Millennial flavors

[Darth Xena]

Okay, I am always curious about demographics. What millennial view do you hold??

[$cirisme]

I'm a dispie. :yipee:

[Lizard]

cirisme:
I'm a dispie. :yipee:

I'm not. :yipee: :yipee:

[GrayPilgrim]

I'm a Christian :yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

[joelkaki]

I am a Christian as well. However, I belief postmillennialism is an accurate representation of Biblical truth.

Joel

[Lizard]

GrayPilgrim:
I'm a Christian :yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

That wasn't the question GP.

I smell a red herring. :D

[efta777]

Can't I just be mid-millenial?

[Solly]

Amillenial. Glad to be the first on the poll!!

Amills are optimistic pessimists. We expect the worst, but are pleasantly surprised if it doesn't happen....yet.

[Cherith]

Dittos to what Solly said...:thumb:

[Darth Xena]

Cherith, give me time, I will convince ya!!

[Carl Smuda]

I'm still officially postmillennial. But maybe due to lack of study I am wondering how we get a long long period of Christianity prevailing before a little uprising and before the physical Return of Christ and physical resurrection. That I took from a Amillennialist. (knee-v). And historical premill still has a piece of my heart. I'll be thinking (when I can) about 1 Cor 15 & Eph 1. :read:

[Darth Xena]

Wow, 6 postmill in one place. Must be something in the water.

[Berean]

Dee Dee:
Wow, 6 postmill in one place. Must be something in the water.
Make that 7,Dee Dee. I'm postmill. :yipee:

[Darth Xena]

Cool!! Man it is turning into a convention. Have a bananna :yipee:

[Berean]

I think I'll have two banannas :yipee: :yipee:

[Lizard]

I'll wait until after the millinium to have my banana.


:yipee:

[Berean]

Faramir:

I'll wait until after the millinium to have my banana.
:rofl:

[Carl Smuda]

a banana a day keeps the heart-attack away. :yipee:

[Popeye]

This is a little tricky for me. I have to side with Carl Smuda (actually, he's referring to me). I consider myself an amillinialist with a postmillinial twist. I can see the expansion of God's kingdom in scripture as the postmill's teach, but how long is it supposed to last once we get that point?

[Popeye]

My roommate's dad says he's pro-trib and pan-millenial. I thought that was kind of interesting.

[Darth Xena]

Well we don't know how long it will last.... I would say a good long time. In short (and all futurists hide your eyes for a moment) - I definitely do not believe that Jesus is coming back soon at all. It could be thousands of years. <a loud gasp heard from the audience> - See I told you not to look. Bad, bad, bad.

[Jaltus]

I am promillenial myself.

:yipee:Go millenium!:yipee:

Historic premill, if you held a gun to my head. Postmill does not work, IMHO, because there is no way you'll ever convince me that Satan is currently bound, which is the problem with amill as well.

[Darth Xena]

That is SOOO easy to prove.

[Jaltus]

Sorry, DDW, don't buy it.

[Ishmael]

How can we possibly have so many Postmillennialists??!! Not possible without undue influence! :hrm:

[Jaltus]

Because postmills are the only ones who tend to argue eschatology since their belief is so rare.

[Darth Xena]

Well Jaltus I guess I will someday soon just have to trounce you on that issue once again. Sigh, it's a dirty job, but someone has got to do it.

[Darth Xena]

Oh, and there are so many postmills because I am exercising Jedi mind contol on the unsuspecting.

[Lizard]

Dee Dee Warren:
Oh, and there are so many postmills because I am exercising Jedi mind contol on the unsuspecting.

I resent that remark, in fact.............



Yes Dee Dee, you are .......



What was I saying?

[Solly]

Ahh, that must be it; I suspect.

Mwuh ha ha ha!!:dufus:

[Solly]

Oo-er Missus

[Jaltus]

Hey, Dee Dee. How about where we have a thread to hash this out, once and for all. I am not a big eschatology buff, but I'd love to have a one on one thread where you and I can talk about what is legit and what is not legit.

I think your arguments about the Olivet Discourse are pretty solid (it took me a few tries just now to spell discourse, LOL), but I'd like to see more about your postmill stuff.

You say they are bound together, but you can be a preterist-amill if you feel the need. I understand your preterism, it is the postmill part I don't get.

So here is my thought. Dee Dee and Jaltus, one on one, a discussion thread.

This would also mean you get ONE POST and then the other responds. Generally, I get one post, and you respond with 4-5 posts all book length, and then ask why I did not answer all your points. Let us do it one post at a time, with unlimited time between postings, so we can both research and do this thing right.

What do you say? I am interested in learning, how about you?

[Darth Xena]

Jaltus:
Hey, Dee Dee. How about where we have a thread to hash this out, once and for all. I am not a big eschatology buff, but I'd love to have a one on one thread where you and I can talk about what is legit and what is not legit.


Hey that sounds great!!! I have done this before with Cirisme and it worked out really well.

I think your arguments about the Olivet Discourse are pretty solid (it took me a few tries just now to spell discourse, LOL), but I'd like to see more about your postmill stuff.

Wow, so I am making some headway with the Discourse???

You say they are bound together, but you can be a preterist-amill if you feel the need. I understand your preterism, it is the postmill part I don't get.

Okay, I understand and really appreciate your candidness.

So here is my thought. Dee Dee and Jaltus, one on one, a discussion thread.

I am all for that!

This would also mean you get ONE POST and then the other responds. Generally, I get one post, and you respond with 4-5 posts all book length, and then ask why I did not answer all your points. Let us do it one post at a time, with unlimited time between postings, so we can both research and do this thing right.

You know me toooo well. LOL. Boom has already clipped my wing feathers here with regards to post length, so that sounds fine.

What do you say? I am interested in learning, how about you?

Yes. Absolutley. Start the thread, and I am there.

[Lizard]

This should be Great!!


:thumb:

:yipee:

:yipee:

:yipee:

[Jaltus]

One question, should that stay in this forum, or should it move to a challenge area?

My question is because I want it to stay just the two of us. Of course, we could do that by making it a closed thread so only mods could post, and then both of us could still post, LOL.

However, that is up to you.

[Darth Xena]

Dear Jaltus:

I think we could keep it here in this area, but just put a notice in the thread that we are requesting to keep it between us two. It worked over at another forum with Cirisme and I.

[Jaltus]

Sounds good.

[Rubia Warren]

Dee Dee Warren:
Okay, I am always curious about demographics. What millennial view do you hold??
Let's see: #1...#2....#3....#4.....oh, there's too many choices!! What to pick, what to pick!!!

[Ric]

I voted for Dispensational Premillennial. :smile:

I know there is a difference between Dispensational Premillennial and Historic Premillennial, but I can't remember what it is - can someone help me refresh my memory? :huh:

[Jaltus]

Dispies believe in splitting time up into....you guessed it....dispensations. Historic premills just believe in premill, no strings attached.

[Darth Xena]

And Jaltus, am I correct in saying that historic premils see the Church as the continuation of Israel as well? Or am I wrong?

[Jaltus]

There is variation on that one. I have not made up my mind on it, but GP does not see a continuation, at least in terms of the land grant promises.

[Carl Smuda]

My limited memory to resond to Dee Dee's question is based on what I can recall from the first parts of J.N.D.Kelly's book 'Early Christian Doctrines.' and maybe a few others...

Please help me out here, but, the early church fathers saw Christ on just about every page of the septuigent. They saw Christ as the fulfillment of promises told by the ancient Prophets. And the juicy details are in the books but as of now beyond my grasp. But, They saw Christ's Church as the fulfillment of many things, according to Kelly, it was a given that Christ was the God of the OT. Well, the Jews rejected Jesus as the Anointed One and the Gentile Church began to see the Christian Faith as the replacement of Judaism.

