Amillennial denominations

[Douggg]

Here is a list I got from wikipedia of amilleninal denominations. Does anyone care to add to the list?

Eastern Orthodox
Oriental Ortodox
Roman Catholic Church
Lutheran
Reformed
Anglican
Methodist
Amish
Old Order Mennonite
Conservative Mennonites
Churches of Christ
Christian Church/Disciples of Christ
Christian churches and churches of Christ
Association of Grace Baptist Churches in England

What about Presbyterian?


Doug

 

[shturt678]

Only suggest to narrow down the list to "amillennial denominations that do not even unknowingly pervert the precious inspired Word of God ... don't mean to be so blunt but don't know how to put it in a softer way? In prayer as could be not only an important journey but a long deceptive one. thank u, happy face.

 

[dogs4thewin]

This has been delete sorry miss understood.

 

[AlfredKeith]

The answer to this question is not that easy.

First: Presbyterian is Reformed/Calvinist. Amillennialism is extremely popular in the Reformed churches, but they also have Post-Tribbers and a few Pre-Tribbers.

Amillennialism (first popularized by Saint Augustine) is popular with Roman Catholics, but the Vatican does not have an "official" End Times view. I have a relative that is a devout Catholic and a Post-Tribber.

Southern Baptists in the United States hold almost exclusively to the Pre-Trib doctrine, but I have met one Southern Baptist pastor that is an Amillennialist.

It is extremely rare for a denomination to have an "official" End Times view. Even most Seminaries remain ambiguous in their Statements of Belief about the End Times. A few Seminaries maintain an "official" End Times view--for instance, Dallas Theological Seminary teaches the Dispensational Pre-Trib doctrine.

The real question to be answered is what denominations give majority support for a particular End Times view.

 

[shturt678]

Great! uv already eliminated a few ... and my prayer is similar to urs ... " I certainly hope the world accuses me of being a genuine Christian having a scrutinizing and diligent agape for the truth, IIthess.2:10 ... ending in being a genuine Christian upon my death. u have a great start ... continue the good work ... Matt.6:3 ... will stand out as most complacent and indifferent including being "SECURE" lacking a heartful fear of God not wanting to offend him nor provoke him beyond Sundays for an hour and a half. sorry so blunt. opinion only

 

[ebedmelech]

To list amillenial denominations means nothing. I attend a SBC that is staunch dispensational.

Actually amillennial is not quite accurate because I believe the millennium is figurative, and that Christ reigns right now from heaven through the Church.

Some would wish they could make amillennial a test for orthodoxy but they can't.

It's defensible from scripture and a sound defense in fact! There are several amillennial Christians in futurist churches. In my Sunday School class there's 3 of us.

So what's the point of this list? It proves nothing. Amillennialism is on the rise...live with it.

People are reading the scriptures and there's about to be an end times reformation!

 

[shturt678]

Thank u for ur humility and meekness; however would rather live with: i have done all i can do to caution u regarding Rev.22"18. 19 in a refutable spirit, IITim.3:16, if u awake in the wrong place for eternity do to perverting God's ways of producing "faith" as very familiar with the SBC and their Commentaries keeping infants out of the kingdom due to ur immersion ... and etc ... only my opinion in humility sir.

 

[Gnarwhal]

To list amillenial denominations means nothing. I attend a SBC that is staunch dispensational.

Actually amillennial is not quite accurate because I believe the millennium is figurative, and that Christ reigns right now from heaven through the Church.

Some would wish they could make amillennial a test for orthodoxy but they can't.

It's defensible from scripture and a sound defense in fact! There are several amillennial Christians in futurist churches. In my Sunday School class there's 3 of us.

So what's the point of this list? It proves nothing. Amillennialism is on the rise...live with it.

People are reading the scriptures and there's about to be an end times reformation!

There's a significant number of amillennialists who are trying to shy away from that title because of the negative connotations that others have associated with it. Rather, "realized millennialism" has become preferred in some circles, as it emphasizes the insistance that the millennium was inaugurated at Christ's ascension and is happening now, rather than an outright rejection of any millennial kingdom.

 

[ebedmelech]

Thank u for ur humility and meekness; however would rather live with: i have done all i can do to caution u regarding Rev.22"18. 19 in a refutable spirit, IITim.3:16, if u awake in the wrong place for eternity do to perverting God's ways of producing "faith" as very familiar with the SBC and their Commentaries keeping infants out of the kingdom due to ur immersion ... and etc ... only my opinion in humility sir.

A persons eschatological view has NOTHING to do with their salvation. Last I read, faith in the finished atoning sacrifice of Christ was the test. I read Jesus say to Nicodemas "You must be born again"....that is what our Lord said!.

I believe our Lord will return...that's the bottom line. There will be no "awaking in the wrong place" because I don't hold a futurist view that teaches a coming antichrist, rebuilt temple with sacrifices, and restoration of Israel, with Jesus ruling the world.

Jesus rules and reigns right now! When He returns it's to judge the quick and the dead, and deliver the kingdom over to God.

When you find that Jesus made eschatology a test of salvation...let me know!

