Amillennialism & Preterism - Are these Biblical, or not?

[AlexB23]

Hello folks. How many of you guys think that Amil and Preterism are anti-Christian? Many Christians believe that Amillennialism and Preterism are false teachings due to their disagreement with a literal interpretation of certain end-time events described in the Bible. Here's why:

1. Amillennialism: This view denies the future millennium as a period of earthly bliss, which is often considered anti-Christian because it goes against several passages that describe this time explicitly (Revelation 20:1-7). For instance, verse 6 (NIV) says, "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." This suggests a literal millennium where believers will reign with Christ on earth.
2. Preterism: Preterists believe that most or all of the prophecies about the end times were fulfilled by events prior to A.D. 70, which is problematic because many passages in Revelation (such as chapters 6-19) clearly depict future events yet to come. For example, Revelation 20:4 (NIV) says, "I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God." This verse suggests a future event where believers will be martyred for their faith.

These interpretations can lead people away from a literal understanding of biblical prophecy and potentially undermine the hope that Christians have in Christ's return and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, which is central to Christian belief. For more detailed information about these views, you may want to refer to works such as "2000 Years of Christ’s Power" by Nick R. Needham (specifically chapters discussing millennialism).

 

[RandyPNW]

Hello folks. How many of you guys think that Amil and Preterism are anti-Christian? Many Christians believe that Amillennialism and Preterism are false teachings due to their disagreement with a literal interpretation of certain end-time events described in the Bible. Here's why:

1. Amillennialism: This view denies the future millennium as a period of earthly bliss, which is often considered anti-Christian because it goes against several passages that describe this time explicitly (Revelation 20:1-7). For instance, verse 6 (NIV) says, "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." This suggests a literal millennium where believers will reign with Christ on earth.
2. Preterism: Preterists believe that most or all of the prophecies about the end times were fulfilled by events prior to A.D. 70, which is problematic because many passages in Revelation (such as chapters 6-19) clearly depict future events yet to come. For example, Revelation 20:4 (NIV) says, "I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God." This verse suggests a future event where believers will be martyred for their faith.

These interpretations can lead people away from a literal understanding of biblical prophecy and potentially undermine the hope that Christians have in Christ's return and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, which is central to Christian belief.

This is way too harsh for me to stomach. These beliefs have been held by many, many good Christians for a very long time. To say they are "antiChristian" in nature is beyond the pale for me, since they are the product of good Christians working out to the best of their ability certain matters. If they are wrong, it may be due to their environment, their influences, their upbringing, their education, etc. But we should let God convict them if they are wrong, since we are not in God's place to judge hearts.

I agree that if some doctrines in eschatology are wrong, they will obviously have a negative effect. But that doesn't mean they will damage the matter of Salvation, or do enormous damage. Some things are more critical to get right than other things. So we need to keep things in perspective, and let them play out. Our role is to be as honest as we can when dealing with these matters ourselves, without judging the motives of others with evil eyes.

 

[HTacianas]

Hello folks. How many of you guys think that Amil and Preterism are anti-Christian? Many Christians believe that Amillennialism and Preterism are false teachings due to their disagreement with a literal interpretation of certain end-time events described in the Bible. Here's why:

1. Amillennialism: This view denies the future millennium as a period of earthly bliss, which is often considered anti-Christian because it goes against several passages that describe this time explicitly (Revelation 20:1-7). For instance, verse 6 (NIV) says, "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." This suggests a literal millennium where believers will reign with Christ on earth.
2. Preterism: Preterists believe that most or all of the prophecies about the end times were fulfilled by events prior to A.D. 70, which is problematic because many passages in Revelation (such as chapters 6-19) clearly depict future events yet to come. For example, Revelation 20:4 (NIV) says, "I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God." This verse suggests a future event where believers will be martyred for their faith.

These interpretations can lead people away from a literal understanding of biblical prophecy and potentially undermine the hope that Christians have in Christ's return and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, which is central to Christian belief. For more detailed information about these views, you may want to refer to works such as "2000 Years of Christ’s Power" by Nick R. Needham (specifically chapters discussing millennialism).

