic starting point, a hypotheis, fujdamental for any theory of any "ism" in my opinion.

I argue this to you as an "ism" of common sense in that we know that prophecy tells us that when the 144,000 chosen Jews return to Israel (Rev 7), when the Fig Tree blooms, that this sign marks the End Times, and the moment when "this generation shall not pass before all things are fulfilled."

Since the DARK AGES represents the ONLY THOUSAND YEAR PERIOD prior to this moment, and since we apparently, with a re-established Israel, will have no other "moment" of a thousand years available to us,... my "ism" of common sense is offered for your wise appraisal.

David Judah Layb

[Stephen]

Thanks studyhound, I'm printing that post, as it was very very helpful :wink:

I take it covenant theology is just, for the most part, non-dispensational?

[studyhound]

Stephen:

Thanks studyhound, I'm printing that post, as it was very very helpful :wink:

I take it covenant theology is just, for the most part, non-dispensational?

Kinda, Covnenant even more broad and more complex. Right now it is a defalt name for any non-dispensational view. But there are some unique qualities to it .

I will try to work on it this week. The dispy one took a lot out of me I wrote it in a few hours all from memory so my brain hurts :duh:


:studyhound:

[Stephen]

I'm honored to be with multiple hours of writing :teeth:

Pearls for enlightening me on some eschatology

[studyhound]

Whhhaaaaa????


Casting your pearls before. . . . . . :doh:

Oh wait . . . . . . Thanks :thumb:



:studyhound:

[Stephen]

So, for a probably obvious question. The difference between acts 9 dispensationalism, acts 28 dispensationalism, etc. is just an argument of when the 6th dispensation began?

Sounds a bit trivial to me :hrm:

[studyhound]

Stephen:

So, for a probably obvious question. The difference between acts 9 dispensationalism, acts 28 dispensationalism, etc. is just an argument of when the 6th dispensation began?

Sounds a bit trivial to me :hrm:


Yeah I agree, but there is a heated debate over the begining of The Body of Christ.

Well there is a bit more to it, a acts 28 says there are not/were not/very few, they can be vague on this sometimes, Jews in the dispensation of grace. So the take the eternal seperation of Israel and the church to the extreme.

While the acts 9 are abit more flexable on this. They allow "more" Jews in to the dispensation of grace

But yeah its a matter of semantics.


:studyhound:

Remember lather, RINSE, then repeat!!

[Glenn P]

Today @ 10:48 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=357615#post357615)
studyhound:

Kinda, Covnenant even more broad and more complex. Right now it is a defalt name for any non-dispensational view.

Well, yes and no. Covenant theology, historically speaking, is the view that God has made two covenants with man: A covenant of works with Adam, and covenant of grace with Abraham.

This is why infant baptism is such an indispenssible part of traditional Covenant theology. Since the covenant of grace is synonymous with the Abrahamic covenant, and Christians are said to be in the covenant of grace, then Christians are in the covenant marked by circumcision, only now circumcision has been replaced with baptism. Since the covenant was made with Abraham "and your seed," we as Christians baptise our "seed" (children) as Abraham circumcised his.

Although I'm Reformed in general, I don't quite subscribe to covenant theology. I think the model outlined above is confused, but I won't go into all that here. :smile:

[studyhound]

Theonomy:

Well, yes and no. Covenant theology, historically speaking, is the view that God has made two covenants with man: A covenant of works with Adam, and covenant of grace with Abraham.

This is why infant baptism is such an indispenssible part of traditional Covenant theology. Since the covenant of grace is synonymous with the Abrahamic covenant, and Christians are said to be in the covenant of grace, then Christians are in the covenant marked by circumcision, only now circumcision has been replaced with baptism. Since the covenant was made with Abraham "and your seed," we as Christians baptise our "seed" (children) as Abraham circumcised his.

Although I'm Reformed in general, I don't quite subscribe to covenant theology. I think the model outlined above is confused, but I won't go into all that here. :smile:


I agree the "original" covenant view was a strait reform view, but many non-reformed non-dispensational have oh for lack of a better word hijacked the name and used it as an umbrella name for non-dispensational view.





:studyhound:

[Stephen]

*gets dizzy and falls over*

[studyhound]

Stephen,

Haven't forgot about this thread, I try working on the covenant view. But I am in the midst’s looking for new work, illness and a laundry list of other distractions including a debate off line with a quasi-dispensationalists about the relationship of Israel and the church/is the church now Israel. So fear not I am still working on it.



Stephen:

*gets dizzy and falls over*

Am I overloading your brain?? :poke: :wink:



:studyhound:

[Stephen]

Hey,
Sure no pressure, whenever you feel you have time. :smile:

[Ted]

For more discussion of the various approaches to prophecy, go to http://www.bibleonly.org/proph/schools.html

Ted

[studyhound]

For more discussion of the various approaches to prophecy, go to http://www.bibleonly.org/proph/schools.html

Ted
Or go to http://www.theologyweb.com and dicuss the various approaches to prophecy.:teeth:

[Dee Dee Warren]

And that link confounds historic preterism which is fully orthodox with the rank NeoHymenaean heresy. It is a shame when the orthodox do not support the orthodox at least in their orthodoxy and kowtow to the heretics.

[Ted]

OK Dee Dee. I guess I'll have to add that to my list of immediate updates...

Ted