 

[shturt678]

Sorry that u misunderstand me sir ... in a refutable spirit ... i'm an amillennialist that views Rev.13:14b exactly where ur at and i did all can do to remove u from this ... if u don't think this has to do with ur fides sola scriptura, this is the big part of this precious passage along with Rev.22:18, 19 ... let alone having "another Jesus," my opinion only please, IICor.11:4 ... and u could care less about IIThess.2:10, my opinion only in meekness and humility ... for ur benefit i hope i'm wrong! enjoyed ur response ... thank u again

 

[WisdomTree]

Amish is ammilenialist!?

 

[ebedmelech]

Sorry that u misunderstand me sir ... in a refutable spirit ... i'm an amillennialist that views Rev.13:14b exactly where ur at and i did all can do to remove u from this ... if u don't think this has to do with ur fides sola scriptura, this is the big part of this precious passage along with Rev.22:18, 19 ... let alone having "another Jesus," my opinion only please, IICor.11:4 ... and u could care less about IIThess.2:10, my opinion only in meekness and humility ... for ur benefit i hope i'm wrong! enjoyed ur response ... thank u again

Yes I did misunderstand...because your response seemed to be towards me. Forgive me that.

There are those that are so staunchly futurist that they just will not accept another view.

I welcome a fellow amil...

 

[Biblewriter]

Yes I did misunderstand...because your response seemed to be towards me. Forgive me that.

There are those that are so staunchly futurist that they just will not accept another view.

I welcome a fellow amil...

And there are those that are so staunchly amil that they will not accept what the Bible explicitly says.

There can be some justification for imagining that the thousand years of Revelation 20 is only a typical expression for a very long time. But there is zero logical justification for refusing to believe the many scriptures that explicitly prophesy a future physical kingdom on this earth, nor the few that explicitly say this future physical kingdom will only be temporary.

 

[shturt678]

Amish is ammilenialist!?

Yes, absolutely the Amish, Martin Luther, and insignificant me ... "Amillennialist"... good question ... thank u; however the Amish has a different "Statement of Faith" than Mr. Luther and myself ... obviously i have a different one than u not that i am right ... a saving faith is by "faith alone" justifies ... i agree to disagree with ur fides caritate formata ... yes there is an intended refute here sir, IITim.3:16 however in humility and meekness.

 

[ebedmelech]

And there are those that are so staunchly amil that they will not accept what the Bible explicitly says.

There can be some justification for imagining that the thousand years of Revelation 20 is only a typical expression for a very long time. But there is zero logical justification for refusing to believe the many scriptures that explicitly prophesy a future physical kingdom on this earth, nor the few that explicitly say this future physical kingdom will only be temporary.

That's right Biblewriter! I accept HOW the bible "explicitly" says it!. This isn't something I just accept for the sake of being contentious. You neglect the symbolism, imagery, and apocalyptic language of scripture when it comes to eschatology. You are rooted in the literal approach and John Nelson Darby when it comes to the end times brother...and it's a wrong approach!

I have listened and studied the scriptures with men of God like J Vernon McGee, John MacArthuur, Chuck Swindoll, Charles Stanley, Ed Young, and Adrain Rodgers, and I still do. However, when it comes to their eschatology, I just couldn't accept their view. I saw the problems with it and I would just say to myself "that doesn't make sense", because there was much that didn't add up. I continued to read the scriptures though. Those are faithful and very sound teachers doctrinally, and I love them, but their eschatology is wrong.

You can continue to challenge me...because I challenge myself to accurately handle "the word of truth". I do not accept that the scriptures teach a future restoration of Israel., a rebuilding of the temple with sacrifice, nor a literal 1000 year reign of Christ. I've been there I know the futurist position brother...very well. There are places where it falls apart.

The first great error is the dating of Revelation...it was NOT written in 95 A.D. and the evidence is overwhelming.

I will continue to hold that the "Israel of God" is what God has had in view all through the NT and that much of Revelation is already fulfilled. As we continue to live in these last days, we will certainly know should Jesus return because there's nothing to hold Him accept His good pleasure!

BTW...I'm still working on my rebuttal of your "True meaning of Romans 9-11", I'll be posting it soon.

 

[WisdomTree]

Yes, absolutely the Amish, Martin Luther, and insignificant me ... "Amillennialist"... good question ... thank u; however the Amish has a different "Statement of Faith" than Mr. Luther and myself ... obviously i have a different one than u not that i am right ... a saving faith is by "faith alone" justifies ... i agree to disagree with ur fides caritate formata ... yes there is an intended refute here sir, IITim.3:16 however in humility and meekness.

Huh?

 

[Biblewriter]

That's right Biblewriter! I accept HOW the bible "explicitly" says it!. This isn't something I just accept for the sake of being contentious. You neglect the symbolism, imagery, and apocalyptic language of scripture when it comes to eschatology. You are rooted in the literal approach and John Nelson Darby when it comes to the end times brother...and it's a wrong approach!

