Are all Calvinists amillenial?

GQ Chris said:

I don't like to "allegorize" the endtimes, until there's a good reason to do it, I'll keep NOT doing it.

Click to expand...

I still like to read my Bullinger Companion Bible's appendices at times, too. Call it a secret pleasure.

AMR

GQ Chris said:

I don't like to "allegorize" the endtimes, until there's a good reason to do it, I'll keep NOT doing it.

Click to expand...

Reformed amillennialism is not about allegorizing, it's about Christ-centered eschatology. If we believe that Christ and his gospel are central to Scripture, then they should also be central to our eschatology.

kenrapoza said:

Reformed amillennialism is not about allegorizing, it's about Christ-centered eschatology. If we believe that Christ and his gospel are central to Scripture, then they should also be central to our eschatology.

Click to expand...

Indeed. I don't think he got my tongue-in-cheek response.



AMR

AMR said:

I think you are speaking a wee bit hyperbolically here.

Click to expand...

Agreed! Pete failed to note that Calvin was amil because Augustine was amil.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Jon_ said:

Agreed! Pete failed to note that Calvin was amil because Augustine was amil.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Click to expand...

Of course, we all know that Augustine was amil because Paul was amil!!

Thanks guys, I definitely still need to study more to catch up with all you Reformed Theologians.

kenrapoza said:

Of course, we all know that Augustine was amil because Paul was amil!!

Click to expand...

Of course, we all know that Paul was amil because Jesus was amil.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

(We could do this all day, I suppose.)

mlqurgw said:

The original founders of the US were Calvinist Puritans for the most part and as such were postmil. That is why they came here, avoiding religious persecution notwithstanding. Their idea was to begin a society that was christian and eventually overcome the world by the Gospel. Now there has historicaly been premil Calvinists, John Gill, as well as amil Calvinists. Though the premil Calvinists don't hold to the Dispensational premil view.

Click to expand...

I know of one. Matt Slick, from CARM, is a Dispensationalist Calvinist.

For the most part, Calvinists have been Amil, but there have been. However, prominate ones like proto-Calvinist Saint Augustine have been (some say he even solidified the theology of amillenialism). I think it is fairly common in Neo-Calvinism.

As far as Neo-Calvinism goes, I tend to shy away from the term. I am a Calvinist only because I think TULIP is an accurate way to describe what the Bible says about Pre-Destination. Most Calvinists from the beginning haven't agreed with everything John Calvin said, but that doesn't make them Neo-Calvinists (baby sprinkling perhaps? Fundamentalistic views on culture, ect.)

Was Calvin Amil?

GQ Chris said:

Was Calvin Amil?

Click to expand...

Yep.

I'm a pre but I guess it all depends on your interpretation. The one
scripture that is heavily debated is Revelation 20:1-3. In reading some
of Calvin's work he was not to thrilled with allegorical interpretation.

itisdeliciouscake said:

I'm premil and a Calvinist.

I'm not sure why so many Calvinists tend to be amil tbh...

Click to expand...

Same..... me too.

A New Dawn said:

I am a premil rapture, postmil return Calvinist.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's how I feel led too.

Not all of them are amill....there is another camp called preterist but it has several different camp under preterist.

NJBeliever said:

Just curious. I seem to encounter that more and more and I'm just wondering if being Amil is part of the tenants of Neo Calvinism. God bless.

Click to expand...

No. John MacArthur, for instance is Premil. Reformed Confessions have rejected Preterism, but some in the Reformed camp call themselves Preterist and others have taken the Partial Preterist view. Most however fall either into an Amil or Postmil view.

The early Reformers would not even have considered any of those terms. In fact, the Preterist and Premillenial views were resurrected by Roman Catholic apologist to counter the Reformations eschatology. One should look at the terms that were used during this period of time to get the feel for Reformed eschatology. You can see this contrasted in the following, Historicism, Preterism and Futurism. Here is a brief explanation of each:

Historicism sees The Antichrist in the office of the Pope and over time.
Preterism sees The Antichrist as a past figure, there are several that various preterist argue fulfilled that role.
Futurism sees The Antichrist in a future, yet to be revealed, person.

The Calvinist of the Reformation were more concerned with refuting the Roman Catholic heresies and errors, therefore they developed and adopted the Historicist view of scripture. This was the result of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide and the desire to let scripture decide what are the matters of faith. This placed the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) on the defensive and they had to take the focus off from the historic evils of the Popes and their doctrines. Especially the teaching that the RCC was the infallible rule of the faith, something that the Reformers had refuted completely. So the RCC promoted two views, the Futurist view, which placed the Antichrist in the future and therefore could not be the Pope. This was the view promoted by Riberia and Bellermine, Jesuit apologist of the time. And the Preterist view which was promoted by Alcazar, another Jesuit apologist of the time. This view placed the Antichrist in the past, and so it couldn't be the Present Pope of that day.

Both of these views, the Preterist and the Futurist, were promoted by the RCC to be divisional and cause dissension in the Reformed camp. This has been, at least in part, successful as the Protestant/Reformed side of the Reformation has adopted these views and developed them into various eschatological schemes. Eschatology's that are often opposed to one another and divisionary in nature. We see this in the Premillenial/Preterist/Amillenial mess that now exists.

I hold a Futurist/Amillennial view, in case you wondered. I would be more than happy to answer any questions that I can about that view as time permits.

Blessings.

sorry, it is my misinformation....




By the way, I never hear anything that RCC would agree with preterist. I doubt it.

I strong believe at 70 ad events. I am not 100 percent preterist..just some of subjects in the perterism.


I personally like the authors: Gary Demar, Kenneth L Gentry, John Bray and some other ones.

student4YHWH said:

Premill/rapture/pretrib camps started at around 1900's

amill/postmill/futurist camps started at around 1400's, 1500's

full/partial/historical preterist camps started at around 70 ad to latest.

Click to expand...

I'll challenge you to show these three points from reputable sources, otherwise they are just revisionists techniques of propaganda. Perhaps you are buying into poor scholarship for the sake of your eschatology.

I will come back with correct info and summary about it.

I do know that the event of 70 AD is already fulfilled according to the Scripture.

Be right back later.

student4YHWH said:

I will come back with correct info and summary about it.

Click to expand...

I'll be quitely waiting.

Blessings.

hey, I edited above #36..sorry for my mistake info.

Tallen said:

I'll be quitely waiting.

Blessings.

Click to expand...