Orthodox preterism/amillenialism

[jduck1986]

Hi all. could anyone recommend any reading whether it be websites or books on amillenialism and orthodox preterism for someone very new to the subject. Thanks.

 

[Job8]

Hi all. could anyone recommend any reading whether it be websites or books on amillenialism and orthodox preterism for someone very new to the subject. Thanks.

You might be further ahead not wasting your time on this, since they are based on fantasy.

 

[Gideon]

Hi all. could anyone recommend any reading whether it be websites or books on amillenialism and orthodox preterism for someone very new to the subject. Thanks.

My recommendation would be, "A case for Amillenialism" by Kim Riddlebarger.

Bear in mind there are differences between Amill and Preterism.

All the best in your search.

 

[jduck1986]

You might be further ahead not wasting your time on this, since they are based on fantasy.

You say it's a fantasy which is certainly possible and I'm not going to argue with you.

One question that always pops into my mind about amillenialism and postmillenialism is that almost all of it's proponents are reformed in their theology. could anyone speak as to why this is the case?

 

[Biblewriter]

In considering the questions of Preterism vs. Futurism, and Amillenism vs. Premillennilism or Post-millennism, there is a basic question that you must resolve in your mind.

That question is, should the plainly stated prophecies in the Bible be taken as literal statements of future events, or should they be taken as symbolic representations of future events. I am not speaking of apocalyptic passages that have no obvious superficial meaning. I am speaking of plain statements that syuch-and-such is going to happen.

If you conclude that the prophecies should be taken at face value, that is, literally, futurism is obvious, and dispensationalism is an necessary result.

But if you conclude that they are only symbolic, then any conclusion is possible.

All the various schools of prophetic interpretation fall along the scale between these two extremes, and they all depend on this one basic and essential question.

 

[Gideon]

One question that always pops into my mind about amillenialism and postmillenialism is that almost all of it's proponents are reformed in their theology. could anyone speak as to why this is the case?

Just historical. The Catholic church was Amill, and the Protestant reformation saw no reason to change the eschatological doctrines of the church. Later on, when popular new premil ideas were emerging, they tended to get picked up by the newer denominations.

So, the connection between amill and reformed theology is coincidental. In my own case, my theology is Wesleyan but I am Amill.

 

[BABerean2]

Hi all. could anyone recommend any reading whether it be websites or books on amillenialism and orthodox preterism for someone very new to the subject. Thanks.

An excellent example of the difference between preterism and futurism can be found in a study of the Olivet Discourse.

First, try to forget everything you have ever heard from the mouth of a man or seen in a movie.

Do your best to just focus on the text in the Bible.

In Matthew chapter 24 the disciples ask Christ 2 questions.

1. When will the temple be destroyed?

2. What will be the sign of thy Coming and the end of the age?

Therefore, we must assume that part of the chapter is about the first question and part of the chapter is about the second question.


My personal view is that the first part of the chapter is related to the first question and the last part is about the second question.

Full-Preterists go into the ditch on one side by ignoring the second question and say it all happened in 70 AD.

Full-Futurists go into the ditch on the other side by ignoring the first question and say it will all happen in the future.

They are both clearly wrong.

Figuring out where the text changes from the first question to the second question is where most of the arguments originate between those whose view is somewhere in between the two extremes.

Do a parallel study of the Olivet Discourse found in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 17 and 21 to get a better picture.

For example, there is mention of being persecuted in synagogues. However, this is not clearly found in all three accounts. We know based on the New Testament that the disciples were persecuted in the synagogues by the Jews, during their lifetime. We know Halley's Comet was seen in 66 AD. This would have most certainly been a sign in the heavens. The Roman 12th Legion under Cestius Gallus surrounded Jerusalem in 66 AD, but then left for some unexplained reason. We know then there were those who saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies. (Luke 21:20) There were major earthquakes in the region during the life of the Apostles. All of these things must be considered in attempting to understand which part has already been fulfilled and which lies in the future.

...................................................................

Also, be aware that there are those on this forum who will use name-calling directed toward you if you dare to disagree with their view.

You will need to have thick skin to handle the personal insults.

Remember that we are all human.

Let God be true and every man a liar. ( That includes me. )

......................................................................

The book "Kingdom Come" by Pastor Sam Storms should be the first book you read.