I am not clear on "continuation." And all due respects I care not if "replacement" hurts some Messianic Jews' feelings.

Now, then, I guess...simmer for 300 years and Origen (and the like) questioned the validity of the historical millennialism. "Those guys" missed it on the first coming of the Saviour, maybe they cannot be trusted for the second coming either? So...i guess...what evolved was Amillennialism.

Anyone?...anyone?... :read:

respectfully,
Carl

[Darth Xena]

Dear Carl:

If you take a look in the dispensationalism thread there is a thread on the church being spiritual Israel... I posted an article there by Reverend Klett which I think really well describes the idea of the church as Isreal.

[Carl Smuda]

OK :angel:

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

I'll say I'm postmill, so you'll know that I'm optimistic. But when it comes to the millennium itself (Revelation 20), I'm Amil. I answered Amil on the poll.
:yipee: :yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

[Popeye]

I was just doing a little reading and two names came up who have similar views as that, Rushdoony and Warfield. I've never read any of their works of the issue, but the author called it "optimistic amillenialism". That seems to me to be the best take on things.

[Solly]

I believe Rushdoony is Post Mill; at least from what I have read when his name is mentioned. Part of the Reconstructionist movement.

*Statement correction required*

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

Solly:
I believe Rushdoony is Post Mill; at least from what I have read when his name is mentioned. Part of the Reconstructionist movement.

*Statement correction required*

The reconstructionists call him Post-mil, but only because he is optimistic.

[Theolog]

I am currently a post mill although perhaps I treat a couple of issues like an idealist. I am still working the details.
I lean towards full preterist. I kind of like the idea of The eternal state coming next.

Are all the cookies really necessary? I usually avoid sites that cookie you on every page turn.

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

Theolog:
I am currently a post mill although perhaps I treat a couple of issues like an idealist. I am still working the details.

Well, there is certainly no conflict between idealism and Postmillennialism.

[Bill K.]

Lump me in with Solly and Cherith. I'm an A-mill. Without the symbology of chapter 20 in John's Revelation, we all would probably be one.

There seems to be two basic versions of a-mill. One says there is NO mill. The other says the reference to the mill. is symbolic but has a referent. I'm in this later group. Knowing the way people are with eschatological ideas, I'm sure there are a dozen other a-mill views that I'm unaware of.

eschatologies are like opinions...

In Christ,
Bill

[Jaltus]

There is no such thing as correct eschatology as far as I am concerned.

Oh, Theolog, just turn off the cookie option in your profile.

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

Jaltus

There is no such thing as a correct statement about whether there is a correct eschatology. :kiss:

[Darth Xena]

FYI - Jaltus, if Theolog turns off the cookie option, he will be logged out constantly. Almost all forum software runs on cookies to keep users logged in, and all VBulletin-based sites operate in that manner.

And of course there is a correct eschatology, God did not dedicate so much space to a subject that it was not possible to have a correct view about. I am surprised to see you say that. Now that does not mean that any of us here necessarily have that correct view, but a correct view is possible.

[Theolog]

Theonomy:


Well, there is certainly no conflict between idealism and Postmillennialism.

Is that a tongue pushing your cheek out?:thumb:

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

Theolog:


Is that a tongue pushing your cheek out?:thumb:

LOL, I confess, you lost me. I was totally serious. The idealist method (i.e. as distinct to the historicist, preterist or futurist method) is quite compatible with Postmillennialism.

[Jaltus]

Dee Dee,

Jaltus, if Theolog turns off the cookie option, he will be logged out constantly. Almost all forum software runs on cookies to keep users logged in, and all VBulletin-based sites operate in that manner. But there are separate spots in our profiles for a cookie for the board and a cookie for every page. He was asking about the latter.

Oh, I think it is theoretically possible to figure out the eschaton, I just think it will never actually happen. Too much is stacked against it in terms of preconceived notions, sin, personal desires, "nobody knows the times or dates..." etc.

[The Curtmudgeon]

Thought I'd better chime in on the poll lest the Dispensationalists go under-represented. I'm with you, Cirisme! :joy:

The (what we need here is a slipped-on-banana-peel smilie) Curtmudgeon

[Socrates]

Do we need an option for neo-Hymenaean heresy aka pantelism? :bonk:

[Darth Xena]

Hey Socrates!!!

No we don't..... I was inquiring of the demographics of historic Christian belief here at TWeb. There are any number of herterodox systems I am sure that might have been included.

[John Reece]

I was originally a premillennialist. Then I read the Bible through many, many times over a period of decades - in almost all the major English versions as well as in Hebrew (OT) and Greek (LXX & NT).

Then I became a postmillennialist, because after seeking God for grace to disabuse my mind of cultural and personal presuppositions (while simultaneously repeatedly re-reading the biblical texts), I could no longer find any basis for premillennialism in the biblical texts.

Then, after a number of years of overlooking certain presuppositions strongly held by popular postmillennial writers, I quit allowing myself to be labeled "postmillenial".

I have the same problem with pantelism that I have with all the other -isms: most advocates of the respective positions carry some baggage (different in each case) that I do not hold on to.

"None of the above" was not listed as an option, so I guess I can't be counted in any of the given categories...

Call it a red herring in my case too, if you like, but I cast my lot with GP on this one.

[Carl Smuda]

John, that is amazing. I'd like to party with YOU, cowboy. :yipee: Or rather, that journey of yours needs to be expounded on. I admire that sort of Godly Knowledge. You have eternal life. :rockon:

[John Reece]

Thanks for the kind response, Carl.

[efta777]

Yeah John, I'd love to hear about some of the things you've discovered on your journey through the many views of Eschatology. Do you find yourself holding to any particular views right now, or are you in-between views, or something else entirely?

[Carl Smuda]

Can you please tell me about some of the presuppositions held by postmills? Thank you. :hmm:

[John Reece]

efta777,

I've forgotten most of what I discovered on my journey. I'm 70 years old and suffering from fatigue of the brain - which never was very strong :smile: .

My views are summed up well enough in the first two headings on my web page (http://www.johnreece.us). That is, who the meek are and how they will inherit the earth.

Carl,

Please see my response to efta777 above. Even if I had more energy than I do now, I'd probably not be wise to expound on the subject of presuppositions held by postmillennialists. I'll let them speak for themselves.

[studyhound]

optimistic amillenialism -- Really hoping for Post-mill.

I cant stand the "pan-mill" idea it just seems like a lazy cop-out not to study parts of God's word :rant: :dunce:

[Darth Xena]

Welcome Studyhound!!! I can deal with opti-amilll....cool :thumb:

[Solly]

No no no, it's all going to end very badly, believe me, I should know.

(picture below is Marvin the manic depressed robot, from Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, BBC TV series, for those who don't know)

[Darth Xena]

Eeek!!!

[Lizard]

03-06-2003 @ 04:28 AM
Solly:

No no no, it's all going to end very badly, believe me, I should know.

(picture below is Marvin the manic depressed robot, from Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, BBC TV series, for those who don't know)

:rofl: Marvin was my favorite character in that show. :thumb:

Sooooooooooooooooo funny.

[Solly]

Yes. here i am, brain the size of a planet, and I'm picking up pieces of paper.

Oops, off topic...

[Lizard]

03-06-2003 @ 08:09 AM
Solly:

Yes. here i am, brain the size of a planet, and I'm picking up pieces of paper.

Oops, off topic...

Where is the moderator to get this thread back on topic.

:argh:

[Solly]

.

[undead]

:bonk:

Do dispie's suffer this way?

[Carl Smuda]

Exactly! They keep it in line to the end and then God says, "nope. I changed the rules again. yuk-yuk." :yipee:

[PuritanD]

I have moved more to the historical premil view with a post-trib rapture. Hard to believe, I know. There has got to be something about the one taken and one remaining in both Luke 17 and Matt 24 and 1 Thess 4 when we meet him in the air...

