Are all Calvinists amillenial?

[Tallen]

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

No problem, thank you for the edit.

I would like to point out though, that you are probably right about RCC's apologist (modern) wouldn't support Preterism. But the Preterist view was intorduced by the RCC in an effort to refute the Amillennialism of the Reformers. It was re-introduced by Luis de Alcazar (1554-1630) of Seville, Spain. This is an easy Google to find several articles about this. The Futurist view that was introduced by RCC apologists was far more successful, and adopted by many Evangelicals. Unfortunately in America it has become the predominate view.

Here is one LINK.

 

[kenrapoza]

deleted post - i made it before i read all of the thread...

 

[awakened777]

Post Trib-Pre Mill.

 

[Kennesaw42]

I had a friend who went to Dallas Seminary (the citadel of dispensational teaching, if you don't know) a few decades back, and he said the school was basically Calvinistic as to soteriology (doctrine of salvation).
I know of Calvinists today who espouse a-, post-, and even pre-mil positions.
Sorry if this is just a rehash of previous posts.

 

[kenrapoza]

Many of the folks at Dallas are Amyrauldians - not fully Calvinist. From what I understand Dallas has been moving towards Progressive Dispensationalism for quite a while...

 

[Anoetos]

I heard Dr. Riddlebarger point out on Reformed Forum recently that until a hundred and fifty years ago or so there was no such category as "amillennialism".

There were just postmillennialists and premillennialists but that within the postmillennial camp there were two groups, one which was more catastrophic in it's view of the end times and one which expected the continued growth of the church up to and including the complete conversion of the nations prior to Christ's return.

The former, which was the majority, came to be known as amillennialism. He told a story about Geerardus Vos and Benjamin Warfield, both of whom at the time would have called themselves postmillennial, arguing eschatology as they walked together at Princeton.

Anyhow the trend of an amilllennial majority has continued at least among paedobaptist Calvinists.

 

[heymikey80]

A citation of Riddlebarger would be useful here -- because: "They condemn also others who are now spreading certain Jewish opinions, that before the resurrection of the dead the godly shall take possession of the kingdom of the world, the ungodly being everywhere suppressed." Augsburg Confession, 17

That's explicit denial of postmillenialism, is it not? In point of fact I'm unsure if it's even really problematic for premillenialism, assuming some kind of resurrection is at least expected before the Millenial Kingdom in premillenialism.

 

[Anoetos]

I am pretty sure that the passage you quoted from the Augustana was written to condemn the many Anabaptist sects that were popping up all over the countryside, many of which maintained belief that they were charged with taking over the secular state. The idea was that they, like the zelotes of the first century, could prompt the return of Christ and usher in His Kingdom by revolution.

This idea certiainly has some currency With postmillennialism though most of them aren't arguing for armed revolution. But I think it's probable that they saw it as an abberation or a perversion of good eschatology rather than as a distinct category. It remains though that the Lutherans have enshrined amillennialism as the sine qua non of eschatological perspectives.

At any rate, the interview was from Jan 5th and is still up over at ReformedForum.org.

 

[kenrapoza]

Which interview are you referring to on Reformed Forum? It is the best books of 2010? That's the only one I saw from Jan 5th. It doesn't look like it was on Christ the Center. I know that Kim Riddlebarger was on Christ the Center in November.

 

[JM]

Riddlebarger's lectures have been very useful for my own understanding of eschatology.

 

[heymikey80]

I am pretty sure that the passage you quoted from the Augustana was written to condemn the many Anabaptist sects that were popping up all over the countryside, many of which maintained belief that they were charged with taking over the secular state. The idea was that they, like the zelotes of the first century, could prompt the return of Christ and usher in His Kingdom by revolution.

Yes. But the confession closes a theological door, and it's not a door closed against revolution, but a door that the godly would take possession of all the worldly kingdoms before Christ's arrival.

In a word: postmillenialism.

Now granted, conditions could've been such that the combined Protestant confession is in error.

 

[Marc15]

I'm Calvinist, and I'm a Premillennialist.

 

[BrotherBob]

So am I

 

[JM]

I know MacArthur said every Calvinist should be PreMil but I honestly believe different. Every Calvinist should be Reformed Amil.

 

[Anoetos]

Well, if we're showing our cards, I am a Hoekema-Vos type Amil.

 

[Anoetos]

Yes. But the confession closes a theological door, and it's not a door closed against revolution, but a door that the godly would take possession of all the worldly kingdoms before Christ's arrival.

In a word: postmillenialism.

Now granted, conditions could've been such that the combined Protestant confession is in error.

That certainly does appear to be the case; i.e. I agree that it seems to be referring to what we would call Postmillennialism. Ironically enough, when Luther et al referred to these folks in parlance, they called them "chiliasts" a word that has usually been reserved for premillennialists.

 

[JM]

Well, if we're showing our cards, I am a Hoekema-Vos type Amil.

Haven't read Hoekema yet but what I've read of Vos I agree with.

 

[Anoetos]

Yes, Vos was a treasure for the church, a friend of Warfield and had he been born here might possibly have been just as famous.

 

[heymikey80]

Well, if we're showing our cards, I am a Hoekema-Vos type Amil.

I'm something of a "concrete" type amillenial. I'm not inclined to use abstract interpretation until it's clear from contextual reasons. Some of Vos' arguments are completely convincing to me.

 

[kenrapoza]

I'm something of a "concrete" type amillenial. I'm not inclined to use abstract interpretation until it's clear from contextual reasons. Some of Vos' arguments are completely convincing to me.

Do you find Vos to be more concrete than Hoekema?