amillennialism

[mannysee]

I have recently finished reading a book in support of amillennialism called, The Lion & The Lamb on Planet Earth, by Rodney Miller. 1976.

This is my first exposure to the subject, and indeed, the word.

It seems to me that the writer may be coming from a covenant theology or reformed? background.

Central to Miller's position is his idea of, "First; the natural, and second; the spiritual or unseen/heavenly etc."
Miller directs the reader to this theme running through the bible.

I find myself somewhat interested in his arguments and will be reading a couple of other books (Hoekema and Riddlebarger) on the subject soon.

Can someone please inform me, if amillennialism has any background -and present day support- within presbyterian/reformed churches?
(For a few months I attended a Westminster Presbyterian Church, a couple of years ago).

thankyou.

 

[xapis]

Certainly! It's background? It was the dominant view from Augustine to the Reformers. Chiliasm (premillenialism) did not come to be an acceptable or even respectable position in Reformed circles until the 20th century and then, only in the form of historic premillennialism (as espoused by scholars like G.E. Ladd). By my estimation, amillennialism is the predominant view in conservative Presbyterian, Reformed, and Lutheran churches today. Also, postmillennialism still finds some support in the Reformed world but today is usually a package deal with theonomic, reconstructionist views. I would encourage you to go ahead and read those other authors and report back to us.

You might also be interested in listening to this audio: http://www.reformedforum.org/ctc31/

 

[heymikey80]

I'm amillenial, though with premil leanings. You'll find you can be amil on similar grounds of Scriptural interpretation as with any other view of eschatology.

millenial views revolve around an arcane subject, the time of an event stated only a couple of times explicitly in Scripture. As a result eschatology is often ... weird. I read a number of different people, across the whole range of eschatology, but Gerhard Vos convinced me the view could be held with strong dedication to a credible, plain interpretation of Scripture.

My collapse into amillenialism came from answering a simple question: what'd a First Century believer understand to be the First Resurrection?

 

[ReformedChapin]

This is something I have to dig deeper in. I took Riddlebergers class on Amill101 in his Anaheim Church Class "The Academy" he had some interesting points. If you want to find the MP3s of his lectures let me know I can post the website.

 

[mannysee]

Amillennialism update . . .

Well, I have finished reading A Case For Amillennialism.

While halfway through, I came across a web-blog of Riddlebarger's, and found an audio series of his called Amillennialism 101. I have listen to the first seven classes.

Mind-blowing stuff.
I am becoming convinced of this view of the scriptures.
In my mind, this view of Christ is very exciting, encouraging, and lifts up Jesus.

One additional thought came to mind just now after finishing audio file #7:-
The OT types and shadows (of Jesus Christ) were embedded in actual history. Now if they -in part- were meant to point to Christ's historical birth/life/death/resurrection/ascension/rule etc. then one is suddenly humbled to see the power of God at shaping history in the OT, to shadow what would come in the NT and beyond.

Makes you feel very small.

Hoekema is next.

P.S. I have just logged onto the forum, and noticed ReformedChapin's post from the 20th. Maybe you were heard on the Q.&A. at the end of each audio file?
Good timing

 

[edie19]

an oldie but a goodie

More Than Conquerors by William Hendriksen

 

[DeaconDean]

deleted

 

[heymikey80]

What does the author say about the first resurrection that has already happened? (cf. Mt. 27:52)

Just to be sure, I'm not averse to people being premil.

The passage we're discussing in comparison with the short sentences in Mt 27 would be in Revelation -- keeping in mind that apocalyptic descriptions are notoriously hard to work with:

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years. Rev 20:4-6
​

In a premillenial view this occurs in the future, and so wouldn't have occurred yet.

In an amillenial view this has already occurred, and the First Resurrection was the Resurrection of Christ.

And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. When the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, "Truly this was the Son of God!" Mt 27:50-54
​

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed.
Jesus is presently enthroned, essentially taking on this authority to judge by His Crucifixion and Resurrection.

Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
The resurrection of souls began with the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ, and some others at that time.

The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.
There's a delay in the resurrection of others.

This is the first resurrection.
This would be the Resurrection of Christ.

Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.
Those who share in the first resurrected are essentially believers and priests of God and Christ.

 

[ReformedChapin]

As for me, I'm still a "hard-core" Pre-Mill. (But not a Dispensationalist)

What does the author say about the first resurrection that has already happened? (cf. Mt. 27:52)

God Bless

Till all are one.

historic premill?

 

[DeaconDean]

deleted

 

[edie19]

Dean - you're reformed, you may post here (not everyone here is Presby - like Bill, you and me)

 

[heymikey80]

Yes, don't worry and I'm not bothered.

The main point here in "Ask A Calvinist" is not to debate it, but to present the positives of your point of view.

And if we have a moderator here, we can probably be civil enough with one another so that people will realize -- the essentials aren't "premil" or "amil". The essentials are simpler, "Last Judgment" and "Eternal Life" through "justification by faith".

Calvinists differ on eschatology.

 

[Anoetos]

I'm assuming that the book by Hoekema is The Bible and the Future.

This book is really excellent, better than the one by Riddlebarger IMO, which seems to have been written more as an answer to Dispensationalism than as a complete exposition of the Amil view.

Anyhow, the Hoekema book is the one that, as I read it, Bible open alongside, convinced me that this is the view which most faithfully represents the full panorama of biblical eschatology.