LCMS and eschatology

[pamaris]

Hi!

I am fairly new to LCMS. I have been researching LCMS eschatology and I think I have figured out that the view is something like this: We are amillennial. Jesus will come- maybe sooner, maybe later. We hope sooner than later. This is the extent of how concerned we are with eschatology.

Is that about right? Having formerly been a dispensational rapturist, ... I have embraced amillennialism... However, I still have the typical dispie nature to wonder about the details. For example, do LCMS Lutherans expect "the antichrist"? The "mark of the Beast"? Is the "tribulation" 7 years, or is it seen throughout history? I have come to my own conclusions but am wondering what you guys think of these things.

I have picked up bits and pieces from this article: http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/mosynod/web/endtme-1.html#contents
but I am wondering about not only "official" positions of the church, but also what people generally think.


Thank you!


Penny

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Hi!

I am fairly new to LCMS. I have been researching LCMS eschatology and I think I have figured out that the view is something like this: We are amillennial. Jesus will come- maybe sooner, maybe later. We hope sooner than later. This is the extent of how concerned we are with eschatology.

Is that about right? Having formerly been a dispensational rapturist, ... I have embraced amillennialism... However, I still have the typical dispie nature to wonder about the details. For example, do LCMS Lutherans expect "the antichrist"? The "mark of the Beast"? Is the "tribulation" 7 years, or is it seen throughout history? I have come to my own conclusions but am wondering what you guys think of these things.

I have picked up bits and pieces from this article: http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/mosynod/web/endtme-1.html#contents
but I am wondering about not only "official" positions of the church, but also what people generally think.


Thank you!


Penny

Hi Penny
I don't know about other Lutherans but as long as Christ has died for me and I know I'm going to heaven some day it doesn't make any differance when he comes.........I'll be ready no matter what. All this is just interesting hyperbole.

just my 2 cents worth.

 

[Jim47]

Filosofer who is a Lutheran Pastor posted the following on this forum a long time ago. I think it will help you to understand. Remember its not my writting but Filo's. I wised he would come back more often as I miss him.

"From Filo"

CPH published Things to Come for Planet Earth by Aaron Luther Plueger. May not find it on the CPH web site, but it was still listed on Amazon.com. It is the best overview from a Lutheran perspective that is understandable at the lay level. I had the privilege to talking to him about 12-13 years ago, right after he had released the 2nd edition. If you can find a copy, by all means, buy it.

Others that are helpful are:

Amillennialism by William Cox (Presb & Reformed Publishing)

Biblical Studies in Final Things William Cox

Prophecy and the Church by O. Allis

--------------
a few thoughts of my own:

The main categories end times discussion are:

1. pre-millennialism (Jesus returns secretly for the Church prior to the tribulation/earthly, physical millennium)

2. pre-millennial dispensationalism (extreme form of pre-millennialism, claiming that we are now in the dispensation of the Church/grace, which will give way when Christ comes secretly before the tribulation and next dispensation)

3. post-millennialism (Christians "improve" society so much that Christ comes to lead them phsycially in the millennium)

4. amillennialism (literally "no millennium" but in actuality no acceptance of a physical 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth.)

Pre-millennialism was one of two views (along with amillennialism) that has existed since the second century. Pre-millennial dispensationalism, on the other hand, is the view that developed in the 1800’s and now has caught the Christian community by storm (sorry for the pun). The most important influences have been the Scofield Bible and the Ryrie Study Bible. Both of these are dispensational in outlook.

The view that was popular 100 years ago among the mainline churches was called post-millennialism. This view stated that the Christian influence would gradually become so overwhelming that this would lead into the millennium. Post-millennialism was consistent with the political, spiritual, economic times of 100 years ago - solgans such as: the unshinkable ship, control and eliminate all diseases in our life time, the war to end all wars, etc. BTW, the war to end all wars (WWI) brought reality to post-millennialism - the world will keep getting worse, not better.

Contrary to popular discussion, amillennialists do believe in the millennium and the rapture. The questions are: what do they mean? and when do they take place?