 

[Straightshot]

duck

You can find the technical definitions of both on the Internet .... just Google

The preterist pushes unfulfilled Bible prophecy into the past ["preter" .... is Latin for past] with the idea that there is nothing left to be fulfilled .... even the second coming of Jesus Christ

This aberrant idea then feeds the false doctrine of the Amil theology with regard to the fact that when the Lord's does come, He is going to rule the earth for 1000 years before He brings His eternal kingdom just after .... both false doctrines deny this truth

If you want related scriptures I will give them to you

 

[jduck1986]

Just historical. The Catholic church was Amill, and the Protestant reformation saw no reason to change the eschatological doctrines of the church. Later on, when popular new premil ideas were emerging, they tended to get picked up by the newer denominations.

So, the connection between amill and reformed theology is coincidental. In my own case, my theology is Wesleyan but I am Amill.

ah thank you. that's always been a point of hesitation for me. but I am definitely leaning towards amil partial preterist

 

[Gideon]

I am definitely leaning towards amil partial preterist

The new generation of prophecy students are moving in large numbers to what is orthodox and safe. Good! My only proviso to this trend is that we should not toss out (entirely) the possibility some prophecy being fulfilled in the period between AD70 and Christs return.

Sure, futurists have over-done a lot of end-time stuff, but part-preterists can sometimes throw the baby out with the bathwater. That's what I like about Kim Riddlebarger's version of Amill. He's got a good balance IMO.

 

[jduck1986]

The new generation of prophecy students are moving in large numbers to what is orthodox and safe. Good! My only proviso to this trend is that we should not toss out (entirely) the possibility some prophecy being fulfilled in the period between AD70 and Christs return.

Sure, futurists have over-done a lot of end-time stuff, but part-preterists can sometimes throw the baby out with the bathwater. That's what I like about Kim Riddlebarger's version of Amill. He's got a good balance IMO.

I've heard Riddlebarger's name mentioned quite a bit along with Kenneth Gentry and R.C Sproul. I'm definitely interested in their points of difference as well as the other differences among other orthodox preterists. As far as going too overboard I'm very much open to new ideas on the topic besides full preterism and dispensationalism.

 

[jduck1986]

An excellent example of the difference between preterism and futurism can be found in a study of the Olivet Discourse.

First, try to forget everything you have ever heard from the mouth of a man or seen in a movie.

Do your best to just focus on the text in the Bible.

In Matthew chapter 24 the disciples ask Christ 2 questions.

1. When will the temple be destroyed?

2. What will be the sign of thy Coming and the end of the age?

Therefore, we must assume that part of the chapter is about the first question and part of the chapter is about the second question.


My personal view is that the first part of the chapter is related to the first question and the last part is about the second question.

Full-Preterists go into the ditch on one side by ignoring the second question and say it all happened in 70 AD.

Full-Futurists go into the ditch on the other side by ignoring the first question and say it will all happen in the future.

They are both clearly wrong.

Figuring out where the text changes from the first question to the second question is where most of the arguments originate between those whose view is somewhere in between the two extremes.

Do a parallel study of the Olivet Discourse found in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 17 and 21 to get a better picture.

For example, there is mention of being persecuted in synagogues. However, this is not clearly found in all three accounts. We know based on the New Testament that the disciples were persecuted in the synagogues by the Jews, during their lifetime. We know Halley's Comet was seen in 66 AD. This would have most certainly been a sign in the heavens. The Roman 12th Legion under Cestius Gallus surrounded Jerusalem in 66 AD, but then left for some unexplained reason. We know then there were those who saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies. (Luke 21:20) There were major earthquakes in the region during the life of the Apostles. All of these things must be considered in attempting to understand which part has already been fulfilled and which lies in the future.

...................................................................

Also, be aware that there are those on this forum who will use name-calling directed toward you if you dare to disagree with their view.

You will need to have thick skin to handle the personal insults.

Remember that we are all human.

Let God be true and every man a liar. ( That includes me. )

......................................................................

The book "Kingdom Come" by Pastor Sam Storms should be the first book you read.

Thank you for your advice and comments. I will definitely check out "Kingdom Come" thank you. Out of personal curiosity, are you amil or postmil?

 

[BABerean2]

Thank you for your advice and comments. I will definitely check out "Kingdom Come" thank you. Out of personal curiosity, are you amil or postmil?

The postmil concept is a beautiful idea, however the globalists seem to be putting things in place now to push us into a one world system.
Therefore, I do not think the postmil view is correct.

The term amillennial means "no millennium" which is not a correct term.
A better term might be postCrossmillennium for me.
Sometimes putting someone in a particular box does not always work.

The 20th chapter of Revelation is full of symbols and is one of the most difficult texts in the book. Attempting to figure out what is figurative and what is literal in this chapter is very difficult.

Read the following article which helped me see that the Gog/Magog battle and the battle of Armageddon are the same. The mountains can only be destroyed one time.
This fact places the end of Revelation chapter 20 at the battle of Armageddon.


