Thomas Schreiner (Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) explains why he now prefers the premillennial system after having taught amillennialism.


View Audio :: Clifton Baptist Church

(Click on the message "The Millennium," and you can skip the first 5 minutes.)

__________________
Charlie Johnson
Downtown Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, student

How sad.

__________________
Steven J. Carr (Sven)
http://beholdingthebeauty.blogspot.com/
Eagan, MN
PCA
"Weak is the effort of my heart / And cold my warmest thought / But when I see thee as thou art / I'll praise thee as I ought."--John Newton
Trophy Wife/Arm Candy: Crystal Ann Children: Steven Jr. and Hannah Grace

__________________
Martin - Reformed
Husband to the most godly, honorable and loyal wife Line
Searching for a Church
Webpage www.5solas.dk
Free Online Reformed Seminary - http://www.tnars.net
Soli Deo Gloria

I consider myself amill, but I was impressed by his alleged inconsistencies between the devil being cast into the abyss and the amillennial system.

McFadden, I hope you read this. I'd love to hear your thoughts.


BTW if a mod reads this, can it be put in the Eschatology forum? I forgot we had one.

Someone's eschatology is right. I guess we'll eventually find out the truth.

__________________
Andrew Thornquist My Photo Album
Calvinistic Baptist
Ukiah, California
To follow Christ was the best decision God made for me!

Historic premill or dispensational? Hopefully not the latter.

__________________
Willie Grills
Trinity Presbyterian Church
OPC
Huntington, WV

That was weird. I was listening to the sermon and for some reason my iTunes switched to a song in my secular playlist, "Eyes On Me" by Celine Dion. It was a somewhat strange transition. Just sayin'.

Good question. I'd be shocked if it dispy.

__________________
Ivan R. Schoen, B.A., M.A., M.L.I.S.
Pastor of Maranatha Baptist Church (SBC)
Poplar Grove, IL, USA
http://maranatha-sbc.org

Does historic premill also teach a rapture? It sounds like Schreiner holds to a rapture of some sort.

Generally, no, historic premil does not teach a rapture.

What on earth is 'sad' about being premil! Millions of solid believers have been premil for many years and love the Lord just as much as the amils and postmils do! I'm not a theologian but it looks like to me it just makes more sense according to scripture.

Besides Tom Schreiner is so credible that I do trust his judgment and exegesis!

__________________
Nancy L./ www.foundersbaptist.org
Spring, TX

Your will, Lord Jesus Christ! Nothing more... nothing less... nothing else.

Sorry...Amil is just a cooler word

__________________
~ Charles Stephen Barribeau ~
Christ Presbyterian Church , OPC (They sing alot of Psalms!)
Original Westminster Standards (I need to study more...)
The Puritans were best! Also... I NEED TO READ MORE!!!
Philipians1:29(KJV) For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

Janesville, Wisconsin (In the fellowship of Bob Vigneault and Matt+Megan Meisberger)

Does he say what prompted the switch?

__________________
Joshua F
Layman
Mountain View Community Church (Missionary Church Denomination)
Johnstown, CO

He said that there are strong cases made by many solid theologians that are all across the spectrum of eschatological understandings; thus, he settled with what he thinks is the most natural understanding of the text (Revelation 20:1-15). He was sure to emphasize that this is a secondary (perhaps even tertiary) issue within Christendom, so being totally rigid with this particular text will more than likely be divisive rather than edifying.

What's sad is that premils believe in Satan's kingdoms victory in histroy. Basically God has surrendered this world to Satan and ultimately can't do anything unless Jesus is here present. It is a defeatist eschatology and is not Biblical. No doubt many Godly people hold to this eschatology, but they are in error.

That being said, North quoted Rushdoony in his "Millennialism and Social Theory" as saying that amillennialism is premillennialism without hope. So his switch could be considered hope filled, though it is the wrong hope to cling to.

__________________
Dewey D
Reformed Heritage Church (Independent at the moment)
San Fransicko, CA

In that case I guess you'll really be surprised when I leave with the rapture!

I'm glad that at least you have a sure understanding of the text. To think that scholars and godly saints have wrestled over this for millennia when we just needed you to show us the truth.

Andrew,

Sorry if I was being over assertive. I respect the intelligence and hard work of true believers who do their due diligence. No disrespect intended for my premil and amil brethern.

-----Added 7/7/2009 at 04:10:38 EST-----


Say hi to Tim LaHaye when you see him in the air!

