I believe we've debunked preterism.

And we both are still under the impression that your view--that Christ now has no physical body--and that of Docetism, that Christ never had a body--are quite similar. If you don't like that, you have to change your view.

 

In what way have I misinterpreted or misrepresented your views?

I wasn't talking to you. Covenanter clearly said he believed we are in the Millennium, meanwhile saying he was amil (which means "without a millennium").

 

You are asking for someone to provide..SCRIPTURES???

 

John, if you are going to use labels, you should use them properly, than than apply heretical labels like "Docetism" to faithful believers.

Also it is generally accepted that there are 3 views of the 1,000 years -
amil - meaning no future millennium, i.e. Rev. 20 refers to the present Gospel age;
postmil - meaning an age of peace & Gospel progress before Jesus returns for resurrection & judgment & the NH≠
premil - meaning a future millennium after Jesus returns for earthly rule & before the NH≠

Please keep to accepted labels rather than redefining what has been in use for centuries.

 

Tell you what, while believing that your view that Christ has not now a physical body is similar to Docetism, I apologize for agreeing with the perceived mischaracterization of your view as Docetism.

Now, I'm sure you plan to apologize for completely misrepresenting my view of the Greek word parousia, right?

 

I have now apologized for agreeing with a perceived mischaracterization of asterisktom's as Docetism. Now I'm waiting for his apology.

You said on p. 4, Post #80: "I believe the present Gospel age is the millennium, and that Jesus will come in glory to do as he promised." That is postmillennialism, no doubt about it. Since you believe that we are in the millennium now, your position cannot be amillennialism, which believes that there is no millennium. Those are the "accepted labels" which have "been in use for centuries."

"Literally, amillennialism is the idea that there will be no millennium, no earthly reign of Christ. The great final judgement will immediately follow the second coming and issue directly in the final states of the righteous and the wicked. Amillennialism is a simpler view than either of the others" (Christian Theology, 2nd ed, by Millard Erickson, Baker Books, 1998, p. 1218).

 

I love that......you hang in there brother, your display of dealing with the pain inspires others, and thats a gift you provide. I will pray for you!

 

That is funny!

 

I strongly recommend that you read at least the postmil & amil sections of "Four views on the millennium" on the blueletterbible.org

It's the understanding - the present Gospel age is the thousand years of Rev. 20 - I've had in many discussions in the last 60 years. I suggest you cease your own "literal" definition of amil & postmil & use the accepted terminology.

 

I more often sing this small testimony in my quite times of grief and distress - both physical and mental.

I am not the man I once was (thank you Father), and I am not the man I will be, but, while I yet remain, I will be like my Lord as I can be.

 

Hey, it's no skin off my nose if you wish to use the wrong terminology for your position. And if you wish to use flawed resources for that, again, that is up to you. But my students are not allowed to use the article you sourced because it has no author listed, so there is no way to tell who wrote it or how informed they are. (I teach theology for a living, remember.)

In fact, I find the author singularly uninformed, since he/she/it includes the ISBN in the bibliographies (not professional), and also has this statement after the amil position: "The Rapture: The saints, living and dead, shall meet the Lord in the clouds and immediately proceed to judge the nations with Christ and then follow Him into their eternal state." I mean, really??? There is a rapture in the amil position???

On the other hand, my source, cited above, is the leading systematic theologian among Baptists nowadays, used in most Baptist seminaries.

 

I would like to expand the use of ISBN (International book number - for those who do not remember) as not being acceptable.

The problem is that when using the ISBN number it does not point to the specific place nor the specific authority of the citation.

Rather, it carries with that numbering, the ability to find the book of which the statement would use for discussion.

It is obvious why this is unacceptable documentation, because typically a book of any note that involves factual information includes all manner of statements which the author may or may not hold, but may in fact be various statements presented in conflict with each other as comparing and contrasting.

That is why, typically, the professors expect students to give author, title, year, page number and other indicators so any could go and locate the exact statement and read how it is used.

 

You are wrong on what Amillennialism is and Post Millennialism, thats plain and simple.

I read the books on people that support it, and people that support Post Millennium, everyone is wrong besides you?

A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times Kim Riddlebarger
Amillennarians believe that the millennium of Christ's heavenly reign is a present reality, not a future hope to come after his return.

Amillennialism (Greek: a- "no" + millennialism) is the view in Christian eschatology which states that Christ is presently reigning through the Church, and that the "1000 years" of Revelation 20:1-6 is a metaphorical reference to the present church age which will culminate in Christ's return. It stands in contrast to premillennialism, which states that Christ will return prior to a literal 1000 year earthly reign; and postmillennialism, which states that Christ's return will follow a 1000 year golden age ushered in by the church.


http://www.theopedia.com/amillennialism


Now, in City of God, Augustine viewed the thousand years of Revelation 20 not as some special future time but "the period beginning with Christ's first coming," that is, the age of the Christian church. Throughout this age, the saints reign with Christ—not in the fullness of the coming kingdom prepared for those blessed by God the Father, but "in some other and far inferior way."

Amillennialism: Millennium Today


Amillennialism alters the timeline of the end times to fit these two views. Christ's kingdom was established at His resurrection. The "first resurrection" (Revelation 20:4-6) does not refer to the physical resurrection of the saints, as premillennialism teaches, but to a spiritual resurrection, that is, the point in history when the Holy Spirit became available to dwell in the hearts of the believers. The "kingdom," then, is a kingdom in spirit only and lasts until Jesus' second coming. The second coming is concurrent with the rapture of the believers. Everyone will be judged, and then the second resurrection will return physical bodies to souls. The eternal state will immediately follow.
amillennialism.html

That is correct, No millennium, no earthly reign. Its symbolically now!

 

Here is the problem with a mill. thinking.

It doesn’t fit with the last three chapters of the Revelation.

Augustine got A LOT wrong.

 

It fits fine.