PuritanD

[bar Jonah]

Daniel, the founder of GODISNOWHERE, is a dispy pre-tribber, but he likes to say he is a "pan-tribber."

"However it pans out is fine with me." :lol:

[efta777]

That's how the pastor at my old church used to put it.
I feel bad for him, though, because he is ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE that he will still be pastor of that church when he is raptured, so where we have pictures of all the past pastors on one of the walls in the church, his says:
Rev. Skip Lane
1991-rapture

[Hitch]

spumoni

[Dave]

:yipee:

but what exactly is 'historical premil'?

My third post! :yipee:

[Hitch]

That view predates DF (dispensational futurist) by over 1,000 years.

H

[Dave]

Today @ 09:26 PM
Hitch:

That view predates DF (dispensational futurist) by over 1,000 years.

H

what exactly does historical premill profess? It's not the whole 'Ephream the Syrian' thing, is it?

[bar Jonah]

03-15-2003 @ 02:26 PM
Hitch:

That view predates DF (dispensational futurist) by over 1,000 years.

H
Logical fallacy, your presupposition that dispensational futurism isn't the correct view. IF it is the correct view, then it is biblical and older than any other view.

Your assumptions are showing. :wink:

[Solly]

David

Historic pre mill does not see a difference between Israel and the Church; Christ comes, there is the millennium, and then the end with the resurrection. No prior rapture/resurrection of the church. Generally, they see Revelation as plotting out history, hence the idea of our being in laodicean days, or philadelphian, or sardisan, since they did not automatically assume they were in the end times. A lot of it, after the Reformation, was pinned to the idea that the Pope was the antichrist, so they worked their numbers from about 660 Ad, ending up with 1860 as the start of the millenium. Of course, when that failed, class. premill took a tumble...

For the right back in hisotry view, pre mill came through the Asia Minor Gang, first through Montanus (noted Heretic), and then Justin Martyr and Ireneaus; but it was never generally accepted, and was specifically outlawed at times.
It cropped up again in the middle ages, and passed into the REformation times via the Anabaptists. In places it merged with classical post millennialism, so that they were almost indistinguishable in the Reformed churches. It survives today in certain Protestant circles.

[Carl Smuda]

Today @ 08:02 AM
Solly:

David

Historic pre mill does not see a difference between Israel and the Church; Christ comes, there is the millennium, and then the end with the resurrection. No prior rapture/resurrection of the church. Generally, they see Revelation as plotting out history, hence the idea of our being in laodicean days, or philadelphian, or sardisan, since they did not automatically assume they were in the end times. A lot of it, after the Reformation, was pinned to the idea that the Pope was the antichrist, so they worked their numbers from about 660 Ad, ending up with 1860 as the start of the millenium. Of course, when that failed, class. premill took a tumble...

For the right back in hisotry view, pre mill came through the Asia Minor Gang, first through Montanus (noted Heretic), and then Justin Martyr and Ireneaus; but it was never generally accepted, and was specifically outlawed at times.
It cropped up again in the middle ages, and passed into the REformation times via the Anabaptists. In places it merged with classical post millennialism, so that they were almost indistinguishable in the Reformed churches. It survives today in certain Protestant circles. Solly that's awful! I can't believe you posted that. David my sources trace historical premillennialism back hundreds of years before Christ. It was an ancient Jewish belief in a coming Golden Age of Messianic Rule, a Messianic Kingdom and a transformation of nature itself. It included a general resurrection and the length of this coming age varied several hundred years depending on one's source. 600, 800, 1000 years. It wasn't a heretic that championed that classic millennialism it was the parent Faith. Origen and Augustine are the ones who switched the Church from "chilism" to Amillennialism.

[Solly]

03-17-2003 @ 05:53 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=38027#post38027)
Carl Smuda:



Sorry Carl, but it depends which books you read, and I have been reading one from the Orthodox Church, who kinda have proprietorial rights over the Early Church Fathers. If you are reading ones which promote class premill, then it will look good. Yes I missed the connection with Jewish chiliasm, but since I believe they got it wrong, that is not to the point. Most of the early church did NOT hold to chiliastic views as was being shown here (http://www.theologyonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=5477&perpage=15&pagenumber=1), and they were condemend in one of the councils. Most of the chiliasms did come out of Asia Minor, of which Montanus was the first prominent exponent.

[Carl Smuda]

What critical difference is there between Jewish chilism and historcial premillennialism? Other than the length of time? 600, 800, 1000 years....or the timing of the general resurrection? (before during or after the Messianic Kingdom) the belief in the restoration of all things, and the transformation of nature is the common denominator. You can't give all that credit to Montanists. You make it sound like they invented this eschatological belief out of thin air.

I suppose we can't deny that the Jews didn't recognize their own Messiah (blessed be Him), and I suppose we can question their entire method of eschatology. But, a return to eden-like earth is the very essense of chilism/classical/historical premilennialism.

I honestly don't see the difference. The day of the Lord, the coming wrath of God. That goes back centuries. It has an historical meaning that was understood when John-the-baptist asked the Pharisees, "who warned YOU to flee from the wrath to come?" The Apostle Paul, I believe, most certainly equated the Day of the Lord with the Day of Christ.

The books I read are John Brights "Kingdom of God"; Albert Schweitzer's "the mysticism of Paul the Apostle", "The Mystery of the Kingdom", "The Kingdom of God and primitive Christianity"; Anthony Buzzard's "Our Fathers who aren't in heaven." Paul somebody's work "When time shall be no more." That last one was a history of beliefs in prophecy.

the church was premillennial until they switched to Amillennial in the third or fourth century. That means for three hundred years they carried the historical jewish eschatology.

Right? Wrong? I respectfully request assistance adjusting my thinking on this.

[Elect Lady]

Greetings,

I am Amillennial!

Blessings,

[Darth Xena]

Hitch, where has Elect Lady gotten off to?

[jabberwocky]

I'm an amillennial, but the guys in this story (http://youthtools.ibelieve.com/content.asp?SID=12&CID=242) are dispensationalist premilliennials.

[Darth Xena]

I am a recovering dispie premill.

[jabberwocky]

I am a recovering dispie premill.
:eek: You poor thing!

[Dr. Jack Bauer]

03-18-2003 @ 03:56 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=37919#post37919)
RightIdea:


Logical fallacy, your presupposition that dispensational futurism isn't the correct view. IF it is the correct view, then it is biblical and older than any other view.

Your assumptions are showing. :wink:

That's the strangest thing i've ever seen. Even leading dispensational writers (back in the days when there were some) are frank and honest in admitting that no theological writers were fully dipensational until WAY after the Reformation. They just assume that the church totally screwed up its eschatology as soon as it entered the second century and finally recovered with the help of modern fundamentalism! :teeth:

[Carl Smuda]

Theonomy,
I second that. No evidence of dispensational theology until, well you know, Glasgow Scotland. Darby, Macdonald, Irving? Scofield...etc. What really gets me is the quote the dispy's have drudged up from a Greek Christian Saint. St. Ephraim? I've seen the same dumb quote three times now but no one provides context. Just like dispensational must defend imaginary verses in canon the same attitude is applied to Church History! i.e. It must be there, just cause there is no evidence of such doesn't mean it aint there somewheres. :poke:

God Bless all who read here in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
respectfully,
Carl

[Bill the Cat]

Boy are we Dispies getting smeared????

http://www.geocities.com/ahahahavi/mud6.jpg

[Bill the Cat]

BTW, that's no one I know. I found the pic on the net..... Public domain and all:thumb:

:btc:

[Carl Smuda]

Sorry Bill-the-cat. All in good Christian brotherhood fun, hey what? :rockon: I've some Dispensational friends whose opinions I respect highly. Cepten they know I think little of the dispy-land stuff. But they know I'm from the same kettle. I suppose, like Dee-Dee, I'm a recovering Dispy-Premill.