I've been going to Clifton for about 6 months now. I was surprised when I heard Dr. Schreiner's message on Rev. 20. I just finished a NT course with him in the Spring and he defended the amil. view in that class.
I'm 99.9 % sure that his view is historic premil. and not dispensational at all.
I respect him for having the humility to stand before his congregation and basically say, "Hey, I've continued to study this passage of scripture and I think I was wrong before." At the same time, I was kind of disappointed that he would make this change based, as he said, solely on what seemed to be the most natural understanding of this one passage. I became convinced of the amil. position about a year ago. One thing that moved me in that direction was to look carefully, over a long period of time, at the clearer and more direct NT passages relating to the second coming and eschatology, and then to allow those passages to shed light on Rev. 20.

__________________
Mike Shingler
Louisville, KY

I wonder how he'd answer the "problem of evil" objection that I've posted about before, one that I've read in Riddlebarger's book.

__________________
Steven Nemes
Phoenix, AZ

Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy must be answered - C.S. Lewis

What is the problem of evil objection?

it is:

When I read George Ladd, I could be premil also. But officially I haven't decided. I go between amil and post. So does Mathison who describes himself as amil/post in last week's interview. Covenant Radio interviewed Dr. Keith Mathison on his book, From Age to Age: The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology on Covenant Radio which I got on my iPod and listened to yesterday while sewing. Mathison does not come at eschatology from any one millennial view, but from what the entire Bible says. Eschatology is bigger than those views, he says. Why it's bigger than Revelation, Matthew and Daniel! It is God's purposes for all of history--hence stages unfolding. Don't have time to read it now, but will order it. It is a thick volume I hear.

__________________
Carol
Plant City, Florida


That I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith.
Philippians 3:8,9

http://gettingoffthenicenesstreadmill.blogspot.com/

I'm an Acts 1:11' er. We have plenty of other good stuff to get into a donnybrook over 'til that day.

__________________
Rich Koster
1689'er
Browns Mills NJ USA
Often Goofy Reformed Eccentric
Romans 7:14-25

Are you supposing that those believers alive at the time of the Second Advent are immediately glorified? I'm inclined to agree, but all Pre-Mills would disagree. They would say that the saved who are alive at the time of the 2nd coming remain as normal mortal humans, giving birth to mortal humans. The rebellion then consists of those who are born during the Millennium (after the sheep and the goats) but who do not come to Christ.

Actually, I believe this would be the view of dispensational premil. but not historic premil. The historic premillenialist would see all believers resurrected and/or glorified at Christ's return. He would argue that, although Christ decisively defeats His enemies at His coming, He does not destroy all unbelievers. Hence, it is unbelievers who are left alive to enter the millennium in mortal bodies (cf. Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology).

Could he be...dare I say...Premil Historicisit?

__________________
Conscience may lash us, but it cannot replenish a languishing life. Conscience may be God's word and minister to you, telling you of your faults and your follies and your destitution. It may point out, but it will never supply you. Christ must give you new life. Hart has well expressed it: "He to the feeble and the faint, His mighty aid makes known; and when their languid life is spent, supplies it with His own." - J. K. Popham

Well then if the historic premill view is right, there are 2 resurrections of the dead, while all talk of any resurrection in the New Testament books looks forward to and only speaks of 1. Not only that, Jesus says at the resurrection there is not marrying and giving in marriage, but they are as angels, so they won't be having kids. Not only that, the final judgment at the end of the age seems to be namely that: the final judgment. Those evil persons are gone, those good persons are taken. The premillennialists would have us beleive there are two judgments, I suppose, but that is not what Jesus teaches, nor what Paul teaches.

How glad. Nice to know he's seen the light.

__________________
Richard T. Zuelch, M.Div
Ruling Elder, OPC (not currently serving)
Westminster Presbyterian Church, CA (OPC)
www.alexandermaclaren.wordpress.com
www.reiterations.wordpress.com
www.spurgeonswords.wordpress.com

Devout souls do not take offence at the depths and difficulties of God's Word, but are, thereby, drawn to intenser contemplation of them. - Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910)

Ah, yes. I do recall reading that in Grudem. I'm not sure how representative he is in that assertion.

Interestingly, he footnotes no Scripture references for this assertion, which is prima facie absurd, since it requires that the only people who "enter the kingdom" (as people) are unbelievers, something entirely contradictory to all of Scripture.