Christianity is amillennialist. Google "condemnation of chiliasm". See also the Nicene Creed, "Whose kingdom shall have no end".

I myself am a preterist. For example, people were "beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God" beginning in the first century.

 

[Richard T]

You question is a good one but I do not think these doctrines make one anti-Christian. There should not be any effects on one's salvation. However, the preterist view (or in most cases the partial preterist view) has what I would call blind spots that can provide some negative consequences. These consequences include but are not limited to:

1. A critical view of rapture believers where some preterists are on record as saying rapture believers are not pulling their weight. Here is a sample of this. https://medium.com/@BrazenChurch/tw...-the-rapture-must-be-left-behind-f115cd751104

"This desire to escape the world — this contempt for the good world that God has made — is a SERIOUS problem. In my mind, it’s more serious an issue than the rapture itself. The mindset of escapism, and the “to-hell-with-the-world” thinking is the disease behind our failing influence in the world today. We have little influence and our gospel is becoming more and more irrelevant, because we have become so focused on the next world we forgot about this one."

2. Many Partial Preterists seem to align themselves with dominionist, Latter rain, New Apostolic Reformation (Just some of the labels used throughout the most recent recent decades) types of beliefs that suggest Christians will overcome the world.
"They think many Christians’ beliefs in a future Antichrist, great tribulation, and rapture are too negative and are distractions. They frequently ridicule those beliefs. And they’re calling for a major paradigm shift, where the church adopts a new NAR understanding of the end time: one that doesn’t include an Antichrist or tribulation—or, if it does include them, it minimizes the magnitude of those threats to the church. Some NAR prophets even claim that God has spoken to them directly about this new, more optimistic NAR doctrine." New Apostolic Reformation and the End Time: What Is NAR’s 'Victorious Eschatology'?

3. The "minimization" of the threats to the contemporary church are scary to me. How can these Christians know the next Jesus is real or an anti-Christ? I know it sounds ridiculous, but is it? I am not sure how long the message for a remake of society aligned with Christian goals can last? Christians are going to hit far harder times, will they give up the message? double down, or embrace a compromised "New World Order?" What if their leaders (including politicians) embrace many of their positions, but are not genuine? Impossible?
Matt 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."

4. A inflexible or incorrect view of the end times can hurt the true prophetic voice of God. In general prophets may filter their vision of the end times to match their respective beliefs. This is scary too.

I will end by saying that our focus has to be Jesus, love and the power of the Holy Spirit. What happens is up to God, just keep doing your best and be a little flexible with your end-time beliefs. All of us need more discernment and none of us need to put too much stock in any one specific individual.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

I myself am a preterist. For example, people were "beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God" beginning in the first century.

Problem with preterism and postmillnialism view is that the book of revelation was written in year 95, at the end of Emperor Domitian'a reign. Early churchfathers affirm this date.

Just reading chapter 11 we know it possible couldn't gave yet happened. The two witnesses were not in Jerusalem yet, doing all the things that are described in the book.

According to Amilleniallism, if I understand correctly, is that God's Kingdom is already here. Then why do Christians pray in Lord's prayer for God's kingdom to come. So which is it?

And satan is not bound yet, no way.

 

[AFrazier]

Unless one can definitively elaborate on each and every prophecy in the book and demonstrate its actual meaning and interpretation beyond any shadow of a doubt, I think it's presumptuous in the extreme to declare anyone's understanding of the book "anti-Christian."

I also think that speaking of what could, or could not, have already happened with such a pretentious air of authority is hypocritical, given that there are as many passages that clearly have happened, and are ignored or talked around by those of a millennialist point of view.

I personally view the debate between the two primary views as one of obstinacy. Coming up in the church, I was always taught the futuristic version, up to and including the rapture. When a friend of mine first came to Christ, he did what few ever do, particularly amongst those who are brand new. He actually read the Bible. And in the process, he did what most of us do. He flipped to the end, because the allure of what happens next is too much for most to resist.