Some claim: "They are named 'millennial' in their outlook because they expect a literal fulfillment of the 'Messiah's thousand year reign on earth' as described in Revelation chapter 20." Not quite. What they expect is a "selective, literalistic fulfillment" of the reign. Do amillennialists believe in the millennium in Rev. 20? Yep. The question is what kind of millennial reign is it? 1 Cor. 15:26 helps greatly. It shows that Christ’s reign began when He ascended into heaven. Now what about Rev. 20? So, for the dispensationalists, we have to ask: Is it literally a thousand years? They would answer "yes." What about the chain that holds Satan? Most scholars who hold this position would say, "no," the chain is figurative. Thus, they are selective in their literalism, which can, and does, lead to all kinds of problems.

Others claim: "We lutherans tend to 'spiritualize' both the judgments and the promises, saying they are only references to historical happenings..."

Lutherans have held to the fulfillment of the Scriptures as Scripture intends. To say that we "spiritualize" is to accept the argument of the dispensationalists in their assessment of the Lutheran position. That is one of the problems that this entire issue faces. Terms that have good, solid, historical foundation have been changed to support a false teaching such as dispensationalism.

I had developed the curriculum and taught at two year Bible College at an independent "Charismatic" church. The first course the students are exposed to is one called the "New Testament Church." It traces the Biblical approach to such issues as kingdom, reign, Israel, Church, God’s purpose, and God's will. It’s amazing what a little solid Biblical teaching will do to point out the errors of dispensationalism. But we cannot fall into the trap of letting them determine the language and the meaning of terms in these discussions. If we do surrender these terms then we move away from solid Biblical scholarship (I don’t mean intellectualism) that can help us avoid the errors.


I have more thoughts if you are interested. But I don't want to divert the thread.

When we interpret a passage of the Bible we take it as literal, unless the context forces us to take it as figurative, and in that case the literal interpretation is the figurative one. Most people get confused by trying to make Revelation say something it does not. Thus, those who most loudly proclaim that they believe in a "literal" millennium, do not believe that the chain that holds Satan is literal - even though it is in the same context. This "hyper-literalism" (but selective literalism) leads to many of the false teachings regarding the end times.

Really the foundation for understanding the framework of the end times comes from the following passages: Matthew 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21; Acts 2 (especially v. 17-21); Acts 15:13-21; Romans 9-11; 2 Corinthians 10-12; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 5:1-11; 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10; 2:1-12; 1 Peter 4:7-19; 2 Peter 2-3; and Jude. With that framework then we discover the "color" of the end times in Revelation. Isn’t it interesting that when John wrote Revelation he intended it as a book to reveal, encourage, and support Christians as they faced the trials and tribulations of first century faith. And yet so many today want to claim that Revelation meant nothing to the first readers, because it is all yet to come. Even more, as you read the passages above, you notice three themes: suffering, faithfulness, comfort/hope. Yet, the "Left Behind" series provides little of that. I’ve talked to many people who have read some or all of the books, and their common experience was that it induced fear - and these are Christians!

Thus, Revelation is a message of hope, comfort, encouragement, and worship even in the midst of suffering and despite that suffering and what our physical eyes tell us. As you read through Revelation notice how much of it has been incorporated into the worship life of the church. (Might also fit with Paul and Silas and their reactions to being beaten and imprisoned in Philippi, Acts 16:25 ff.)

Aside from the false teachings about the end times in the "Left Behind" series, the authors also present two other major errors. One is that every child under the age of twelve is "raptured" out in the so-called secret coming of Christ for the Church. Where in the Bible is the age limit placed on either condemnation or salvation? There isn’t any passage to support this view. Likewise, where does the New Testament teach two future comings of Jesus? It doesn’t. Read through the Gospels - not once is there a reference to two comings. Likewise in the letters. The authors refer to the "appearing" (singular).

