Featured Premillennium, Amillennium, Postmillennium

I voted "Amillennium" because that's the closest to my view. To be completely honest, I hold a "Partial Preterist" view of prophecy, where I believe that most (but not all) prophecy was fulfilled in the Jewish War, ending with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (AD 66-70). I don't believe Revelation 20 speaks of a literal 1,000 years, but of a very long period of time. Having said that, and acknowledging that I am in the minority, I'm not here to change anyone's view.

[EDIT] - I forgot to answer the question about resources. I recommend "Last Days Madness" by Gary DeMar, "The Last Days According to Jesus" by R.C. Sproul, and "When Jerusalem Fell" by Ken Gentry.

 

Was fervent Pre trib Rapture/Pre Mil, now historical preMil..
book that impacted me was actually NT Theology of GE Ladd!

 

You do see a future second coming, and a future physical bodily resurrection event, correct?

 

What's the difference in those views, if you don't mind my asking?

 

Yes to both parts of your question.

 

The first would be what is called Dispy theology, which would hold to God removing His church out right before the Great tribulation of last days hits, while my present view sees the Christians still here, but protected by God just as the Israelites were in Egypt during the Plagues...

 

"Things to Come" Dwight Pentecost
"Revelation-unlocking the future" Edward Hinson
"Revelation Unveiled" Tim Lahaye

 

Thank you. There are so many different views regarding the End Times that it can be difficult to keep them straight.

 

I am covenant premil, which means do see Spiritual Israel as the Church today, but unlike many reformed, do also see God still dealing with the Jews at end of this Age, as those still living will receive Jesus as their Messiah at His second coming!

 

I'm Amil with heavy leanings to historical partial preterist... My favorite author by far is Josephus, which I am reading now... I've waded through every view and personally for me and I know it is not everyone this suits me just fine... I'm waiting for the resurrection but the thousand year reign, not so much but as I say to each his own... Brother Glen

 

I am amillennial, and not very preterist.
The church that I was saved at was a bit vague on eschatology, but was broadly Dispensational. When I first heard that view preached it didn't seem to square with texts like 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 2 Peter 3, and I was exceedingly puzzled by Revelation The book that put me right was More than Conquerors by William Hendrickson. I strongly recommend it to get the hang of the structure of Revelation.

 

I hold to a premillennium view. That the dead in Christ are raised to rule in the millinnium (Revelation 20:4-6). That the rapture will not take place untill the dead in Christ have been risen. 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17. Hebrews 9:28. Acts of the Apostles 1:11. Titus 2:13. 1 John 3:2.

 

For the most part I am (or have been) pre-millennial but I can see mid or post millennial in order to cleanse the church by passing it through the fire of the Great Tribulation.

 

Since the very nature of the tribulation is the pooring out of Gods wrath its not possible that the church participates in it.

 

Maybe not...

1 Peter 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

Mid tribulation is a possibility. The "Great" tribulation presumably starts there according to Walvoord (I believe) during which time the wrath of God actually begins.

 

We talk about what that judgment means but it cannot mean suffering Gods wrath.

2 Thess refutes a mid position

 

Not necessarily, no reference to the tribulation point in time is made.

 

Pre-mil/pre-trib and non-ultra dispensational. Salvation has always been "by faith...through grace." However, as God gave additional revelation to humankind, He set different tasks before them to serve as "schoolmaster" (Gal. 2:24-25), that would show us - by our inevitable failures - that our works were useless and unacceptable to God unless we believed by faith - in His promise and future Christ (OT) then in Christ Himself.
I enjoyed Stewart Custer's commentary, "From Patmos to Paradise" (though I think his commentary on Acts is even better.) I also learned a lot about the differing positions on eschatology from "Revelation - Four Views: A Parallel Commentary" by Steve Gregg. Four conclusions I draw from the latter:
--Eschatology is separate from soteriology, except perhaps at the utter extremes.
--Those from each view can cite numerous supporting texts; each are also confronted with texts problematic for their view.
--There is considerable variation within each of the views, and probably the most variation within preterism and historic.
--Unless there are other, major, doctrinal differences, Christians should not reject fellowship over eschatology.

 

Agreed.