Amillenial Baptists?

[Pete_Martinez]

Ah, thank you for the chart, I don't necessarily agree with all the points but I would fall more in line with Dispensational Premillenialism.

 

[DD2008]

Ah, thank you for the chart, I don't necessarily agree with all the points but I would fall more in line with Dispensational Premillenialism.

According to that chart I would too.

 

[Pete_Martinez]

I also checked out THE 70 WEEK PROPHECY OF DANIEL. One of the links from the Francisco Ribera site. I cannot agree with the author's conclusions, and the following is why.

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

According to this Christ is the one who destroys Jerusalem. Even if it is Titus the Roman General who destroys it...

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

He never makes a historical covenant with the Jews and breaks it halfway.

Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

If it is true though that it was Titus, or Christ, then it must be one of the two who stands in the holy place and defiles the temple.

I understand at the end when he says...
"As you can see from the above quote, Matthew Henry, a Protestant writing in the early 18th century, knew nothing of a gap between the 69th and 70th week, and he knew nothing of a 7 year peace treaty with the antichrist in verse 27."

It is certainly possible for time to freeze as far as prophecy goes.
Isa 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
Isa 61:2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God

Luk 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Luk 4:19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
Luk 4:20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
Luk 4:21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Mat 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
Mat 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.

While part of those prophecies have been fulfilled, they are still waiting their full and complete fulfillment. Otherwise we would have also seen the day of vengeance, the day of the LORD. Many times the prophets saw prophecy as one set event, which is why they lumped everything together. It was only as time passed that we saw that they were progressive and sometimes separated by a long wait.

 

[Pete_Martinez]

One last thing though, if the only leaders of pre-millenialism were led by Dallas Theological Seminary or the other people on the list I would be amillenial too.

 

[JM]

Shoehorn?

 

[Pete_Martinez]

Oh, nopers, what I express is the reason why I have difficulties accepting amillenialism. I'm willing to see what you have to offer as a counter argument. I just feel that scripture is specific on things and in order for scripture to be fulfilled it does it in an obvious way that you can clearly see, where you say oh that makes sense. If you have to dig hard into a meaning to get it to say something I would be very hard pressed to see that as a fulfillment or an interpretation of the text. Similar to how modern day televangelists dig into a text and torture the meaning to get it to what they want it to say.

Isa 35:3 Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm the feeble knees.
Isa 35:4 Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you.
Isa 35:5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.
Isa 35:6 Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.

If Christ had just given everyone understanding when he was here on Earth I would have accepted the prophecies concerning him in a spiritual sense. I would have said, oh I see he came to open their spiritual eyes and open their deaf spiritual ears. But the fact that when he showed up he not only did that but also opened their literal eyes and literal ears makes me feel that most if not all prophecy will not only have a spiritual but literal fulfillment.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with amillenialism that the spiritual kingdom is here now. Christ told his disciples...
Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

But I also have an expectation, reading the Old and New Testaments, that the kingdom will be here in literal form on Earth as well.

 

[JM]

[FONT=&quot]I will offer no apologia for Amillennialism, not in this forum and not at this time. [/FONT]

 

[DD2008]

[FONT=&quot]I will offer no apologia for Amillennialism, not in this forum and not at this time. [/FONT]

That's probably a good idea.

 

[Anoetos]

It's a general term for any system that espouses the view that the Church has replaced Israel, instead of espousing the biblical view that there is a difference between Israel and the Church.

It's a straw man.

Neither amillennialism nor covenant theology claim that the church replaces Israel.

In fact, no one teaches it and this has been explained to you before.

I am an amillennial Baptist just like the vast majority of Baptists throughout history. It has nothing to do with Romanism and everything to do with understanding Scripture on its own terms in the proper context. It has to do with understanding the Word of God according to genre and as the Whole Counsel of God; the plainer parts explaining the more obscure rather than the opposite which is what you have with classic dispensationalism.

It has to do with understanding the Bible to be not a book of mysteries requiring the special gnosis of a "prophecy matrix" through which to press it, but as the very Word of God, obscure or clear as the Spirit witnessing within us desires.

 

[DD2008]

It's a straw man.

Neither amillennialism nor covenant theology claim that the church replaces Israel.

Nope. They teach that the church IS Israel. That is replacement.

 

[JM]

It's a straw man.

Neither amillennialism nor covenant theology claim that the church replaces Israel.

In fact, no one teaches it and this has been explained to you before.

