A Case For Amillennialism-? - Page 2

Daniel Ritchie · #41 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 06:25 AM

Oh yes, I should add that the thread is entitled: "Idealism is it Hegelian?"

JM · #42 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 10:34 AM

I'm lurking on it, thank you.

Daniel Ritchie · #43 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JM

I'm lurking on it, thank you.

No problem.

danmpem · #44 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JM

I'm premil and it's the first position on eschatology that I ever took, from reading PB many have taken this position until they default into Amil when they become Reformed,

That's the same thing with me, and that's why I voted "Undecided". I'm very premil, but being on PB has made me a little more optimistic toward amill.

Ivanhoe · #45 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 05:00 PM

My problem with amillennialism is that it posits a flattened ontology.

Daniel Ritchie · #46 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

My problem with amillennialism is that it posits a flattened ontology.

Ivanhoe · #47 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

My problem with amillennialism is that it posits a flattened ontology.

I'll explain later.

Sonoftheday · #48 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 06:06 PM

I once tried listening to some of the sermons found on Grace Christian Assembly website. It seemed to me that he was teaching that the Mosiac Law has no hold over the Gentile whatsoever, but the Jew must still abide by all that it teaches plus place faith in Christ for salvation, is this what he teaches or did I missunderstand his sermon??

JM · #49 (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 06:51 PM

Mr. Riddle, he's a dispey and makes it clear that he is. That said, I'd suggest the following messages:

# 025 - Intro to the Millennium
# 026 - Millennialism pt.2
# 027 - Hebrews 11 and Premillennial Thinking

# 047 - Amillennialism

# 088 - The History of Amillennialism
# 089 - The History of Premillennialism
# 090 - Augustine's Amillennialsm
# 091 - Revelation 20 and Amillennialism
# 092 - Answering the Two Age Model
# 093 - Answering Hoekema pt.1
# 094 - Answering Hoekema pt.2
# 095 - Answering Hoekema pt.3
# 096 - Answering Hoekema pt.4
# 097 - Answering Hoekema pt.5
# 098 - Answering Hoekema pt.6
# 099 - Answering Hoekema pt.7
# 100 - Answering Hoekema pt.8
# 101 - Answering Hoekema pt.9
# 102 - Answering Hoekema pt.10
# 103 - Hoekema and The Resurrection

link

Daniel Ritchie · #50 (**permalink**) 01-29-2008, 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

My problem with amillennialism is that it posits a flattened ontology.

I'll explain later.

Please do.

JM · #51 (**permalink**) 01-29-2008, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danmpem

Quote:

Originally Posted by JM

I'm premil and it's the first position on eschatology that I ever took, from reading PB many have taken this position until they default into Amil when they become Reformed,

That's the same thing with me, and that's why I voted "Undecided". I'm very premil, but being on PB has made me a little more optimistic toward amill.

MR. Pemberton, did you get a chance to download the messages I posted from GCA?

Blue Dog · #52 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blueridge Baptist

I read it and found it very helpfull. I am a little biased though being an amillenialist myself.

Hey, I've overlooked my watch, lost my keys, and forgotten my wallet. But how can you Amil boys keep losing 1,000 years?

US amill boys havent lost a 1,000 years It's here and now. We reign with Jesus now, "Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you." (1Cor 4:8)"For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet."(1Cor 15:25) "we shall also reign with Him"(2Tim 2:12) "And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
" (Rev5:10) cf.(context) Rev 20 (I know I am preaching to the choir here).

Ivanhoe · #53 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Dog

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blueridge Baptist

I read it and found it very helpfull. I am a little biased though being an amillenialist myself.

Hey, I've overlooked my watch, lost my keys, and forgotten my wallet. But how can you Amil boys keep losing 1,000 years?

US amill boys havent lost a 1,000 years It's here and now. We reign with Jesus now, "Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you." (1Cor 4:8)

I see Paul's reference here as sarcasm, given the problem of an overly-realized eschatology in Corinth.

Quote:

"And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
" (Rev5:10) cf.(context) Rev 20 (I know I am preaching to the choir here).

Do you believe you are currently reigning on earth over the nations (which Revelation 2 says you will)?

holyfool33 · #54 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 11:44 AM

I tried reading it but I found it so dry I gave up trying to read it and gave my copy to my pastor who is Amil.

holyfool33 · #55 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenRev1611

Some dispensationalists insist that the OT sacrifices would be sovereignly reinstated in the thousand year reign of Christ. I consider this an aberration because it insists that the work of Christ was not complete. If Christ fulfills the sacrifices, then why go back. The writer to the Hebrew has alot to say about this. I believe between Chap 7-10.