By 1990 I had already jettisoned the pre-trib-rapture. It would be another ten years before I hit upon the Amillennial and Postmillennial views. I find is funny that in the late 1980's I actually read a preterist book on prophecy and didn't even realize it. I simply read it and mentioned to several Dispy friends that, "hey, this book says the great trib has passed already, huh..."

Bill-the-Cat, Have you read anything that compares the four views of the "millennium"?

respectfully,
Carl

[Bill the Cat]

Today @ 12:58 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=133248#post133248)
Carl Smuda:


Bill-the-Cat, Have you read anything that compares the four views of the &quot;millennium&quot;?

respectfully,
Carl

No, but I've read books on pre trib, pre-wrath, and post trib. I also read Days of Vengence, and was not really impressed (no offense). Do you have a recommendation?

Oh and for being so respectful, have some pearls!!

[Carl Smuda]

Bill the cat,
"The Bible and the Future" by Anthony A. Hoekema. I really enjoyed reading this work. Several chapters I read repeatedly. A few I plan to return to for deeper study. He really does a wonderful job explaining inaugurated eschatology, realized eschatology (which is what he thought Amillennialism should be called) and he goes into detail on Dispensationalism and Postmillennialism and the Return of Christ and many issues of these things to come. The reason I kept returning to it over-and-over because I could read a chapter and think about it or look up some Bible passages on my own, and then go back and read the other chapters on the OTHER views. Send me a snail mail address and I'd be happy to send you a copy?

sincerely,
Carl

[Bill the Cat]

I sent you a PM carl.

[Carl Smuda]

Got'cha. Thank you. :cheers:

[Trinitarian]

I'm a Historic Premill, we're hopeful pessimists on a mission.

[Carl Smuda]

Trinitarian,
God Bless you in the name of Jesus Christ! A Trinitarian that smokes a pipe AND is historical premillennial to boot. My, my..

My hat's off to you dude. Tell me, do you have any thoughts on realized millenium? i.e. what, if anything, do you see in the abundant life now that He came to give us, as a little piece of the kingdom? I'm equating the coming kingdom of God with the millennium.

sincerely,
Carl

[Trinitarian]

Today @ 05:20 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=135970#post135970)
Carl Smuda:

Trinitarian,
God Bless you in the name of Jesus Christ! A Trinitarian that smokes a pipe AND is historical premillennial to boot. My, my..

My hat's off to you dude. Tell me, do you have any thoughts on realized millenium? i.e. what, if anything, do you see in the abundant life now that He came to give us, as a little piece of the kingdom? I'm equating the coming kingdom of God with the millennium.

sincerely,
Carl

I would defintately see the Kingdom as an 'Already/Not Yet.' It is inaugurated in the present but awaits ultimate fulfilment. I have been very influenced by George Elddon Ladd in this respect.

[Hitch]

06-27-2003 @ 05:39 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=134161#post134161)
Trinitarian:

I'm a Historic Premill, we're hopeful pessimists on a mission.
LMBO

[John Reece]

:smile:

[mandolin]

Well... I picked historic pre-mil because I'm no longer a dispy pre-millenialist, and it was the only other pre-millenialist view.

I think I read Revelation a bit more literally than most people do, and I'm therefore a post-trib. premillenialist.

I used to be dispy, because Hagee made such a convincing claim in "from daniel to doomsday" (as I already stated in a different room)...but I no longer believe in the pre-trib rapture, and am therefore no longer dispie.

I don't really know what historic pre-millenial is...but I guess as a post trib premillenialist...it's what I am. :huh:

[Trinitarian]

Yesterday @ 05:35 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=143984#post143984)
Hitch:


LMBO

Why don't I know what this means? I thouht I was web-savy :brood:

[efta777]

laughing my butt off

[Trinitarian]

Today @ 04:40 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=145481#post145481)
efta777:

laughing my butt off

Ahh...excellent.

[Sher]

also known as ---> :lmbo:


:smile:

[asaph]

Hey,
I don't know what I am. Give me a label and then I'll know. I am just a lowly custodian who knows nothing except cleaning toilets behind the learned and spiritual giants of the church. I don't like to pick fights, I'm too lovable for that, but I do seem to get black eyes anyway. Any advice? I suppose I am premillennial, somewhat, but modified dispensational. I hate labels. (Are we not right in saying that thou art a Samaritan and hast a devil?) I like the spiritual application of the preterist but feel they go too far in doing away with the physical side of things. There will we a physical/spiritual restoration of "Israel after the flesh" at which time they will become one with the church. The church is God's central plan for eternity. Jesus is the Builder and very essence [Material] (in us as spiritual stones)] of the church. Jesus today is manifested in the church as the life giving Spirit. "Now the Lord is that Spirit". I do not think that any individual can answer all the tough questions but the church who is the fulness of Him who fills all in all can find the answers in Him.

Pleasant debating,

asaph

[Darth Xena]

08-18-2003 @ 10:53 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=188936#post188936)
asaph:

Hey,
I don't know what I am. Give me a label and then I'll know. I am just a lowly custodian who knows nothing except cleaning toilets behind the learned and spiritual giants of the church. I don't like to pick fights, I'm too lovable for that, but I do seem to get black eyes anyway. Any advice? I suppose I am premillennial, somewhat, but modified dispensational.

Maybe we can cure you of that premill stuff :teeth:



I hate labels. (Are we not right in saying that thou art a Samaritan and hast a devil?) I like the spiritual application of the preterist but feel they go too far in doing away with the physical side of things.

You have met the wrong preterists, apparently the heretical version which is more properly labeled NeoHymenaeanism. Orthodox preterists do not do away with the physical side of things, and even more so, postmill preterists do not, which I am.



There will we a physical/spiritual restoration of &quot;Israel after the flesh&quot; at which time they will become one with the church. The church is God's central plan for eternity. Jesus is the Builder and very essence [Material] (in us as spiritual stones)] of the church. Jesus today is manifested in the church as the life giving Spirit. &quot;Now the Lord is that Spirit&quot;. I do not think that any individual can answer all the tough questions but the church who is the fulness of Him who fills all in all can find the answers in Him.

Amen. You are not dispensational by the way, what you articulated about Israel is antithetical to dispensationalism which holds to two distinct peoples of God which I also reject.

[Sher]

08-18-2003 @ 10:53 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=188936#post188936)
asaph:

Hey Asaph ... Hitch told me who you are from CU :smile: I was SherBear there (pre-forum crash)

Welcome to TWeb ... hope you'll hang around ... we're a good bunch here.

Sher

[Solly]

/ot Sher, weren't you sherbear here for a while? And were you on Baptist Board?

[Spiritus Naturae]

Dispensational Premillenial...most definetely. Mmm Mmm good...

[Smusiak]

Non Mill'er...partial preterist, Tuesday...I think to my self...hmm...amill sounds good...Wednesday...I think to my self..no postmill sounds good...well amill is more has been held by the most of the church for centuries, I believe that postmill is more scriptural...and compatible with my partial preterist convictions...tough call really...

[scottatiwu]

amill up in the hizzy

[Darth Xena]

:bump:

[prewrathrap]

What about us plain ole premillennialist? We don't get a place to vote.

I am a progressive dispensationalists.

See following http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/prodisp.html
http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/prodisp2.html


Shalom
Mark

[John Reece]

'Looks like Amillennials are in the lead . . .

[ratioann]

Hello,

I'm voted disp. pre-mil.
I am suprized at how many people voted for the other views.

[shunyadragon]

Okay, I am always curious about demographics. What millennial view do you hold??