For example: Revelation 22:12-15 12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone for what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." 14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates. 15 Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and the sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

Matthew 5:20 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

John 3:5 5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Isaiah 66:15-24 15 "For behold, the LORD will come in fire, and his chariots like the whirlwind, to render his anger in fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. 16 For by fire will the LORD enter into judgment, and by his sword, with all flesh; and those slain by the LORD shall be many. 17 "Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following one in the midst, eating pig's flesh and the abomination and mice, shall come to an end together, declares the LORD. 18 "For I know their works and their thoughts, and the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and shall see my glory, 19 and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands afar off, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations. 20 And they shall bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses and in chariots and in litters and on mules and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD. 21 And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the LORD. 22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain. 23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD. 24 "And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh."

Panmillenialism, anyone?

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

The idea of resurrected saints and pre-resurrection individuals (some of whom will prove to be unregenerate) occuying the same physical millennial kingdom is troubling.

__________________
Tom Albrecht
Elder, Covenant URCNA, New Holland, PA.

"When I find the time, I'm going to write the social history of bourbon."

I learned a long time ago that where you STAND has a lot to do with where you SIT.

If you put on your dispensational lenses when reading the Bible, it holds together rather nicely. Daniel becomes the hermeneutical Rosetta Stone for understanding Revelation (hence Walvoord's title for his Daniel commentary ("The Key to Prophetic Revelation"). When taken in this vein, Matthew falls into place, the Thessalonian correspondence "teaches" a secret rapture, and Revelation 20 makes the most sense of predicting a literal millennium following the second coming.

If you put on your covenant Calvinist lenses, you find that an amillennial (or postmillennial) view makes the most sense. Revelation gets taken in a way that suggests that it is not referencing a literal futurist event unfolded chronologically in the chapters.

People like Schreiner (evidently), Doug Moo, and my old prof George Ladd have a miserable situation to contend with in being historic premill. Having neither a consistent covenant nor dispensational hermeneutic, they are left with the naked facticity of Rev. 20 standing out there by its lonesome. Because they are not dispensational, they cannot show how the premill position gibes with the rest of the Bible, particularly the OT prophets. Not being fully covenantal, they cannot simply interpret the book of Revelation in an apocalyptic vein as the fulfillment of the drift of God's revelation from Genesis to Revelation.

Hence, you get these awkward admissions that "I would be amil if it weren't for Rev. 20." When I took NT Theology from Ladd, he could not give us a compelling reason for the millennium except that a grammatical historical hermeneutic leaves you with no option but to affirm it. Also Erickson, Grudem, Piper, et. al.

Bottom line: there will always be loose ends that trouble our handling of Scripture, regardless of which view we adopt. When I re-examined the consistent Reformed view, my problems with Rev. 20 seemed to become less important than a consistent reading of the whole of Biblical revelation.

__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Also, according to Matt. 25, [U]when Christ comes and sits on His throne[U], He will judge the nations, and all the unbelievers (goats) will be cast into the Lake of Fire. Of course, Grudem places this at the end of the millennium, but I really find that a stretch in light of the fact that Jesus states it will happen when He comes, not 1,000 years later.

SermonAudio.com - Postmillenialism and Revelation 20

I found Rev David Silversides sermon on historic postmillenialism to be very encouraging and enlightening. He does a really good job at explaining the weaknesses of premillenialism, amillenialism and Rush D's postmil, he then goes on to describe the puritan view of postmillenialism. I had to listen to this sermon twice looking up the scriptures, backing up the sermon etc to understand what he was saying.

Being Premil previously, and then Amil, I found historic postmil to be so refreshing. I realize eschatology is such a difficult subject, however, I believe the puritans, John Owen, Calvin, and our historic confessions had it right. The sermon references these points so I'd refer anyone interested to listening to it.

Hope this wasn't off topic, I'm just overjoyed with recently discovering historic postmillenialism!

__________________
Josh
Reformed - WCF
Clinton, Utah

"My business is to love others and not to seek that others shall love me" // "Redeeming the time, for the days are evil" Eph 5:16

I just finished listening to the whole series. He does a great job at pulling out the practical side of Rev and he makes a good case for Pre Mil.

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


"Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

__________________
Brian
Grace Bible Church;E.Bridgewater
East Bridgewater MA
http://www.gracebiblehome.org

I agree. By contrast, 'premil' is almost... gay.

__________________
Nathan Tyler
Reformed Baptist
University of Toronto (Student: Hons. B.A. in Philosophy)
Ontario, Canada

1689'er

http://nathantyler.wordpress.com