Amillenial Baptists?

classicalhero

Junior Member
Jun 9, 2013
1,631
399
Perth,Western Australia
✟11,338.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Liberals
Hey Blue, theology isn't democratic, meaning just because a most Baptists are Dispey Premil doesn't mean they are correct. I know most North American Baptists reject Amil but that doesn't mean Amil is wrong, especially considering the history of the doctrine.

Blue, Particular Baptists are a raising minority among Baptists...we all know and recognize that.

Have a good weekend.
But that was one of your arguments, since you appealed to authority by naming those who believed in you point of view.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,496.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
But that was one of your arguments, since you appealed to authority by naming those who believed in you point of view.

Nope. That was just a fact, for historical purposes, I didn't claim we must believe Amil because most Baptists in history were either Post or Amil.
 
Upvote 0

Bluelion

Peace and Love
Oct 6, 2013
4,341
313
47
Pa
✟6,506.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Nope. That was just a fact, for historical purposes, I didn't claim we must believe Amil because most Baptists in history were either Post or Amil.
well if your going to make that argument the first doctrine of the early church was premillienism. 1-3rd century according to Elwell who backs it up with a number of books which have been found from around this time which highlights this as the belief of the church, thanks but I'll stick to God's word.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,496.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
well if your going to make that argument the first doctrine of the early church was premillienism. 1-3rd century according to Elwell who backs it up with a number of books which have been found from around this time which highlights this as the belief of the church, thanks but I'll stick to God's word.


I concur, stick with God’s word, as all Bible believing Christians claim to do. But please be aware that all of us are influenced by outside sources such as personal experiences, sins, secular and pastoral authors, teachers, etc. Not one of us, as thinking human beings, can claim to read the Bible without relying on past knowledge. This is why Paul tells in Romans to “renew your mind.” We are not tabula rasa or blank slates. When we read the Bible we interpret it according to our presuppositions.

As for what the early church believed…I’m pretty sure I’ve dealt with that several times on this forum. If you want I’ll hunt up the post for you but in essence, the early church in Asia Minor (that’s where the Premil writings came from) were Premil. Not Dispensational Premil, but Premil, it wasn’t the universal church but a small group of churches. That can be demonstrated. One father, Tertullian I believe, even mentions that “good” Christians disagree with his Premil view and it should be noted that Premil was rejected for 1500 years by the church. This doesn't mean we just accept what the church has done but it should cause you to pause and ask, "why did they reject the view?" Maybe even look at the debates... It is also important to note that Historic Premil is covenantal and not dispensational, which means, they did not break up the Bible into the “Jew and Gentile” like Dispey’s do today but viewed Bible prophecy covenantally.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0

Bluelion

Peace and Love
Oct 6, 2013
4,341
313
47
Pa
✟6,506.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I concur, stick with God’s word, as all Bible believing Christians claim to do. But please be aware that all of us are influenced by outside sources such as personal experiences, sins, secular and pastoral authors, teachers, etc. Not one of us, as thinking human beings, can claim to read the Bible without relying on past knowledge. This is why Paul tells in Romans to “renew your mind.” We are not tabula rasa or blank slates. When we read the Bible we interpret it according to our presuppositions.

As for what the early church believed…I’m pretty sure I’ve dealt with that several times on this forum. If you want I’ll hunt up the post for you but in essence, the early church in Asia Minor (that’s where the Premil writings came from) were Premil. Not Dispensational Premil, but Premil, it wasn’t the universal church but a small group of churches. That can be demonstrated. One father, Tertullian I believe, even mentions that “good” Christians disagree with his Premil view and it should be noted that Premil was rejected for 1500 years by the church. This doesn't mean we just accept what the church has done but it should cause you to pause and ask, "why did they reject the view?" Maybe even look at the debates... It is also important to note that Historic Premil is covenantal and not dispensational, which means, they did not break up the Bible into the “Jew and Gentile” like Dispey’s do today but viewed Bible prophecy covenantally.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
don't bother I hate theology, I do Love discussing God's Word though. A person interpreters God's word by the Holy SPirit its when we draw from ourselves we get into trouble reading the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,496.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
But that verse is referring to the fact that time is irrelevant to God, so can't be used to Amillenialism. The only way it can work is to ignore what the Scriptures say.

Plenty has been posted to support Amil in this thread. A quick read through will help.

Just a note; Amil views the 1,000 years to be a literal amount of time, but that time is not limited to 1,000 literal years only.

jm
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,106
New Zealand
Visit site
✟78,865.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Not sure..I think the thousand years can be the 'day' of the Lord. Its a chunk of time anyway, that is going by His timetable, not ours. Revelation shows things happening in the spiritual and ALSO it was written to believers in the first century, so have to take that into account.
Many people seem to think Jesus just said things for our benefit in the 21st century as if all the saints of old just didn't matter to Him.
 
Upvote 0

FaithfulPilgrim

Eternally Seeking
Feb 8, 2015
455
120
South Carolina
✟39,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
There are, but amill Baptists are a minority.