Is the Gog Magog War the Battle of Armageddon ?
Gog of Magog - Here a little, there a little - Prophecy


One of my favorite local Baptist pastors is old-school, nondispensational, premill.

There will always be different points of view on the things that none of us know for sure, while we are in this world.

When posting on this forum, avoid those who will call you or others fool, liar, baby, troll, blind, arrogant, etc. Be prepared for that.

Some will want to make peace with you one day and spit in your face the next day.
That is just the way it is here.

I am certainly no saint myself. It is easy to get frustrated and say something we should not say.

Welcome to the battle... I mean Forum.

 

[parousia70]

In considering the questions of Preterism vs. Futurism, and Amillenism vs. Premillennilism or Post-millennism, there is a basic question that you must resolve in your mind.

That question is, should the plainly stated prophecies in the Bible be taken as literal statements of future events, or should they be taken as symbolic representations of future events.
If you conclude that the prophecies should be taken at face value, that is, literally, futurism is obvious,

Except of course the literal time statements such as soon, shortly, about to take place, in a very very little while, the time is near, it is the last hour, etc... those literal statements are the exceptions allowed to be spiritualized and allegorized away in the futurist camp... for adhering to literalism here would force the futurist to abandon futurism all together. And we can't have that dontcha know?

But if you conclude that they are only symbolic, then any conclusion is possible.

Except of course the literal time statements such as soon, shortly, about to take place, in a very very little while, the time is near, it is the last hour, etc... those literal statements are the exceptions allowed to be spiritualized and allegorized away in the futurist camp... for adhering to literalism here would force the futurist to abandon futurism all together. And we can't have that dontcha know?

All the various schools of prophetic interpretation fall along the scale between these two extremes, and they all depend on this one basic and essential question.

With the above noted basic and essential exception that futurists claim allowance to apply to over 100 scripture passages..

 

[jduck1986]

Been listening to a bit of Kim Riddlebarger's position on the book of Revelation today and I'm suprised to find out that he is in fact not a preterist. Idealist I believe? Any Idealists on this forum?

 

[BABerean2]

Been listening to a bit of Kim Riddlebarger's position on the book of Revelation today and I'm suprised to find out that he is in fact not a preterist. Idealist I believe? Any Idealists on this forum?

During the last few weeks I have had a chance to hear Jacob Prasch on Youtube. He is a Messianic Jew. I do not agree with everything he says, however be brings a fresh perspective.

In the talk below he slays several of the sacred cows involved in the end-time deception.
You can fast-forward it to the 25.00 minute mark where he starts his speech.


2015 Moriel Conference: Jacob Prasch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw26Zxp341I

 

[Job8]

You say it's a fantasy which is certainly possible and I'm not going to argue with you.

One question that always pops into my mind about amillenialism and postmillenialism is that almost all of it's proponents are reformed in their theology. could anyone speak as to why this is the case?

Reformed Theology relies heavily on Augustine and his ideas. Augustine believed that he was already in the Millenium and that the Church had replaced Israel. Thus Bible prophecy is "spiritualized".
https://bible.org/seriespage/4-amillenniallism-augustine-modern-times

 

[Straightshot]

Jacob Prasch is a messianic "Jew"

And so have many come in the same venue today

Be careful of these teachers because many of them are forming cults and require their members to keep Jewish laws which is a contradiction of the gospel of Jesus Christ

The Lord warned Israel that these would come [Matthew 24:4-5]

 

[BABerean2]

Jacob Prasch is a messianic "Jew"

And so have many come in the same venue today

Be careful of these teachers because many of them are forming cults and require their members to keep Jewish laws which is a contradiction of the gospel of Jesus Christ

The Lord warned Israel that these would come [Matthew 24:4-5]

I agree 100% that many in the "Hebrew Roots" movement are modern day Judaizers.

Jacob is not one of those, from what I have seen of him.

One side of his family is Catholic and the other Jewish. He jokes that he has been sprinkled and clipped.

Like all of us he is made of flesh, and I do not agree with everything he says.
However, he is speaking the truth that some do not want to hear about what has happened to the modern Church.

He actually comes from the Pentecostals, but has rejected much of what is going on with the Benny Hinn crowd today.

There are a number of modern Jews who are following the path of the Apostles.

Their part has not been blinded.

It is my belief that they have the best chance of evangelizing the descendants of Jacob, because they understand how modern day Talmudic Judaism has perverted the Old Testament.

 

[iamlamad]

ah thank you. that's always been a point of hesitation for me. but I am definitely leaning towards amil partial preterist

Please define what you mean by partial preterist?