I am an amillennial Baptist just like the vast majority of Baptists throughout history. It has nothing to do with Romanism and everything to do with understanding Scripture on its own terms in the proper context. It has to do with understanding the Word of God according to genre and as the Whole Counsel of God; the plainer parts explaining the more obscure rather than the opposite which is what you have with classic dispensationalism.

It has to do with understanding the Bible to be not a book of mysteries requiring the special gnosis of a "prophecy matrix" through which to press it, but as the very Word of God, obscure or clear as the Spirit witnessing within us desires.

That is why I will not engage on the subject.

 

[Hentenza]

It's a straw man.

Neither amillennialism nor covenant theology claim that the church replaces Israel.

In fact, no one teaches it and this has been explained to you before.

I am an amillennial Baptist just like the vast majority of Baptists throughout history. It has nothing to do with Romanism and everything to do with understanding Scripture on its own terms in the proper context. It has to do with understanding the Word of God according to genre and as the Whole Counsel of God; the plainer parts explaining the more obscure rather than the opposite which is what you have with classic dispensationalism.

It has to do with understanding the Bible to be not a book of mysteries requiring the special gnosis of a "prophecy matrix" through which to press it, but as the very Word of God, obscure or clear as the Spirit witnessing within us desires.

I disagree with you. Amil uses a highly spiritual and allegorical hermeunetics. The plain reading of scripture teaches not just pre mil but also a literal, earthly kingdom yet to come. This was the teaching and understanding of the early church for the first couple of centuries.

 

[DD2008]

That is why I will not engage on the subject.

Yeah right...

I think you won't engage because you suspect you might be wrong and know there are people on here that can easily prove you are wrong if you are and you are enjoying your trek into amillenialism too much to stop now.

 

[Communion]

I disagree with you. Amil uses a highly spiritual and allegorical hermeunetics. The plain reading of scripture teaches not just pre mil but also a literal, earthly kingdom yet to come. This was the teaching and understanding of the early church for the first couple of centuries.

what is it they say..."proof or it didn't happen"

 

[Anoetos]

Nope. They teach that the church IS Israel. That is replacement.

If I am father to my children as well as their progenitor does one title "replace" the other?

Israel and the church are the same thing, which is why the London Baptist confession calls Israel "the Church under-age".

 

[DD2008]

If I am father to my children as well as their progenitor does one title "replace" the other?

Israel and the church are the same thing, which is why the London Baptist confession calls Israel "the Church under-age".

I don't hold to the London Baptist Confession.

There is a distinct difference between Jews and gentiles in the history if salvaiton. Replacement theology denies this by saying basically that national Israel means nothing and that the Church is God's only people and that all of the covenant promises made to national Israel are the Church's.

The bible shows that there is a distinct difference between national Israel and the Church and all of the prophecies concerning both will be fullfilled. Take the temple prophecies in Eziekiel for example. It is obvious they are not fullfilled. They will be fullfilled in the Millenial kingdom.

 

[JM]

Nothing, just forget it.

 

[Hentenza]

what is it they say..."proof or it didn't happen"

LOL!! But it did. What early (first 2 centuries) apostle or ECF taught amil?

 

[Hentenza]

DD,

I know you were chastised on the Puritan Board for breaking their rules and I believe you told me they eventually banned you from posting there. I know it hurt you pretty badly, you were wounded by their quick reprimand, but you did break their rules. Since that time you have done a complete turn around and have been antagonistic toward any idea upheld by Reformed Christians.

You were very proud of your grandfather who held to Amillennialism and now you seem to believe it is a vile, insidious doctrine held by heretics. You and Hentenza cannot even spell Amillennialism correctly! and you keep saying you were once Amil but have no idea what Amil is about...

A mi lle nnia lism. There.

 

[DD2008]

DD,

I know you were chastised on the Puritan Board for breaking their rules and I believe you told me they eventually banned you from posting there. I know it hurt you pretty badly, you were wounded by their quick reprimand, but you did break their rules. Since that time you have done a complete turn around and have been antagonistic toward any idea upheld by Reformed Christians.

Untrue. I have only changed my eschatology. The Puritan Board is a legalistic mess. I am ashamed to have supported it.

You were very proud of your grandfather who held to Amillennialism and now you seem to believe it is a vile, insidious doctrine held by heretics. You and Hentenza cannot even spell Amillennialism correctly! and you keep saying you were once Amil but have no idea what Amil is about...

I am still proud of him, and you for that matter. I do not see the view as vile. However, I am pleased to have my hermeneutics cured by Hentenza because that clears up a lot of problems for me and makes many parts of the bible (the ones Matthew Henry couldn't explain) come alive.