I am undecided on what I believe about eschatology. It is one of those doctrines that is non-essential to a person's faith and salvation. The only views Christians should reject is Full Preterism and extreme Dispensationalism.

I believe that the establishment of the State of Israel as a fulfillment of biblical prophecy and that it will one day be saved (the majority of the population becoming Christian.) Of course, there is some overlap between Israel and the Church. God is not yet finished with Israel.

As long as I can adhere to the above view, I have no issue with becoming amillennial.

I find myself agreeing on aspects with both premill and amill views. They same with Covenantalism and Dispensationalism.

This is why I never fully embraced Reformed Theology since it seems dogmatically opposed to dispensationalism when it should really be a minor issue.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Coram Deo.
Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,337
3,604
Canada
✟738,496.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
(Amil Baptists only please.)

Ever notice how the new birth, being "born again" and "resurrection" are often linked?

"To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,"

"And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence."

"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hammster
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bluelion

Peace and Love
Oct 6, 2013
4,341
313
47
Pa
✟6,506.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I concur, stick with God’s word, as all Bible believing Christians claim to do. But please be aware that all of us are influenced by outside sources such as personal experiences, sins, secular and pastoral authors, teachers, etc. Not one of us, as thinking human beings, can claim to read the Bible without relying on past knowledge. This is why Paul tells in Romans to “renew your mind.” We are not tabula rasa or blank slates. When we read the Bible we interpret it according to our presuppositions.

As for what the early church believed…I’m pretty sure I’ve dealt with that several times on this forum. If you want I’ll hunt up the post for you but in essence, the early church in Asia Minor (that’s where the Premil writings came from) were Premil. Not Dispensational Premil, but Premil, it wasn’t the universal church but a small group of churches. That can be demonstrated. One father, Tertullian I believe, even mentions that “good” Christians disagree with his Premil view and it should be noted that Premil was rejected for 1500 years by the church. This doesn't mean we just accept what the church has done but it should cause you to pause and ask, "why did they reject the view?" Maybe even look at the debates... It is also important to note that Historic Premil is covenantal and not dispensational, which means, they did not break up the Bible into the “Jew and Gentile” like Dispey’s do today but viewed Bible prophecy covenantally.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Funny I had a class on interpreting the Bible and if you are doing it by your own subjective point of view you are doing it wrong. This is why we have Schools, because the average person reading their Bible does not know how to properly interpret the Bible. The very first step in interpreting is view the context and what it meant to the original audience. You need to keep in mind the Bible was written to people before you and you need to know what it meant to those people. In other words leave your theology out of it. You need many tools to studying the Bible different books some, are a Bible dictionary, a commentary, as well as an Illustrated Bible, as well as a strongs to list some. Not only do you need your Bible but for real study you need to know the People. Take the Good Samaritan for one case, you need to know that the town was a fort and had seen its fair share of war, you need to know they worshiped many Gods as well as God, You need to know that the Jews hated them and viewed them as wicked people because a Samaritan desecrate the temple of Solomon, and ever sense the Jews hated the people. The Jews had stereotyped one group of people as bad based on one mans actions. It also helps if you know locations on the map. That is just the first step. The second is called the river, you see the differences between them and you, then the bridge you find the theological principle which fits with the rest of the Bible and is universal, Next is the map, which is making sure the theology fits with the rest of the Bible,Then grasp the text in your town, how it relates to modern day.

There is a whole book written on these five steps called Grasping God's word By Duvall and Hays, which is also my reference.

So a big part of what is wrong with the church today is people think the Bible is so easy they can pick up and read it like any other book, and that there understanding is as good as or better than those who have been called to teach and gotten the education there in. It translate to arrogant's in the church and pride. No one goes to a class room and tells the teacher who is teaching them that they know better than them because they read the book, yet this is what people do in church all day long. Until people learn to humble their self and like God said take correction, Proverbs 15: 32 If you reject discipline, you only harm yourself;
but if you listen to correction, you grow in understanding. and also Proverbs 12:1 To learn, you must love discipline;
it is stupid to hate correction.

So until people stop claiming to have the knowledge and understanding of God while they sin by not taking correction the church will go down hill.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bluelion

Peace and Love
Oct 6, 2013
4,341
313
47
Pa
✟6,506.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Yet still there are people with this view. Let's make this clear people who hold this view believe Jesus will not reign for a thousand years as clearly laid out in Rev and also in the Old Testament which was promised to the Jews. SO It makes Jesus out to be a lair. Also they believe this is the thousand year period and the way into it is by getting saved Hearing the world and then bam you are in the thousand year reign of Jesus. The fact that people die still and peace does not reign and Jesus is not ruling with a rod of iron all of which God said would happen and people would not die during the thousand years. They Ignore God and His words and make up there own theology with no Biblical bases what so ever.

Of course JM would say we should not follow the early church, you know the same church which Paul started and wrote letters to, no they were wrong, the amillennialism know better. They follow there own doctrine which is not Biblical as I point out a few cases above.
 
Upvote 0