RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I was originally a partial-preterist postmillennial theonomist. When I left that view I went to post-tribulationism (it seemed the most natural and sequential reading of NT texts). I did see some of the problems with a millennial kingdom. So a few years ago I backed off (if not denied) that view.
I found myself floating in amil land, but I never could get a grip on specifics. Everything seemed to be a type of something. On one hand, that's obvious. Melchizedek and all. But it wasn't always clear on how some random prophecy in Isaiah, which seemed to promise a physical (read-non Platonic) blessing, was "spiritual of the church," or something.
The amillennial timeline on the millennium seems to be accurate, though. That being said, I am finding myself holding to some form of futurism, perhaps even seeing a future tribulation, yet all within an amillennial time scheme regarding the millennium/church age.
I found myself floating in amil land, but I never could get a grip on specifics. Everything seemed to be a type of something. On one hand, that's obvious. Melchizedek and all. But it wasn't always clear on how some random prophecy in Isaiah, which seemed to promise a physical (read-non Platonic) blessing, was "spiritual of the church," or something.
The amillennial timeline on the millennium seems to be accurate, though. That being said, I am finding myself holding to some form of futurism, perhaps even seeing a future tribulation, yet all within an amillennial time scheme regarding the millennium/church age.