I am a Baha'i. My view is more like 'cyclic millennial'. Revelation and creation are cyclic in nature.

[Lizard]

shunyadragan:

The Eschatology forum is strictly for discussion of eschatological discussion within orthodox Christianity. I would love to discuss your views, however, this is not the place for that. If you wish to disucss your eschatology you may start a thread in comparative religion.

Thanks

[theseed]

I favor the premil. postion, although, I voted pan-mill. I'm wanting ot study decide where I stand. I don't side with dispy or historic--just plain premill.

[gary cook]

after satan is bound .We will have the sabbath or 1000 years of peace .Those BORN of GOD will rule with HIm .As they are being trained on earth ,even now Those that lived thought the wrath of GOD .Will marry ,and live as now .But will not do evil .Those that are born again will not .They will have there new bodys and names .some will rule over one city some over 10 some more .We will have NEW JERUSALEM here .[From the heavens ] Then after the 7000 years are finished .Which we are now about at 6000 years ? then satan who as been locked up ,for the 1000 years or sabbath .Will again be free .He will get many to rebell .They will make one last try to destory JESUS CHRIST .He stops this .Put those evil ones in the lake of fire .And NO ONE EVER SINS again .WHY ?because satan and his fallen angels cause ALL our problem ,from the garden of eden until now .Once he is gone.We will not do evil .God makes a NEW heaven and earth ,for us .Because we are no longer flesh and blood .SO we need a NEW WORLD .there will be no water in this new place .we will not have blood .because the fleshes life is in the blood .But we are NOW spirits as OUR SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST .

[prewrathrap]

How about just plain ole premillennial?

[Spiritus Naturae]

:wink:

When I first signed on here in Sept. of '03 I was a Dispensational Premillenialist mainly by 'default', as it was what I was most exposed to. In fact, one of my first posts on this site was in this thread identifying with that school of thought. However, here in '04, a little over a year later I have had opportunity to study and expand my understanding of scripture thanks in part to many posters on this forum. I find it interesting but true nonetheless that I find myself understanding and siding with an eschatology that is perpetuated mainly by those in Reformed circles. Eschatology is wild, ain't it?

Any way, I am working on a thread for the 'Eschatology' forum that will cite the resources (Scripture included of course :wink:) that aided me in my conclusions and my ultimate reasons for arriving at Amillennialism.

God bless,
Jonathan

[gary cook]

you will not want it then !You will want the rivers of living water !

[Hope4U]

Well DeeDee, since you asked me to jump in, I'm a post-mill and my friends are so pre-mill that they won't even eat "Post" toasties.

[spauline]

Hi,

I'm new to the board. I am a Catholic Postmillennialist. Now, I don't know if there are different versions of the Postmill position, but mine, of course, vindicates Catholicism. In this view, following the witness of many approved Catholic mystics, I believe that Christian history will manifest TWO apostasies, in between which lies the Millennium, or, as the mystics call it, the "Age of Peace," during which the world will be primarily Catholic and with a veritable social reign of the Gospel.

The first apostasy, that is, the one BEFORE the Millennium, is our current age, a minor apostasy, that will be followed either by a conversion, or a chastisement that succeeds in bringing about a conversion, that will ultimately bring about the REUNION of Christians into the RCC, enabling a fuller conversion of the world and the aforementioned Age of Peace.

The Age of Peace, or Millennium, will dissolve because of spiritual laxity, thereby leading to the GREAT apostasy, the antichrist, and the end of the world.

Well, that's my tidbit.

In her and her Son,
Scott

[AV1611]

I am a premillenial dispensationalist :teeth:

[InChristAlways]

I decided to just vote Pan amill and though that word isn't used in scripture, "working out" our salvation is and growing in Christ daily, and that goes for everyone in Christ I believe, so everything will work out in the end eventually. LOL>:ahem:

Phil 2:9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ Lord, to the glory of God the Father. [i]12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for [His] good pleasure.

[CJD®]

I think it's up for grabs, depending on how the church fulfills her mission.

We ought to pray and hope and work for the Postmil vision. I mean, who wants it be as bad as the Premil's conceive of it?

<sigh> When will people begin to see that this stuff isn't fatalistically doled out for us? There are a plethora of unforeseen contingencies that will effect the way things go. One of them is, will the church actually repent thus bringing restoration? (see 2 Peter)

CJD

[Hitch]

I think it's up for grabs, depending on how the church fulfills her mission.

We ought to pray and hope and work for the Postmil vision. I mean, who wants it be as bad as the Premil's conceive of it?

<sigh> When will people begin to see that this stuff isn't fatalistically doled out for us? There are a plethora of unforeseen contingencies that will effect the way things go. One of them is, will the church actually repent thus bringing restoration? (see 2 Peter)

CJDWell this is certain, what is 'unforseeen' is solely on our part.

[CJD®]

Oh, yes indeed. I'm no open theist.

[berndpaulhans]

I'm dispensational pre-trib by tradition however I'm in a new Bible study of Revelations that is questioning all I've been taught. I'll be looking to discuss details of my study with you all and find out your views on specific verses dealing with end-times events. :lol:

[Darth Xena]

IOW, he found my site :grin:

:shifty:

[Lizard]

IOW, he found my site :grin:

:shifty:

:no: It was a Bible study of Revelation (long before I had ever heard of you) that caused me to question my pretrib, premil, dispensational futurism. It was Revelation Unveiled by Tim LaHaye. :teeth:

And my intention when studying was to get a better understanding of futurism.




I did.





That is why I am now a preterist. :tongue:

[gary cook]

I am pre wrath ,planing on going before the great tribulation,as it is the wrath of GOD.

[A Cup of No]

I'm post T-Web. I believe Jesus will return when T-Web goes down, 'cause that has to be the end of the world. :teeth:

[Spirit-Filled]

I vote amill because Christ's kingdom is Spirtual not physical.If Jesus is on the throne of David how can be this be a physical kingdom.1oooyrs can be symbolic of a unspecified number.

[Chytraeus]

Amillenial. Glad to be the first on the poll!!

Amills are optimistic pessimists. We expect the worst, but are pleasantly surprised if it doesn't happen....yet.
As a fellow amelinialist, I don't see anything truly pessimistic about it. We recognize that this current world is sold out to the devil and that we will never look like we are running things down here. But, by faith we will always remember that God has defeated the devil, and that we already have the victory in Christ, for the head of the devil received its mortal blow at the cross. With spiritual eyes I witness the defeat of Satan and the victory of the blessed sacrificial Victim every time I worship.

[Chytraeus]

Hi,

I'm new to the board. I am a Catholic Postmillennialist. Now, I don't know if there are different versions of the Postmill position, but mine, of course, vindicates Catholicism. In this view, following the witness of many approved Catholic mystics, I believe that Christian history will manifest TWO apostasies, in between which lies the Millennium, or, as the mystics call it, the "Age of Peace," during which the world will be primarily Catholic and with a veritable social reign of the Gospel.

The first apostasy, that is, the one BEFORE the Millennium, is our current age, a minor apostasy, that will be followed either by a conversion, or a chastisement that succeeds in bringing about a conversion, that will ultimately bring about the REUNION of Christians into the RCC, enabling a fuller conversion of the world and the aforementioned Age of Peace.

The Age of Peace, or Millennium, will dissolve because of spiritual laxity, thereby leading to the GREAT apostasy, the antichrist, and the end of the world.

Well, that's my tidbit.

In her and her Son,
Scott
I know that this is a little off topic, but regarding the return of all Christians to the RCC, until they take Mary and the Pope off the throne that belongs to God alone, it ain't gonna happen.

Amallinialist who believes the antichrist is alive and well.

[studyhound]

I know that this is a little off topic, but regarding the return of all Christians to the RCC, until they take Mary and the Pope off the throne that belongs to God alone, it ain't gonna happen.

