Pre-Mil Only Types of Premillennialism

[9Rock9]

Premillennialism is divided into two main camps: historic premillennialism (a.k.a chiliasm) and dispensationalism.

I lean in a premillennial direction myself, but on the fence between historic premill and dispy.

I have heard that historic premillennialism (hereon, HP) can be further divided into two types: New Covenant and Old Covenant. The former was the view of some of the earliest church fathers like Irenaeus. They see no future for national Israel.

The latter type was held by the likes of Charles of Spurgeon, who despite not being a dispensationalist, seemed to believe in a restoration of Israel as a geo-political entity. This is also what I am leaning towards.

On one hand, I do believe that the ethnic Jews will be (or rather, already have been) returned to the promise land and restored as a political state. On the other hand, I still believe that ethnic Jews can only be saved the same way as everyone else: by hearing accepting the Gospel that Jesus is Lord. Also, I agree that the Jews being returned to their land fulfills biblical prophecy.

My issue with dispensationalism is that it seems to separate Jews from Gentiles, when there are no Jews nor Greeks in Christ. There are accusations lobbed against dispensationalism that it believes there are two ways to salvation: one for the Gentiles, and another for Jews.

Also, dispensationalism relies on a literalistic interpretation of prophecy, while other hermeneutical methods combine literalism with symbolism and antitypes.

I also think the NT is explicit that those who are in faith are part of the true Israel.

As for the rapture, idk if I believe in pre-trib or post-trib view. It'll happen when it happens, as far as I'm concerned.


What are your thoughts? Am I way off about anything in this post?

 

[DavidPT]

Premillennialism is divided into two main camps: historic premillennialism (a.k.a chiliasm) and dispensationalism.

I lean in a premillennial direction myself, but on the fence between historic premill and dispy.

I have heard that historic premillennialism (hereon, HP) can be further divided into two types: New Covenant and Old Covenant. The former was the view of some of the earliest church fathers like Irenaeus. They see no future for national Israel.

The latter type was held by the likes of Charles of Spurgeon, who despite not being a dispensationalist, seemed to believe in a restoration of Israel as a geo-political entity. This is also what I am leaning towards.

On one hand, I do believe that the ethnic Jews will be (or rather, already have been) returned to the promise land and restored as a political state. On the other hand, I still believe that ethnic Jews can only be saved the same way as everyone else: by hearing accepting the Gospel that Jesus is Lord. Also, I agree that the Jews being returned to their land fulfills biblical prophecy.

My issue with dispensationalism is that it seems to separate Jews from Gentiles, when there are no Jews nor Greeks in Christ. There are accusations lobbed against dispensationalism that it believes there are two ways to salvation: one for the Gentiles, and another for Jews.

Also, dispensationalism relies on a literalistic interpretation of prophecy, while other hermeneutical methods combine literalism with symbolism and antitypes.

I also think the NT is explicit that those who are in faith are part of the true Israel.

As for the rapture, idk if I believe in pre-trib or post-trib view. It'll happen when it happens, as far as I'm concerned.


What are your thoughts? Am I way off about anything in this post?

I'm basically in the same boat as you. I wish I had some answers for some of that. Unlike some others, I view the Jews return to their land last century to be setting up what Ezekiel 38-39 is involving. Yet, I'm not a Dispy. Or if I am one, but just don't realize it, I'm not a Dispy to the same degree typical Dispys are.

 

[RandyPNW]

Premillennialism is divided into two main camps: historic premillennialism (a.k.a chiliasm) and dispensationalism.

I lean in a premillennial direction myself, but on the fence between historic premill and dispy.

I have heard that historic premillennialism (hereon, HP) can be further divided into two types: New Covenant and Old Covenant. The former was the view of some of the earliest church fathers like Irenaeus. They see no future for national Israel.

The latter type was held by the likes of Charles of Spurgeon, who despite not being a dispensationalist, seemed to believe in a restoration of Israel as a geo-political entity. This is also what I am leaning towards.

On one hand, I do believe that the ethnic Jews will be (or rather, already have been) returned to the promise land and restored as a political state. On the other hand, I still believe that ethnic Jews can only be saved the same way as everyone else: by hearing accepting the Gospel that Jesus is Lord. Also, I agree that the Jews being returned to their land fulfills biblical prophecy.

My issue with dispensationalism is that it seems to separate Jews from Gentiles, when there are no Jews nor Greeks in Christ. There are accusations lobbed against dispensationalism that it believes there are two ways to salvation: one for the Gentiles, and another for Jews.

Also, dispensationalism relies on a literalistic interpretation of prophecy, while other hermeneutical methods combine literalism with symbolism and antitypes.

I also think the NT is explicit that those who are in faith are part of the true Israel.

As for the rapture, idk if I believe in pre-trib or post-trib view. It'll happen when it happens, as far as I'm concerned.


What are your thoughts? Am I way off about anything in this post?

Lots of points to address here. Good subject!

I'll just share my own beliefs. I basically agree with how you categorize Premill movements. However, I believe Early Christianity did believe in the restoration of Israel--it just began to lose faith in Israel's restoration after a few centuries of failure. And then "Israel" began to be interpreted symbolically to represent the international Church, and faith in Israel's literal restoration was lost.

Dispensationalism helped to restore faith in Israel's restoration, though I can't say I agree with Pretrib teaching. And I would agree with you that Dispensationalism tends to separate Israel and Christian nations into separate categories and sometimes even into different covenants, as if Israel will return to the Law of Moses. I certainly don't believe that.

When OT prophecy speaks of the "temple," as it applies to a NT fulfillment, we can easily reconfigure in our minds the real heavenly Temple for which the OT temple was strictly a type. References to OT infrastructure and practice serve only to show the importance of holiness as Christ has come to fulfill it--not just for the Gentile nations, but also for Israel.

As for Israel's restoration itself, we were told that this national restoration will be preceded and previewed by the sustenance of a believing remnant throughout the NT age. Jews will always convert to Christianity, though the nation will as a whole remain hardened until judgment falls and Christ comes back. Dispensationalism is wrong to think this is merely an endtime strategy of God, a "Tribulation" to bring Israel back to God. (I am Postrib, BTW, and I do think the value of this biblical teaching can be overlooked.)

In reality, world judgment is designed to bring all nations, called of God, back to Him, both Israel and the nations. Judgment is going to be inflicted upon all nations. And some in all nations will represent the people God is seeking to have, prior to restoring entire nations.

The biggest problem, as I see it, is that Christians tend to look only at these remnants, and not at entire nations, as God sees them. Nations are reduced to small remnants of believers over time, because sin infects the majority over time, and "leaven leavens the whole lump."

But in reality, from the beginning God has reached out to whole nations, and has, at least for a time, been able to work with nations to operate in faith through them. He did so with Israel in OT times, and in NT times He has been able to do this with Christian nations.

And so, with an emphasis on mere remnants there is less faith that God can restore a whole nation like Israel. But I believe it's coming. And we do see in the modern world that God has restored the entire nation of Israel. Makes you believe in God's promises! Thanks for a good question.