But what was different with him was that he hadn't spent years being indoctrinated by dogmatic church teachings. When he read the Bible (and the Revelation), he did so uncorrupted. And he came to me asking about futuristic Revelation stuff. But he didn't ask about what was coming. He pointed out that several of the things had clearly happened already.

As a good little sheep, I towed the line. I argued with him. No matter what he said, I argued. Because the Revelation is all future. I argued 'til I was blue in the face. We darn near stopped being friends that day because of the severity of the argument.

But after he left, after I had calmed down, I started to dwell on some of the facts he had pointed out. And in my time of reflection, I realized that he was right. There were statements in the New Testament that, viewed objectively, couldn't be ignored.

My journey into preterism started that day. And it didn't start through any anti-Christian stance. It started through an acceptance of blatant scripture.

Jesus explicitly said that he would return before their generation was gone. Any interpretation of any cryptic prophecy must be evaluated in that light.

Now, if anyone wants to argue interpretations, that's fine. If someone wants to argue that Jesus didn't mean their generation, that's their prerogative. But don't make blanket judgements about people because they understand something differently. Preterists believe as they do for a good reason, and we really don't need your approval.

 

[d taylor]

-
​

Good thing about Biblical disagreements, the truth is coming and we will get to see who had it right.

The one area that there can be no getting it wrong though, is how to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life salvation. By belief in Jesus, people better get that one right, no second chances at that.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Hello folks. How many of you guys think that Amil and Preterism are anti-Christian?

This is just unbelievable that you would even ask this question. Amillennialists emphasize the majesty and authority of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. We point out how scripture explicitly teaches that He reigns now. How can that be anti-Christian?

Are these passages anti-Christian?

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Colossians 1:12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Many Christians believe that Amillennialism and Preterism are false teachings due to their disagreement with a literal interpretation of certain end-time events described in the Bible. Here's why:

1. Amillennialism: This view denies the future millennium as a period of earthly bliss, which is often considered anti-Christian because it goes against several passages that describe this time explicitly (Revelation 20:1-7).

One passage equals "several passages"? Also, you are assuming that a passage contained in the most highly symbolic book in the Bible is supposed to be interpreted literally. Is that a wise approach? I don't think so.

What did Peter say we are looking forward to? An earthly millennial kingdom? No.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Peter said, in accordance with the promise of Christ's second coming, we are looking forward to "new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness". How do you reconcile your premillennial view with the above passage?

1. For instance, verse 6 (NIV) says, "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." This suggests a literal millennium where believers will reign with Christ on earth.

No, it does not suggest that. Scritpture teaches that Christ's resurrection was the first resurrection (Acts 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5) and that we spiritually have part in it (Romans 6:1-4, Eph 2:4-6, Col 2:12-13, etc.).

Do we need to be bodily resurrected in order for the second death to not have power over us? No. It doesn't have power over us now and it doesn't have power over the souls of the dead in Christ who reign with Christ in heaven now.

1. Preterism: Preterists believe that most or all of the prophecies about the end times were fulfilled by events prior to A.D. 70, which is problematic because many passages in Revelation (such as chapters 6-19) clearly depict future events yet to come. For example, Revelation 20:4 (NIV) says, "I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God." This verse suggests a future event where believers will be martyred for their faith.

These interpretations can lead people away from a literal understanding of biblical prophecy and potentially undermine the hope that Christians have in Christ's return and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, which is central to Christian belief.