Amallinialist who believes the antichrist is alive and well.

Which antichrist?
1john 2:18
1john 2:22
1john 4:3
2john 7

(the only places the phrase is used)

:sh:

[trebor7]

Okay, I am always curious about demographics. What millennial view do you hold??
I am unsure for now .but I am leaning toward historic pre millealism

[Chytraeus]

Which antichrist?
1john 2:18
1john 2:22
1john 4:3
2john 7

(the only places the phrase is used)

:sh:
That's the one.

[studyhound]

That's the one.

My Point is that you use the term in the wrong way, you said:

Amallinialist who believes the antichrist is alive and well.

1 John 2.18 - antichrist is coming (John was warning those he was writing) Also there is a plurality of them

1 John 2.22 antichrist is one who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4.3 Is a spirit which was laread present in Johns time.

2 John 7 antichrist is one who is a deciver and denies the coming of Christ in the flesh.

So to say he is alive and well today is to streach the text to say something it does not.

Also its Amillennial not Amallinialist........unless of course you deny the mall...:blush:

:sh:

[gary cook]

I am pre tribulation,The great tribulation is the wrath of GOd,It is not for HIS kids,But for those who have reject the LAMB of GOd.We must be reborn.new spirits

[Chytraeus]

My Point is that you use the term in the wrong way, you said:



1 John 2.18 - antichrist is coming (John was warning those he was writing) Also there is a plurality of them

1 John 2.22 antichrist is one who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4.3 Is a spirit which was laread present in Johns time.

2 John 7 antichrist is one who is a deciver and denies the coming of Christ in the flesh.

So to say he is alive and well today is to streach the text to say something it does not.

Also its Amillennial not Amallinialist........unless of course you deny the mall...:blush:

:sh:
Spelling was never my stong point. One of these day someone will have to invent one of these forums that ties into MS Word so the spell check can help me out.

Either you read something into my statement that is not really there, or you are reading something into John's words that is not really there. I believe that antichrist has been alive and well ever since the foundation of the Church, for ever since that day there have been those who pretended to be members of the Church, but who, for various reasons, denied the coming of Christ in the flesh. Some denied Him because they could not fathom that the finite could contain the infinite (hey, Calvinists, does that sound familiar). They simply could not imagine that God could take on human flesh. Other's denied Christ because they could not imagine that God could let people into heaven without making them obey a bunch of rules first. Others rejected Christ because they never wanted to be held accountable for their lawless acts in the first place. All of these gave lip service to Christ, but their real beliefs and actions showed that they were not of His People.

Since the first century, the antichrist has become increasingly sophisticated. Although St. Paul does not mention the word, "antichrist" he has in mind the same concept in 2 Thesselonians when he spoke of the man of lawlessness who would pretend to be God and would even sit on God's seat in the Church. As I said in another thread, there is only one place that I know of where a man sits on a high seat in the church and pretends to have the power of God to determine who may or may not go to heaven, and that is in the Roman Catholic church. However, there are many other churches that have their own version of antichrist. Jehova's witnesses deny the Jesus is God in the flesh. Mormons claim that Jesus and his Father are two different Gods, and that both of them have come in the flesh at one point or another, but not for the forgiveness of anyone's sins. Many pentacostals reject the Trinity and therefore hold very aberant views about the work of Jesus, and they end up rejecting his atonement because they insist on a long list of "holiness rules" for a person to get to heaven. All of these are in the spirit of antichrist, and they are alive and well, and will be until the return of Christ at the end of this millinial age.

I have problems with the pre-trib/pre-millinialists because they have that whole "left behind" concept that proposes that there are really two kinds of Christians, the really faithful and the sort-of faithful, and the second group will have to be left behind to realize their mistake. Sounds elitist to me, and I see nothing in Scripture to support any elitist views. I have problems with post-millinialism because it is triumpalisitic. The Church of the Bible is a Church under the form of the Cross. God choses things that appear to be weak and insignificant in the eyes of world to show His strength. In heavenly reality, the Church is already ruling this world, for She holds out the Word of God that either judgesd and condemns the world, or brings the world to salvation by saving faith in Christ Jesus. However, in outward appearances she does not seem to be ruling, but to be ruled, persecuted, and dispised. In the same way a believer is truly a saint who is spotless and sinless in the eyes of God, althouh we can only see our shortcomings and sin. The victory of the Church and the believer must be seen with eyes of faith, and they will only be evident to unbelievers at the return of Christ.

Therefore, it warms my heart to see that the largest group is amillinialists. It also amazes me, for nearly every christian I know outside of the Lutheran and Catholic churches is either a pre or post-millinialist. Where are all of you hiding?

[BurningBush--U]

My limited memory to resond to Dee Dee's question is based on what I can recall from the first parts of J.N.D.Kelly's book 'Early Christian Doctrines.' and maybe a few others...

Please help me out here, but, the early church fathers saw Christ on just about every page of the septuigent. They saw Christ as the fulfillment of promises told by the ancient Prophets. And the juicy details are in the books but as of now beyond my grasp. But, They saw Christ's Church as the fulfillment of many things, according to Kelly, it was a given that Christ was the God of the OT. Well, the Jews rejected Jesus as the Anointed One and the Gentile Church began to see the Christian Faith as the replacement of Judaism.

I am not clear on "continuation." And all due respects I care not if "replacement" hurts some Messianic Jews' feelings.

Now, then, I guess...simmer for 300 years and Origen (and the like) questioned the validity of the historical millennialism. "Those guys" missed it on the first coming of the Saviour, maybe they cannot be trusted for the second coming either? So...i guess...what evolved was Amillennialism.

Anyone?...anyone?... :read:

respectfully,
Carl
Christ is on every page!

Have to study the law.

[BurningBush--U]

Lump me in with Solly and Cherith. I'm an A-mill. Without the symbology of chapter 20 in John's Revelation, we all would probably be one.

There seems to be two basic versions of a-mill. One says there is NO mill. The other says the reference to the mill. is symbolic but has a referent. I'm in this later group. Knowing the way people are with eschatological ideas, I'm sure there are a dozen other a-mill views that I'm unaware of.

eschatologies are like opinions...

In Christ,
Bill
milti-mill

[Chytraeus]

Christ is on every page!

Have to study the law.
Christ is on every page, something that nearly everyone believed until some 19th century protestants started the dispensationalist movement.

As far as I know, no one spoke of a historical movement other than Iraneaus and some people who were excomunicated for severe heresy concerning the person and work of Jesus. It seems that the only melinialist to keep straight on the other doctrines was Iraneaus. The Montanists did not believe that Jesus really became a human, other's believed he earned his status as devine by obedience, and nearly all believed in charismatic gifts, all of which makes me question both charismatic gifts and millinialism.

Origin was one of the first to write against millinialism because until then, most millinialists were outside of the church, and so it was not an issue for those inside the church. The evidence really sides with Amillinialism being the understanding of choice until the 16th century.

[trebor7]

Make that 7,Dee Dee. I'm postmill. :yipee:
I guess you could call me a pan-millenialist. As lomg as I make in to the new heaven and the new earth It'll pan out in the end . I'm not too concerned about which view is correct we"ll all know soon enough. I 'm studying all viewpoints so I'll be prerared which ever way the end times play out.

[BurningBush--U]

I guess you could call me a pan-millenialist. As lomg as I make in to the new heaven and the new earth It'll pan out in the end . I'm not too concerned about which view is correct we"ll all know soon enough. I 'm studying all viewpoints so I'll be prerared which ever way the end times play out.
Ok, bottom line:

Christ comes NOW, in thirty second.

Clap, Boom Cha-Bang! we know he's here... then what?

Who goes and who stays and how long before the Father is all in all?