Now does that mean Lutherans don’t believe in the rapture? Of course not! It is based on Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians 4:13–18. But Biblically the rapture occurs at the end when Christ comes in victory. Note how the author of Hebrews puts this:

Hebrews 9:26-28​

"Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him." ​

Jesus came once (v. 26) and he appears a second time (v. 28). This Hebrews text is also significant because it mentions no possibility of a "second chance" (v. 27) - waiting for Christ’s secret coming then believing. In actuality, the end time comes for an individual either at the person’s death or at Christ’s appearing, neither of which we know or expect. Thus, the encouragement to "prepare, be ready, wait..." in the Gospels as well as the letters.

The second doctrinal problem relates to the re-institution of the sacrifices - that doesn’t quite square with what the New Testament tells us about the sufficiency and finality of Christ’s substitutionary death. Read the Hebrews passage again to note that point (v. 27).

 

[pamaris]

Thanks! That was an excellent post, whoever wrote it.

The second doctrinal problem relates to the re-institution of the sacrifices - that doesn’t quite square with what the New Testament tells us about the sufficiency and finality of Christ’s substitutionary death. Read the Hebrews passage again to note that point (v. 27).

That is the exact issue that caused me to abandon dispensationalism. There was no getting around it.

Hebrews 9:25-28 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 9:11-12 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for us].

There is absolutely no point to a 1000 year long millennium on earth in which a temple is resurrected and "memorial" sacrifices are offered to God! What a spit in the face!

Anyway, thanks for the post. I can get that first book listed from Amazon for $2.78. Sounds good.

 

[SPALATIN]

Filosofer who is a Lutheran Pastor posted the following on this forum a long time ago. I think it will help you to understand. Remember its not my writting but Filo's. I wised he would come back more often as I miss him.

I believe that Filo is getting ready or is attending the AALC Convention. I think they are considering a pulpit and altar fellowship with the LCMS and many of their Seminarians will be coming to Fort Wayne for their education. Perhaps we can lure him back to find out the results of the convention.

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

Hi Penny
I don't know about other Lutherans but as long as Christ has died for me and I know I'm going to heaven some day it doesn't make any differance when he comes.........I'll be ready no matter what. All this is just interesting hyperbole.

just my 2 cents worth.

 

[filosofer]

I believe that Filo is getting ready or is attending the AALC Convention. I think they are considering a pulpit and altar fellowship with the LCMS and many of their Seminarians will be coming to Fort Wayne for their education. Perhaps we can lure him back to find out the results of the convention.

Howdy, Scott. Yes, the convention took place June 21-24 in Minneapolis. We had extended discussion on the topic, but the consensus was that we should continue to explore fellowship talks with LCMS; next meeting will be in two weeks.

I had the privilege of leading two General Bible Studies (opening: Law and Gospel; closing: Justification by Grace through Faith - Our Heritage and Our Future), as well as two workshops on teaching the Bible in the Parish. Very well received. I was appointed/called to be National Mission Developer...

BTW, our seminary has been on the Ft. Wayne campus for a year. It has worked very well with us, and the LCMS reception has been very positive.

In Christ's love,
filo

 

[Jim47]

Howdy, Scott. Yes, the convention took place June 21-24 in Minneapolis. We had extended discussion on the topic, but the consensus was that we should continue to explore fellowship talks with LCMS; next meeting will be in two weeks.

I had the privilege of leading two General Bible Studies (opening: Law and Gospel; closing: Justification by Grace through Faith - Our Heritage and Our Future), as well as two workshops on teaching the Bible in the Parish. Very well received. I was appointed/called to be National Mission Developer...

BTW, our seminary has been on the Ft. Wayne campus for a year. It has worked very well with us, and the LCMS reception has been very positive.

In Christ's love,
filo

Tis certainly great to hear from you again. I am hoping that this trend may continue.

 

[filosofer]

Tis certainly great to hear from you again. I am hoping that this trend may continue.

Howdy, Jim. The last few months have been unbelievably busy. I finally published my mother's book 4 weeks ago (it was a five year project), and I was preparing for the Convention, and teaching and examining the role of National Mission Developer, and ...and

Anyway, not sure how much I'll be around. But appreciate your "re-welcome".

Blessings

In Christ's love,
filo

 

[GlennH]

I recently pulled down a 65 page document from the LCMS website (search for eschatology on the lcms website) and am slowly working through it.