The Sacrifices will be reinstituted but they wont have any expeateing. Power it will be much as Christians now look upon the Lord's supper.

mshingler · #56 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 12:27 PM

I'm just finishing up the book. I liked it, but was disappointed, at some points, that there was not more effort at detailed exegesis. Also, it seemed like much of the exegetical work offered was simply referenced from other works like Hoekema, Kline, etc.
I especially appreciated the chapter on the Olivet Discourse. This section of Scripture is one that I always felt like dispensationalists had to really "read into" to make it fit (I say that as one just "coming out of" dispensational thinking myself). At the same time, I've not been satisfied with the full preterist interpretation. I think Riddlebarger has a very solid and balanced understanding of these passages, taking a good bit of his material from D.A. Carson's commentary on Matt.
I can't say that this book has convinced me, but it has helped me understand some of the strengths of the amil. position and to face the inherent problems with premil.

AV1611 · #57 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holyfool33

The Sacrifices will be reinstituted but they wont have any expeateing. Power it will be much as Christians now look upon the Lord's supper.

The ceremonial system was a shadow of Christ, why would we return to the shadows when we now have the reality?

danmpem · #58 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mshingler

I'm just finishing up the book. I liked it, but was disappointed, at some points, that there was not more effort at detailed exegesis. Also, it seemed like much of the exegetical work offered was simply referenced from other works like Hoekema, Kline, etc.
I especially appreciated the chapter on the Olivet Discourse. This section of Scripture is one that I always felt like dispensationalists had to really "read into" to make it fit (I say that as one just "coming out of" dispensational thinking myself). At the same time, I've not been satisfied with the full preterist interpretation. I think Riddlebarger has a very solid and balanced understanding of these passages, taking a good bit of his material from D.A. Carson's commentary on Matt.
I can't say that this book has convinced me, but it has helped me understand some of the strengths of the amil. position and to face the inherent problems with premil.

Johnny Mac has a book just about the Olivet Discourse. While it's not the kind of book that I think would change anyone's mind and turn 'em Premil, he does clear up a lot of tricky passages in Matt.

Also, isn't D.A. Carson Premil?

danmpem · #59 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danmpem

Quote:

Originally Posted by JM

I'm premil and it's the first position on eschatology that I ever took, from reading PB many have taken this position until they default into Amil when they become Reformed,

That's the same thing with me, and that's why I voted "Undecided". I'm very premil, but being on PB has made me a little more optimistic toward amill.

MR. Pemberton, did you get a chance to download the messages I posted from GCA?

No, I didn't. I didn't even see that post until 5 minutes ago. Thanks!

Backwoods Presbyterian · #60 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moral necessity

I picked up the book, A Case For Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger over the weekend, and am on Chapter 8. Has anyone read this yet? If there are any dispensationalists or pre/post millennialists who have been persuaded into Amillennialism, I just wondered what scriptures or reasoning convinced you of such a theological move?

Blessings!

I have read it and it changed me from a Pan-Millenialist to a A-Mill overnight. I used to think eschatology does not really matter a whole lot but that book changed my mind.

Ivanhoe · #61 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danmpem

Quote:

Originally Posted by mshingler

I'm just finishing up the book. I liked it, but was disappointed, at some points, that there was not more effort at detailed exegesis. Also, it seemed like much of the exegetical work offered was simply referenced from other works like Hoekema, Kline, etc.
I especially appreciated the chapter on the Olivet Discourse. This section of Scripture is one that I always felt like dispensationalists had to really "read into" to make it fit (I say that as one just "coming out of" dispensational thinking myself). At the same time, I've not been satisfied with the full preterist interpretation. I think Riddlebarger has a very solid and balanced understanding of these passages, taking a good bit of his material from D.A. Carson's commentary on Matt.
I can't say that this book has convinced me, but it has helped me understand some of the strengths of the amil. position and to face the inherent problems with premil.

Johnny Mac has a book just about the Olivet Discourse. While it's not the kind of book that I think would change anyone's mind and turn 'em Premil, he does clear up a lot of tricky passages in Matt.

Also, isn't D.A. Carson Premil?

Yes. The Evangelical Free Church demands it.

Zadok · #62 (**permalink**) 03-29-2008, 06:04 PM

There are series of mp3 lectures by Riddlebarger on Amillennialism and Eschatology at:

Christ Reformed Info - MP3's and Real Audio (of Academy Lectures)

And off topic, he also has a series on the New Perspective