1000 years, 7000 years, 20000 years 40000+ years before its all over

hum, where do you stand in your MILL flavor?

[Fizban]

I voted Historic Premill.

I'll probably either move to being a dispie or an Amill Preterist.

Just gotta wait to have time to study it.

[spauline]

I voted Historic Premill.

I'll probably either move to being a dispie or an Amill Preterist.

Just gotta wait to have time to study it.

this is the problem that I see: extremism, like the R's and the D's in politics. That is, either you're a ultra-conservative fundie or a totally relativistic liberal. Why not something in the middle: balanced! Like the RCC: conservative in mind, liberal at heart. Then, in my opinion, something analogous to postmill is more fitting: believing in two major apostasies in Church history, in between which lies the "Age of Peace," or, analogously, the "Millennium".

[Hitch]

this is the problem that I see: extremism, like the R's and the D's in politics. That is, either you're a ultra-conservative fundie or a totally relativistic liberal. Why not something in the middle: balanced! Like the RCC: conservative in mind, liberal at heart. Then, in my opinion, something analogous to postmill is more fitting: believing in two major apostasies in Church history, in between which lies the "Age of Peace," or, analogously, the "Millennium". Speaking as a PM.... Huh?

[Fizban]

this is the problem that I see: extremism, like the R's and the D's in politics. That is, either you're a ultra-conservative fundie or a totally relativistic liberal. Why not something in the middle: balanced! Like the RCC: conservative in mind, liberal at heart. Then, in my opinion, something analogous to postmill is more fitting: believing in two major apostasies in Church history, in between which lies the "Age of Peace," or, analogously, the "Millennium".

No offense, but what in the world does being in the middle or balanced have to do with the truth?

I would like to believe that my eschatology will be totally correct someday, no matter what camp I fall into. It doesn't matter if I fall on the end of the spectrum, as long as I don't fall off the spectrum (like hyper-preterism). But to be quite honest, I don't really care that much about eschatology. Jesus is coming again, bodily, and Christians are going to heaven, and the unbelievers to hell. BAM. That's my eschatology. When I can definite it further, I will. Until then...*shrug*

[Chytraeus]

No offense, but what in the world does being in the middle or balanced have to do with the truth?

Of course, what does being at either end of the spectrum have to do with truth. In Islam you have both fundies and libs, with everything inbetween, and they are all lost, as none of them have the truth.

I once heard an excellent definition of a fundamentalist. "A person, who having lost sight of his goal, has redoubled his efforts to get there." One could add that he might be perfectly willing to kill anyone who claims to be headed to the same goal, but is going in a completely different direction. Fundies are just plain scary. The only thing they know for certain is that if they are wrong, all they have hoped for is lost, so any challenge is met with utter hostility.

What I find odd is that libs often act exactly like fundies. The only difference is that for them it is not the way to the goal that they cannot except challenge to, it is the goal itself. The goal, for them, is that there cannot be any god to whom we are accountable, and man must take that place himself. They also end up just plain scary. Any challenge to their plan for all mankind is also met with utter hostility.

However, post millinialism is not any more balanced than premil. The Reformed Theonomists who would force feed Christianity by law are usually post mil, and they are some of the scariest fundies. A-mil seems to be the most balanced to me, and it brings great joy to my heart to see that most people voting here are of that brand. There is hope for the world and the Church afterall (of course, I knew there was, for there is always hope in the a-mil view). :wink:

[Hitch]

The Reformed Theonomists who would force feed Christianity by law are usually post mil, and they are some of the scariest fundies

Would you care to provide a list of names?

[spauline]

Of course, what does being at either end of the spectrum have to do with truth. In Islam you have both fundies and libs, with everything inbetween, and they are all lost, as none of them have the truth.

I once heard an excellent definition of a fundamentalist. "A person, who having lost sight of his goal, has redoubled his efforts to get there." One could add that he might be perfectly willing to kill anyone who claims to be headed to the same goal, but is going in a completely different direction. Fundies are just plain scary. The only thing they know for certain is that if they are wrong, all they have hoped for is lost, so any challenge is met with utter hostility.

What I find odd is that libs often act exactly like fundies. The only difference is that for them it is not the way to the goal that they cannot except challenge to, it is the goal itself. The goal, for them, is that there cannot be any god to whom we are accountable, and man must take that place himself. They also end up just plain scary. Any challenge to their plan for all mankind is also met with utter hostility.

However, post millinialism is not any more balanced than premil. The Reformed Theonomists who would force feed Christianity by law are usually post mil, and they are some of the scariest fundies. A-mil seems to be the most balanced to me, and it brings great joy to my heart to see that most people voting here are of that brand. There is hope for the world and the Church afterall (of course, I knew there was, for there is always hope in the a-mil view). :wink:

Hi, Chytraeus,

thanks for responding. Well, I really don't have much time to devote to these boards, so I really shouldn't post here. but for reference sake, read here (http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-7HJjW9kieKlaV2usQKhFiwefjXc-?l=16&u=20&mx=20&lmt=5&p=2) on my blog about being "in the middle" or "balanced." Also, we believe as Catholics that Jesus can save non-Christians: also on my blog (http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-7HJjW9kieKlaV2usQKhFiwefjXc-?p=29). for a more detailied understanding of the "postmill" I advocate (the Church doesn't use this terminology), you could read this (http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-7HJjW9kieKlaV2usQKhFiwefjXc-?l=16&u=20&mx=20&lmt=5&p=1).

but, anyway, GB,
scott

[BoranJarami]

Here is my millenial flavor

I believe the tribulation started in the first century and is continuing even to today.
I believe that at pentacost the kingdom of God (which is the church) came.
I believe that while the kingdom of God already came, it is still growing and that one day the church will grow to it's fullest.
I believe that at that time Christ will rule the earth through the church for a period of time when there will be peace and prosperity which is an end to the tribulation.
I believe that after this period of time satan will cause a rebelion against the church rule but the rebelion will be crushed by God.
I believe that after God has crushed this rebelion, all believers will be taken up into the heavens where they will wait for the judgement of believers and unbelievers as well as for the recreation of earth.
I believe that after the judgement and reaceation of earth the church will live forever on earth in the presence of God, the way man was intended to live in the beginning.


I believe in a post-millennial rapture

[Geoffrey]

I believe the Millennium was the time of the Old Covenant, ending with the death and resurrection of Christ. I am unsure, however, whether the Millennium began with Abraham, Moses, Saul, or David. If the latter, then the Millennium was pretty close to a literal 1,000 years. I follow Eugenio Corsini (The Apocalypse: The Perennial Revelation of Jesus Christ) in this.

[Zguy28]

I used to be Pre-trib/Pre-Mill. Right now I am definitely not Pre-trib anymore. I realized that when Paul said we would be caught up at the Last Trumpet. I have been slowly evolving my views independently and looking more at Historicism as my eschatology of choice. A gradual unfolding of prophecy throughout history sounds right to me.

As far as Millenium views go, I would say Amill, it makes the most sense to me, but I have a big problem with the binding of Satan thing. Its one of the reasons I have been asking the folks around here for their definitions of "deceiving the nations."

I just find the literal Pre-Mill view to be lacking in sense and practicality. I mean are there two kingdoms? How many times do we refer to our work as "Kingdom work" or "expanding the Kingdom of God" by making converts. Plus a foolish person ignores other people's mistakes. I am referring to the Jews believing in a Premill view. The messiah's kingdom is spiritual. Why should we expect material things? This earth is passing away and is suitable only for the fire.
I voted Amill.

[Chytraeus]

I used to be Pre-trib/Pre-Mill. Right now I am definitely not Pre-trib anymore. I realized that when Paul said we would be caught up at the Last Trumpet. I have been slowly evolving my views independently and looking more at Historicism as my eschatology of choice. A gradual unfolding of prophecy throughout history sounds right to me.