In the end, (pun intended) , I have to agree with Radidio--I know I'll be in heaven due to God's grace and the sacrafice that Christ made on the cross for my sins, so my exact grasp on the end times stuff and concurrence with a specific view is probably not on my top 10 list of things I need to have figured out. (I'm reading it primarily to be able to have some knowledge about it and be able to have some intelligent conversation on the topic if I happen to run into it.)

 

[Anoetos]

Pamaris,

God bless and keep you on your acceptance of biblical truth!

 

[Simon_Templar]

As a pre-millenialist who is not "pre-tribulation" I would like to point out that the two are not synonymous. Not all pre-mil people believe in the "secret" coming to rapture the church before the tribulation.

There are a growing number of us around who believe there is no secret coming and that Jesus will simply return at the end and the rapture of the church is a real event in which all beleivers are gathered to Christ, to welcome him in a procession (as was the ancient practice to welcome dignitaries into a city).

also, this is the view that was held by the early church, not the pre-trib version. I have been told by some that there were one or two refrences to 'pre-tribulation' rapture in the early church, but I have never seen them, and the supposed examples I have been shown, don't actually say that.

Just a note to clarify something about "pre-mil"

 

[Jim47]

As a pre-millenialist who is not "pre-tribulation" I would like to point out that the two are not synonymous. Not all pre-mil people believe in the "secret" coming to rapture the church before the tribulation.

There are a growing number of us around who believe there is no secret coming and that Jesus will simply return at the end and the rapture of the church is a real event in which all beleivers are gathered to Christ, to welcome him in a procession (as was the ancient practice to welcome dignitaries into a city).

also, this is the view that was held by the early church, not the pre-trib version. I have been told by some that there were one or two refrences to 'pre-tribulation' rapture in the early church, but I have never seen them, and the supposed examples I have been shown, don't actually say that.

Just a note to clarify something about "pre-mil"

I didn't think Anglicians believed in any part of the millenum or tribulation, but I'm even more confused by your statement. If you are pre-mil who doesn't believe in the pre-rapture, and that doesn't buy into pre-trib then how are you a milleniumist at all. (we just happen to be studing these false doctrines at bible class right now )

 

[Simon_Templar]

I didn't think Anglicians believed in any part of the millenum or tribulation, but I'm even more confused by your statement. If you are pre-mil who doesn't believe in the pre-rapture, and that doesn't buy into pre-trib then how are you a milleniumist at all. (we just happen to be studing these false doctrines at bible class right now )

most anglicans a-millenial. I happen to have joined the Anglican tradition late in life, relatively speaking. I was raised non-denominational.

The term "pre-millienial" or "post-millenial" or "a-millenial" deals strictly with the issue of the millenial reign, and the relative placing of Jesus' return.

Post-millenials believe that the millenial reign is figurative for something we create. The Church becomes the millenial reign through impacting society etc, and thus Jesus returns after the millenial reign, or "post millenial"

A-millenial as I'm sure you are aware don't believe in a literal 1000 year messianic kingdom. Most that I'm aware of, hold that after Jesus returns we simply go immediately to eternal paradise with Christ.

Pre-millenialism refers to those who believe that Jesus Christ will return before the millenial reign, and following his return there will be a millenial kingdom of Christ on earth.

Thus how a person percieves the rapture does not necessarily figure into their position on the millenial reign.

The most common variety of "pre-millenial" view point is that of the dispensationalist, and its related "pre-tribulation" view point. Unlike the "millenial" views which are placing the return of Christ relative to the millenial reign. The "tribulation" views are placing the rapture of the church relative to the tribulation.

So for example I would describe myself as post-tribulation pre-millenial. Because I believe the rapture happens after the tribulation, and JEsus returns before the millenial kingdom.

The rapture can be a very confusing topic because of the different ways in which it is percieved. Pre-tribulation view points describe the rapture as a shocking, sudden event in which all the christians in the world just suddenly disappear because Jesus has come and snatched them out from under the noses of the world and taken them back to heaven.