I disagree with preterism, also. But, why have a literal understanding of symbolic text? That makes no sense. Amillennialists do not undermine the hope we Christians have in Christ's return at all. We believe He will rid the world of sin and death forever when He returns and that He will usher in the eternal new heavens and new earth. If that isn't hope, I don't know what is. To say that premillennialism is central to Christian belief is simply not true.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Hello folks. How many of you guys think that Amil and Preterism are anti-Christian? Many Christians believe that Amillennialism and Preterism are false teachings due to their disagreement with a literal interpretation of certain end-time events described in the Bible. Here's why:

1. Amillennialism: This view denies the future millennium as a period of earthly bliss, which is often considered anti-Christian because it goes against several passages that describe this time explicitly (Revelation 20:1-7). For instance, verse 6 (NIV) says, "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." This suggests a literal millennium where believers will reign with Christ on earth.
2. Preterism: Preterists believe that most or all of the prophecies about the end times were fulfilled by events prior to A.D. 70, which is problematic because many passages in Revelation (such as chapters 6-19) clearly depict future events yet to come. For example, Revelation 20:4 (NIV) says, "I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God." This verse suggests a future event where believers will be martyred for their faith.

These interpretations can lead people away from a literal understanding of biblical prophecy and potentially undermine the hope that Christians have in Christ's return and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, which is central to Christian belief. For more detailed information about these views, you may want to refer to works such as "2000 Years of Christ’s Power" by Nick R. Needham (specifically chapters discussing millennialism).

Yikes! I must be a heretic!
Blessings.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

According to Amilleniallism, if I understand correctly, is that God's Kingdom is already here. Then why do Christians pray in Lord's prayer for God's kingdom to come. So which is it?

It hasn't come in its fullness in terms of the new heavens and new earth with no more death, sorrow, crying or pain yet. But, it certainly has come spiritually already.

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Colossians 1:12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Romans 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

And satan is not bound yet, no way.

Not in the way you understand it, but it's not talking about him being incapacitated. It's talking about him being bound from keeping the world in spiritual darkness like he was able to do in OT times.

I believe Satan's binding relates to passages like these:

1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Matthew 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. 29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.

Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

Acts 26:16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

 

[AlexB23]

This is way too harsh for me to stomach. These beliefs have been held by many, many good Christians for a very long time. To say they are "antiChristian" in nature is beyond the pale for me, since they are the product of good Christians working out to the best of their ability certain matters. If they are wrong, it may be due to their environment, their influences, their upbringing, their education, etc. But we should let God convict them if they are wrong, since we are not in God's place to judge hearts.

I agree that if some doctrines in eschatology are wrong, they will obviously have a negative effect. But that doesn't mean they will damage the matter of Salvation, or do enormous damage. Some things are more critical to get right than other things. So we need to keep things in perspective, and let them play out. Our role is to be as honest as we can when dealing with these matters ourselves, without judging the motives of others with evil eyes.

Ooh, I am sorry. Some of my posts can come across as a little harsh (such as the one about the Olympics having a Demonic intro, or the one about the Sikh prayers at a rally being to a false god, or a future post that I will make in October about how Halloween has become demonic over the past few decades).

Hey, salvation comes through Christ, not from whether we believe in a certain doctrine. All we must believe in is the Gospel. So, I agree with you.

 

[AlexB23]

This is just unbelievable that you would even ask this question. Amillennialists emphasize the majesty and authority of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. We point out how scripture explicitly teaches that He reigns now. How can that be anti-Christian?

Are these passages anti-Christian?

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Colossians 1:12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.


One passage equals "several passages"? Also, you are assuming that a passage contained in the most highly symbolic book in the Bible is supposed to be interpreted literally. Is that a wise approach? I don't think so.

What did Peter say we are looking forward to? An earthly millennial kingdom? No.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Peter said, in accordance with the promise of Christ's second coming, we are looking forward to "new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness". How do you reconcile your premillennial view with the above passage?


No, it does not suggest that. Scritpture teaches that Christ's resurrection was the first resurrection (Acts 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5) and that we spiritually have part in it (Romans 6:1-4, Eph 2:4-6, Col 2:12-13, etc.).

Do we need to be bodily resurrected in order for the second death to not have power over us? No. It doesn't have power over us now and it doesn't have power over the souls of the dead in Christ who reign with Christ in heaven now.