I have listened and studied the scriptures with men of God like J Vernon McGee, John MacArthuur, Chuck Swindoll, Charles Stanley, Ed Young, and Adrain Rodgers, and I still do. However, when it comes to their eschatology, I just couldn't accept their view. I saw the problems with it and I would just say to myself "that doesn't make sense", because there was much that didn't add up. I continued to read the scriptures though. Those are faithful and very sound teachers doctrinally, and I love them, but their eschatology is wrong.

You can continue to challenge me...because I challenge myself to accurately handle "the word of truth". I do not accept that the scriptures teach a future restoration of Israel., a rebuilding of the temple with sacrifice, nor a literal 1000 year reign of Christ. I've been there I know the futurist position brother...very well. There are places where it falls apart.

The first great error is the dating of Revelation...it was NOT written in 95 A.D. and the evidence is overwhelming.

I will continue to hold that the "Israel of God" is what God has had in view all through the NT and that much of Revelation is already fulfilled. As we continue to live in these last days, we will certainly know should Jesus return because there's nothing to hold Him accept His good pleasure!

BTW...I'm still working on my rebuttal of your "True meaning of Romans 9-11", I'll be posting it soon.

But there is no way around the fact that your position is based, in its entirety, on interpretations of the meanings of various scriptures, while mine is based on their explicit wording.

 

[shturt678]

I join in the interpretation of ebedmelech being amil., but not clear when he says "it was not written 95A.D." I was hoping u could clear this up? Romans 9-11 "the righteousness of God," obtained by "faith ALONE! Explains what occurs in the case of Israel and the case of the Gentiles ... think ebedmelech can prove his proposal.

 

[ebedmelech]

But there is no way around the fact that your position is based, in its entirety, on interpretations of the meanings of various scriptures, while mine is based on their explicit wording.

Bibllewriter...you can attempt to skew this as "interpretation" if you wish...but let's understand books...

Regardless of the words used from within the literature of any book...you allow that literature to establish what those words mean.

Let's take Romans 2:28, 29:
28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

Those are explicit words...that make it clear the have a a spiritual meaning...it is established in how those words are used.

So when you want to say there is no "Israel of God"...I can start right here.

If one is a "spiritual Jew" there's a spiritual Israel!

Paul indeed makes that case for me when he says in Romans 9:6-8
6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel;
7 nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: “through Isaac your descendants will be named.”
8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

Now...you can try all you wish to say it doesn't mean there's an "Israel of God" but Paul has just established that!

 

[ebedmelech]

I join in the interpretation of ebedmelech being amil., but not clear when he says "it was not written 95A.D." I was hoping u could clear this up?

It refers to the dating of Revelation. Futurist hold that Revelation was written in 95 A.D. so their eschatology holds the prophecy of Revelation will be in the future. Because it's written after the fall of Jerusalem.

My view is that Revelation was written most likely between 64-66 A.D. and that Revelation is primarily about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Theres only a small portion of Revelation remaining to be fulfilled as I read it.
There's more...but that's the gist of it.

Romans 9-11 "the righteousness of God," obtained by "faith ALONE! Explains what occurs in the case of Israel and the case of the Gentiles ... think ebedmelech can prove his proposal.

Indeed I can. We can start with Ephesians 2...where the apostle makes the point that Jews and Gentiles are ONE in Christ. He makes it pretty clear too:
Ephesians 2:11
11 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called “Uncircumcision” by the so-called “Circumcision,” which is performed in the flesh by human hands—

The apostle makes the case that circumcision (which the Jews thought made them right with God), is nothing. He wants Gentiles to understand it is not circumcision, but faith in Christ.

Ephesians 2:12
12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

This speaks to the condition of Gentiles before Christ. To become a Jew Gentile males had to be circumcised and eat of the Passover which made them Jews as Exodus 12:43-49 states.

13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Christ sacrifice on the cross did away with the ceremonial Laws given to Israel, as well as circumcision which was a seal of the covenant with Abraham.

Now the apostle establishes exactly what Christ's sacrifice accomplished with respect to the New Covenant:
Ephesians 2:14:
14For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall,

There is nothing to separate Jews and Gentiles in the cross...yet many futurist positions deny this and hold that there are two peoples of God (Jews and Christians). Their view is that God will save all of Israel at in the future. This is foreign to the scriptures though.

Ephesians 2:15, 16:
15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace,
16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity.

This is what Christ accomplished at the cross! He fulfilled the Law for all who come to Him in faith and made Jews and Gentiles one in Him!

Ephesians 2:17, 18:
17 And He came and preached peace to you who were far away, and peace to those who were near;
18 for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.

The preaching of Christ brings both groups together and we both have equal access to God through Christ

Ephesians 2:19:
19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household,

Gentiles and Jews are on the same footing with the same access to God.

Ephesians 2:20-23:
20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone,
21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord,
22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.

Jews and Gentiles that are saved are building a spiritual temple to God! We are ONE.

This is the issue. There are those who believe instead of one people of God, there are two. They believe God has a separate plan for the Jews. That is where the "line in the sand".

There are those who believe God has another plan for Jews in the end times and that all of Israel will be saved.

That where is stands.