In the post-tribulation view, the rapture doesn't look anything like that. In the post tribulation view, we recognize that when Jesus returns to earth, all of the believers in the world will be gathered together to welcome him into Jerusalem. What is described in the bible was very common in the ancient world. Whenever a ruler or important person would visit a town or a city, the leaders and peolpe of the town would line the streets leading in to the city to welcome the important visitor.
That is how the rapture is described in scripture.

So chronologically, I believe that there will be an antichrist who inaugurates the greatest persecution of christians and jews in history.. or at least something on the scale of the great persecutions of history. This is known as the great tribulation.
This tribulation will end when Jesus Christ returns to destroy the antichrist and rescue the church. At that time the church will be gathered together to welcome Jesus Christ back to earth. This is the rapture.
Then, once Jesus has completed the initial judgement of the wicked, he will establish the millenial reign from Jerusalem.

Thats my view point in chronological sequence.
Hope that makes things more clear

 

[Anoetos]

Good, complete answer but it boils down to the fact that what is called "Historic Premillennialism" doesn't have a "Pre-Trib Rapture" or any of the other Dispensational nonsense.

This view is a minority view but seems to be gaining ground among some Reformed Christians.

James Montgomery Boice and Eldon Ladd were Historic Pre-Mil.

 

[LutherNut]

What the Scriptures teach us is what Lutherans call "realized millenium" in that the figurative "1000 year reign of Christ on earth" is currently being realized. His Kingdom is here and now. Jesus said to Pilate "My Kingdom is not of this world" which dispels any earthly millenial kingdom after the rapture.

The rapture occurs on the Last Day. What Paul is clarifying in 1 Thessalonians 4 is the teaching of Jesus where He compares His return to the wise and foolish virgins and the coming of the bridegroom to the wedding feast in Matthew 25. Paul is assuring the Thessalonians that those who have passed away will not miss the return of Jesus. In fact, they are going to meet Him first. Those who are "raptured" will accompany Him to the "White Throne Judgement" as Jesus describes in Matthew 25:31-46.

We are now in "the Millenium" awaiting the "rapture."

 

[Edial]

I didn't think Anglicians believed in any part of the millenum or tribulation, but I'm even more confused by your statement. If you are pre-mil who doesn't believe in the pre-rapture, and that doesn't buy into pre-trib then how are you a milleniumist at all. (we just happen to be studing these false doctrines at bible class right now )

Pre-mill does not necessarily mean that rapture would take place prior to the tribulation.

All it means is that there will be a millenium (1000 years) in the future.

The rapture has 3 views (pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib).

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Edial]

Some comments concerning filo's post as posted by Jim ...

...

Some claim: "They are named 'millennial' in their outlook because they expect a literal fulfillment of the 'Messiah's thousand year reign on earth' as described in Revelation chapter 20." Not quite. What they expect is a "selective, literalistic fulfillment" of the reign. Do amillennialists believe in the millennium in Rev. 20? Yep. The question is what kind of millennial reign is it? 1 Cor. 15:26 helps greatly. It shows that Christ’s reign began when He ascended into heaven. Now what about Rev. 20? So, for the dispensationalists, we have to ask: Is it literally a thousand years? They would answer "yes." What about the chain that holds Satan? Most scholars who hold this position would say, "no," the chain is figurative. Thus, they are selective in their literalism, which can, and does, lead to all kinds of problems.

... When we interpret a passage of the Bible we take it as literal, unless the context forces us to take it as figurative, and in that case the literal interpretation is the figurative one. Most people get confused by trying to make Revelation say something it does not. Thus, those who most loudly proclaim that they believe in a "literal" millennium, do not believe that the chain that holds Satan is literal - even though it is in the same context. This "hyper-literalism" (but selective literalism) leads to many of the false teachings regarding the end times.

I find this a very unusual generalization concerning "selective" reasoning of the pre-millenialists.

The chains are real that God made in the Supernatural world in order to keep the Supernatural Satan bound in the Supernatural place of confinement.

That same type of a Supernatural chain (yes, it probably has links) is also mentioned in Jude ...

JUDE 1:6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home--these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.