I disagree with preterism, also. But, why have a literal understanding of symbolic text? That makes no sense. Amillennialists do not undermine the hope we Christians have in Christ's return at all. We believe He will rid the world of sin and death forever when He returns and that He will usher in the eternal new heavens and new earth. If that isn't hope, I don't know what is. To say that premillennialism is central to Christian belief is simply not true.

I am not sure. Why do we even have multiple doctrines on the End Times?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Ooh, I am sorry. Some of my posts can come across as a little harsh (such as the one about the Olympics having a Demonic intro, or the one about the Sikh prayers at a rally being to a false god, or a future post that I will make in October about how Halloween has become demonic over the past few decades).

Hey, salvation comes through Christ, not from whether we believe in a certain doctrine. All we must believe in is the Gospel. So, I agree with you.

What made you think that Amillennialism might be anti-Christian in the first place then? Nothing you said in disagreement with Amillennialism has anything to do with whether someone is a Christian or not.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I am not sure.

You are not sure about what exactly?

Why do we even have multiple doctrines on the End Times?

Because we don't all have the same level of spiritual discernment. Paul taught that the deeper things in scripture, such as end times doctrine, must be spiritually discerned by way of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:9-16). But, I see some people trying to interpret end times prophecies as if they are just reading a literal, straightforward news article where no spiritual discernment is required. That is not a good approach to interpreting end times scriptures.

 

[AlexB23]

You question is a good one but I do not think these doctrines make one anti-Christian. There should not be any effects on one's salvation. However, the preterist view (or in most cases the partial preterist view) has what I would call blind spots that can provide some negative consequences. These consequences include but are not limited to:

3. The "minimization" of the threats to the contemporary church are scary to me. How can these Christians know the next Jesus is real or an anti-Christ? I know it sounds ridiculous, but is it? I am not sure how long the message for a remake of society aligned with Christian goals can last? Christians are going to hit far harder times, will they give up the message? double down, or embrace a compromised "New World Order?" What if their leaders (including politicians) embrace many of their positions, but are not genuine? Impossible?
Matt 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."

4. A inflexible or incorrect view of the end times can hurt the true prophetic voice of God. In general prophets may filter their vision of the end times to match their respective beliefs. This is scary too.

I will end by saying that our focus has to be Jesus, love and the power of the Holy Spirit. What happens is up to God, just keep doing your best and be a little flexible with your end-time beliefs. All of us need more discernment and none of us need to put too much stock in any one specific individual.

I do agree with points 3 and 4. A lot of people are talking about the AC, and some are saying it might be Musk, others say certain politicians. For myself, I believe the AC has not revealed himself yet. Nero was the first version of the AC, Hitler might be another version, but we will get a true AC in the future, which we Christians will either be raptured before the Great Tribulation, or witness the 3.5 years of the Tribulation before the AC and then being raptured.

 

[AlexB23]

What made you think that Amillennialism might be anti-Christian in the first place then? Nothing you said in disagreement with Amillennialism has anything to do with whether someone is a Christian or not.

Look at what is going on with the Olympics, and the woke stuff spewing out from even some Christians. If this is not a sign that the Great Tribulation is in the future, I am not sure what is.

But yes, we all have different levels of discernment. I am gonna be honest with you, I only started getting into the Bible more over the past few months, so I am in no place to be criticizing other doctrines. So, I apologize for saying Amil or Preterism is anti-Christian. I do hope that Jesus returns again. But hey, when we pass away, we will be with Jesus and return to Him in Heaven above.

 

[RandyPNW]

Ooh, I am sorry. Some of my posts can come across as a little harsh (such as the one about the Olympics having a Demonic intro, or the one about the Sikh prayers at a rally being to a false god, or a future post that I will make in October about how Halloween has become demonic over the past few decades).

Hey, salvation comes through Christ, not from whether we believe in a certain doctrine. All we must believe in is the Gospel. So, I agree with you.

I haven't read all of your posts, brother, but I would agree with you that the Olympics Intro was demonic--that is not "harsh" at all, but rather, truthful and serious. Ever since Voltaire called Christianity a "cursed thing" worldly people have been competing with one another in who can be the most anti-Christian. Some call it the "Brave New World." Some simply call it "Institutional Christianity" or "State Christianity."