As far as Millenium views go, I would say Amill, it makes the most sense to me, but I have a big problem with the binding of Satan thing. Its one of the reasons I have been asking the folks around here for their definitions of "deceiving the nations."

I would be glad to attempt an answer, but I need to know more about what you want to know.

According to the Amill view, all the numbers, especially those dealing with years, are symbolic, and that the book of Revelation is a heavenly or divine view of the troubles and joys the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church is going through now, has been since the first Pentecost, and will until the final return of Christ in glory. The thousand years spoken of in Rev. 20 are symbolic for the victory that the Church now has over Satan, in that his gates will not ever overcome Her. The "time, times and half a time" or 3 1/2 years are symbolic for the power that Satan still seems to weild over this world. He is still able, through those who allow him to rule over them, to haras the Church through worldly governments, armies, media moguls and false religious systems, and he does. At times it seems as though he is victorious, but in reality, he never is. His greatest "victories" are always his greatest defeats in the end. So, the reign of Satan over the earth is called 3 1/2 years, while the reign of the Church over the earth is called 1,000 years. The Church reigns in a hidden way that can only be seen by God and by believers who see with eyes of faith, but it is the only truly significant reign. John, therefore, used the images of oposites. What we see as powerful and significant, he paints as small and insignificant. What we see as small and insignificant, he paints as powerful and very significant. It is David and Goliath in reverse, they way God saw them, not the way the soldiers on both sides saw them.

So, Satan is chained and falling in the bottemless pit, but he is still able to exercise power over the nations, especially those which have not acknowledged the victory of Christ on the cross. But Satan has absolutely no real power over any who are truly in the Church, those who believe in Jesus Christ for the forgivness of their sins, who are called saints and who are being sanctified through daily worship of God through the Son. The Holy Spirit has made such His temple, and Satan cannot tread there. He can harass, but he cannot destroy.

I hope this helps.

[Chytraeus]

The Reformed Theonomists who would force feed Christianity by law are usually post mil, and they are some of the scariest fundies

Would you care to provide a list of names?
Well, we can start with John Calvin who had heritics burned at the stake, and then go on with most of those who followed him....

[Darth Xena]

Well, we can start with John Calvin who had heritics burned at the stake, and then go on with most of those who followed him....

Don't be ignorant.

[mikewhitney]

I'm a modified merging of post-mil amillennialism.
Actually I haven't found a term describing what seems to be the biblical model.
Help desk! Please!!

[mikewhitney]

Okay. I just looked up post-mil. I had thought that those guys still were waiting for the kingdom to start. But since they say it has started, I agree with that part of it.

So what is it called when one thinks likely that all of Matt 24 and Luke 21 were fulfilled and most of Revelation too and that various verses and the resurrection of all believers aren't fulfilled (Maybe, but not verified, that only Rev 20, as a parenthetical phrase, has not been fulfilled)?

Though, I have only been studying the definition and timing of the kingdom. So I'm not so familiar with the details of dispute and distinction between some of the eschatological views.

I see the kingdom beginning in 70AD as an operation distinct from the Church. The dominion theology therefore doesn't seem to comport with my understanding. Rather, the Church (speaking of the Church only as being the invisible embodiment of all believers) has merely an advisory role, being the help desk to the nations.

[Darth Xena]

So what is it called when one thinks likely that all of Matt 24 and Luke 21 were fulfilled and most of Revelation too and that various verses and the resurrection of all believers aren't fulfilled (Maybe, but not verified, that only Rev 20, as a parenthetical phrase, has not been fulfilled)?



Preterism. I am a postmill preterist. (beware of those who would call themselves preterists but are in reality heretical hyperpreterists)

[studyhound]

Okay. I just looked up post-mil. I had thought that those guys still were waiting for the kingdom to start. But since they say it has started, I agree with that part of it.

So what is it called when one thinks likely that all of Matt 24 and Luke 21 were fulfilled and most of Revelation too and that various verses and the resurrection of all believers aren't fulfilled (Maybe, but not verified, that only Rev 20, as a parenthetical phrase, has not been fulfilled)?

Though, I have only been studying the definition and timing of the kingdom. So I'm not so familiar with the details of dispute and distinction between some of the eschatological views.

I see the kingdom beginning in 70AD as an operation distinct from the Church. The dominion theology therefore doesn't seem to comport with my understanding. Rather, the Church (speaking of the Church only as being the invisible embodiment of all believers) has merely an advisory role, being the help desk to the nations.



You sound like how i was several years ago came to conclutions but had no name to tie it to, of course I thought was lost it and was a heretic there are several of us here that are preterists so feel free to shot some questions our way.

sh ~

[JonLanceBarker]

i am an amillennial orthodox preterist.
AOP.
there.
have a banana. :banana:

[Rubens]

I'm pan-millenial.

i.e. however it all pans out will be fine with me.

[The Remonstrant]

What millennial view do you hold?? [sic]

Tentatively, I am an amillennialist. I take dispensational premillennialism to be preposterous, and the postmillennial idea seems more derived from modern age speculation than a careful biblical analysis. Besides the amillennial perspective, the only other viable millennial view to my mind is historical premillennialism. Still, I have a real problem in adopting a literal one thousand year interpretation from a single passage in Revelation seeing as it is apocalyptic literature we are dealing with. The obvious question, given the fact how much symbolism is contained throughout the Apocalypse, is, Why should we assume John is writing of a literal one thousand years? What about the twelve thousand of each tribe of Israel being sealed in chapter seven? Should we take that literalistically as well?

[Tertullian]

Earthy Amills are the best.

[ruffedge]

I'm amillennial of the partial preterist variety.

[DanK]

I am promillenial myself.

:yipee:Go millenium!:yipee:

Historic premill, if you held a gun to my head. Postmill does not work, IMHO, because there is no way you'll ever convince me that Satan is currently bound, which is the problem with amill as well.

Okay, I know this was posted forever and a day ago, but I was reading through the thread after voting, and I felt I had to comment on this, because I was thinking about this while I was studying this eschatology stuff just now, and had this thought:

What if the binding of Satan was him losing his power over death as a result of Christ's death and resurrection?

[MetalMark]

Well, I picked amillenial but only because I read that is the closest to Catholic teaching.

[Chytraeus]

Okay, I know this was posted forever and a day ago, but I was reading through the thread after voting, and I felt I had to comment on this, because I was thinking about this while I was studying this eschatology stuff just now, and had this thought:

What if the binding of Satan was him losing his power over death as a result of Christ's death and resurrection?

Good point. Also, just how many true cases of demon possession have any of you run into lately. A cursory reading of the Gospels gives the impression that demon possession was more common than the cold in those days. What happened, if Satan is not bound.

However, I can understand the point. There is an awful lot of evil in the world today. Two things to remember. 1) After the fall Satan is no longer the sole source of evil, we people create quite a bit of evil all on our own, without any satanic influence. 2) If Satan is bound, and the world is this evil, think how bad things could be if he had free course. Does any premil who holds this opinion actually believe that amils are blind to the evil in the world? If you really understood the beliefs of amils, you would realize that the amount of evil in the world is fully a part of our theology. Postmils have a greater problem, because their teaching is that this is the best of all possible worlds and is always getting better until the return of Christ. The facts just don't add up.

[Chytraeus]

Well, I picked amillenial but only because I read that is the closest to Catholic teaching.

You silly Catholic, amillenial is the Catholic teaching. All others who hold it got the idea from the Catholics. One could even say that this is the catholic teaching, meaning the millenial postion held by the church since the beginning. Of course, both premils and postmils claim this, but I believe with much less support. Only a few early theologians held those positions, and you can tell by the way they wrote about them that they were promoting an idea against the mainstream.

[MetalMark]

Oh.
Thanks for correcting me.