Others claim: "We lutherans tend to 'spiritualize' both the judgments and the promises, saying they are only references to historical happenings..."

Lutherans have held to the fulfillment of the Scriptures as Scripture intends. To say that we "spiritualize" is to accept the argument of the dispensationalists in their assessment of the Lutheran position. That is one of the problems that this entire issue faces. Terms that have good, solid, historical foundation have been changed to support a false teaching such as dispensationalism.

Some do not spiritualize it, but symbolize it "away".

For some reason some do not seem to accept that such things are indeed happening in the Supernatural world, just as John has seen it and carefully recorded.

Really the foundation for understanding the framework of the end times comes from the following passages: Matthew 24–25; Mark 13; Luke 21; Acts 2 (especially v. 17-21); Acts 15:13-21; Romans 9-11; 2 Corinthians 10-12; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 5:1-11; 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10; 2:1-12; 1 Peter 4:7-19; 2 Peter 2-3; and Jude. With that framework then we discover the "color" of the end times in Revelation. Isn’t it interesting that when John wrote Revelation he intended it as a book to reveal, encourage, and support Christians as they faced the trials and tribulations of first century faith. And yet so many today want to claim that Revelation meant nothing to the first readers, because it is all yet to come. Even more, as you read the passages above, you notice three themes: suffering, faithfulness, comfort/hope. Yet, the "Left Behind" series provides little of that. I’ve talked to many people who have read some or all of the books, and their common experience was that it induced fear - and these are Christians!

But let's not bunch the pre-millenialists with the pre-tribbers.
Pre-tribulational rapture has no verses to support itself.

Pre-millenialists have pre-, post- and mid-tribbers.

I found that many Lutherans are "scoring" points by bunching all pre-mills into pre-tribs.

Pre-trib "Left Behind" is a new theology that twists verses to support itself.

...
And pre-millenial advocates do see a relevance of the Revelation for the 1st century believers.
I do not understand the statement that they do not.

Thus, Revelation is a message of hope, comfort, encouragement, and worship even in the midst of suffering and despite that suffering and what our physical eyes tell us. As you read through Revelation notice how much of it has been incorporated into the worship life of the church. (Might also fit with Paul and Silas and their reactions to being beaten and imprisoned in Philippi, Acts 16:25 ff.)

It is a message of hope, but it also is a revelation for the futuristic events.

Likewise, where does the New Testament teach two future comings of Jesus? It doesn

’t. Read through the Gospels - not once is there a reference to two comings. Likewise in the letters. The authors refer to the "appearing"

(singular).

Post-trib Pre-Millenialists do not believe in two 2nd comings, but one.

Now does that mean Lutherans don

’t believe in the rapture? Of course not! It is based on Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians 4:13–

18. But Biblically the rapture occurs at the end when Christ comes in victory. Note how the author of Hebrews puts this:

Hebrews 9:26-28​

"Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him." ​

Jesus came once (v. 26) and he appears a second time (v. 28). This Hebrews text is also significant because it mentions no possibility of a "second chance" (v. 27) - waiting for Christ’s secret coming then believing. In actuality, the end time comes for an individual either at the person’s death or at Christ’s appearing, neither of which we know or expect. Thus, the encouragement to "prepare, be ready, wait..." in the Gospels as well as the letters.

Pre-Mills also believe that.​

The second doctrinal problem relates to the re-institution of the sacrifices - that doesn

’t quite square with what the New Testament tells us about the sufficiency and finality of Christ’

s substitutionary death. Read the Hebrews passage again to note that point (v. 27).

Now this is interesting.​

How is it re-instituted among the believers?

Thanks,
Ed




​

 

[Edial]

MODS, I just saw the rules and the church I go to is ELCA (although conservative).
They also are amillenialists.

Can I post here addressing pre-millenialism?

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Jim47]

MODS, I just saw the rules and the church I go to is ELCA (although conservative).
They also are amillenialists.

Can I post here addressing pre-millenialism?

Thanks,
Ed

Hi Ed

Yes, you can post here, but please be careful as to not argue or debate, as that would be against forum rules.