Any way you cut it, public and open condemnation of Christianity is inappropriate and demonic. I think that each situation calls for its own kind of response. I may agree 100% on your views with respect to Amill and Preterism. But these are generally accepted as Christian positions. Those who fight wars of these kinds of interpretations are not, in my opinion, fighting the spiritual war, but doing so inappropriately using "carnal weapons."

And quite frankly, I've found that in these Christian disagreements there are elements of truth in competing ideas so that each side can learn something from the other side. So we need to consider not just the over-arching theological position, but also individual points included in its position as well.

I appreciate your good spirit. I wouldn't condemn you stating your beliefs openly and boldly. That's the only way issues get resolved. Some will always be correctable. Some never will. We can't let the hard-hearted dictate to us the subjects of our discussion. Thanks for airing your views on anything and everything!

 

[BPPLEE]

Hello folks. How many of you guys think that Amil and Preterism are anti-Christian? Many Christians believe that Amillennialism and Preterism are false teachings due to their disagreement with a literal interpretation of certain end-time events described in the Bible. Here's why:

1. Amillennialism: This view denies the future millennium as a period of earthly bliss, which is often considered anti-Christian because it goes against several passages that describe this time explicitly (Revelation 20:1-7). For instance, verse 6 (NIV) says, "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." This suggests a literal millennium where believers will reign with Christ on earth.
2. Preterism: Preterists believe that most or all of the prophecies about the end times were fulfilled by events prior to A.D. 70, which is problematic because many passages in Revelation (such as chapters 6-19) clearly depict future events yet to come. For example, Revelation 20:4 (NIV) says, "I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God." This verse suggests a future event where believers will be martyred for their faith.

These interpretations can lead people away from a literal understanding of biblical prophecy and potentially undermine the hope that Christians have in Christ's return and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, which is central to Christian belief. For more detailed information about these views, you may want to refer to works such as "2000 Years of Christ’s Power" by Nick R. Needham (specifically chapters discussing millennialism).

Preterism is interesting and seems to fit and make a lot of sense until you get to the book of Revelation. Then it completely falls apart.

 

[AlexB23]

I haven't read all of your posts, brother, but I would agree with you that the Olympics Intro was demonic--that is not "harsh" at all, but rather, truthful and serious. Ever since Voltaire called Christianity a "cursed thing" worldly people have been competing with one another in who can be the most anti-Christian. Some call it the "Brave New World." Some simply call it "Institutional Christianity" or "State Christianity."

Any way you cut it, public and open condemnation of Christianity is inappropriate and demonic. I think that each situation calls for its own kind of response. I may agree 100% on your views with respect to Amill and Preterism. But these are generally accepted as Christian positions. Those who fight wars of these kinds of interpretations are not, in my opinion, fighting the spiritual war, but doing so inappropriately using "carnal weapons."

And quite frankly, I've found that in these Christian disagreements there are elements of truth in competing ideas so that each side can learn something from the other side. So we need to consider not just the over-arching theological position, but also individual points included in its position as well.

I appreciate your good spirit. I wouldn't condemn you stating your beliefs openly and boldly. That's the only way issues get resolved. Some will always be correctable. Some never will. We can't let the hard-hearted dictate to us the subjects of our discussion. Thanks for airing your views on anything an everything!

Hey, thank you for the kind words. Could it be possible that there could be a partial preterist/futurist movement, where Matthew 24-25 (Olivet Discourse) is a dual prophecy, both predicting Nero in 70 AD, but also predicting a far future tribulation that has yet to come to pass?

Dual prophecies could satisfy both preterists, and futurists, cos compromise is important for all of us, myself especially.

 

[AlexB23]

Preterism is interesting and seems to fit and make a lot of sense until you get to the book of Revelation. Then it completely falls apart.

True, unless Revelation both describes Nero and a future event. I believe Revelation covers both 70 AD and a future Great Tribulation event that has yet to come to pass.