-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Amillennialism
- Thread starter Amy.G
- Start date
- Status
Well, it means no millennial kingdom. Christ comes back, judges everyone, and the Kingdom of God/NH-NE-NJ is instituted.Amy.G said:What is it and do you adhere to it?
(I know there have been other threads on it ((I did a search)), but I want to participate)
Do I believe it? NO! It "skips" a lot of steps in God's program and covenants.
Amy, at a minimum there is OT, NT, MK (Christ's kingdom) and then God's kingdom in the recreated earth (Christ's kingdom "delivered up to God" 1Cor 15:24).
But many theologies are willing to "erase" the distinctions that God has put there and believe in one covenant and one purpose and one people. That is what it all comes to but it's a little more complicated than they make if out to be.
skypair
From what I've read so far, Amillennialists do believe in the MK, but they believe that it is going on now (in heaven) and the 1000 years is figurative. The MK will continue 'til Christ's return.skypair said:
I'll check back later to see if we have any Amil's on the BB.
(gotta make dinner...AGAIN! Why do these people have to eat everyday? :laugh: )
Actually it started in 70 AD on earth to many. :thumbs:
DeafPosttrib
New Member
Hello everyone.
Myself used be premill for many years. Now I am Amill.
I would like to explaining you why my beliefs has changed. Back in year 2000. I was studying Eschatology on rapture timing. At first, I was pretrib in my beginning Christian life back to 1989. I though pretribulational is biblical. Because I was invited to an independent fundamental baptist church by old friend. IFB people saying, "I am a Bible believer", because they use KJV, and claim, they always follow the Bible 100% with doctrines. I was learning pretribulationism, because of what Baptists teaching. I thought it is biblical and truth.
One day, I visited old deaf couple's house(they were member of that Baptist church, which I was used as member there before). They asked me, when rapture will occurs? I told them, rapture before tribulation. They told me, they believe rapture after tribulation. I was shocked of them. Because I noticed almost all Baptists believe in pretribulation. I did debate with them on rapture. They want me to read 2 Thess. 2:1-3. I said to them, ok, I am reading it and sign language same time while reading it, as I said to them, "When I read them, I MUST agree and follow what God's Word saying."
When I read 2 Thess. 2:1-3. Verse 3 that hit me so hard. I understand verse 3 very clear. I cannot argue with verse 3.
Then, they want me to read Matt. 24:29-31. Then, I told them the same thing.
When I read Matt. 24:29-31. Verse 31 that hit me hard. I told them, that verse 31 tells the same thing with 1 Thess 4:16-17 about gathering.
I told them, I have to study Bible and commentatories on rapture at home, I will be right back and tell them what I have study them.
I have been studying Bible and books on rapture spent many hours all day till 1:30 a.m. Finally, at last I determined left pretrib camp for good, and realized that Bible is clear telling us that we must face tribulation first before our gathering. I left pretrib camp in year 1992.
But, I wa still premill during in that period.
Till year 2000, I started to digging deeper on God's word on Eschatology.
While studying Bible. Matthew 25:31-46 caused me trouble the mostly whilst myself was premill. Matt 25:31-46 tells me clearly, when Christ shall come with angels, angels will separate believers aparted from unbelievers from all nations. And bring them to face before Christ sits on throne. This is very picture of Great White Throne. And there is no "a thousand years" mentioned in Matthew 25:31-46.
Also, another passage in John 6:39.40. 44, and 54; that passage bother me mostly. Christ ells us, the resurrection shall be on the LAST day.
Pretrib teaching that the resurrection shall be 7 years earlier before Second Advent. That is about 2,700 days aparted between "Rapture" and "Second Adevnt". But, that passage clearly telling us, the resurrection shall be on the LAST day. I understand, "last day" simple mean it will be on the last day of humankind era- "end of the world", that shall be follow at Second Advent.
Even, also, John 6:39,40, 44, & 54 did not say, there will be 1000 years aparted. That passage telling us, resurrection shall be on the LAST day. I notice in the four gospels, Christ never teaching them of 'a thousand years'. Clear, Christ doesn't teaching premill doctrine.
Also, in John 5:28-29 telling us very clear, WHEN the "hour" is come, both believers and unbelievers in their graves, all shall hear Christ's voice. All shall be raise out of graves, some go into everlasting life, some go into everlasting punishment. This is very clear of ONE resurrection event, and one judgment day. This passage didn't saying anything of 'a thousand years'.
I better stop this post. I better continue discuss this post into part two in another post. To be continued...
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
Myself used be premill for many years. Now I am Amill.
I would like to explaining you why my beliefs has changed. Back in year 2000. I was studying Eschatology on rapture timing. At first, I was pretrib in my beginning Christian life back to 1989. I though pretribulational is biblical. Because I was invited to an independent fundamental baptist church by old friend. IFB people saying, "I am a Bible believer", because they use KJV, and claim, they always follow the Bible 100% with doctrines. I was learning pretribulationism, because of what Baptists teaching. I thought it is biblical and truth.
One day, I visited old deaf couple's house(they were member of that Baptist church, which I was used as member there before). They asked me, when rapture will occurs? I told them, rapture before tribulation. They told me, they believe rapture after tribulation. I was shocked of them. Because I noticed almost all Baptists believe in pretribulation. I did debate with them on rapture. They want me to read 2 Thess. 2:1-3. I said to them, ok, I am reading it and sign language same time while reading it, as I said to them, "When I read them, I MUST agree and follow what God's Word saying."
When I read 2 Thess. 2:1-3. Verse 3 that hit me so hard. I understand verse 3 very clear. I cannot argue with verse 3.
Then, they want me to read Matt. 24:29-31. Then, I told them the same thing.
When I read Matt. 24:29-31. Verse 31 that hit me hard. I told them, that verse 31 tells the same thing with 1 Thess 4:16-17 about gathering.
I told them, I have to study Bible and commentatories on rapture at home, I will be right back and tell them what I have study them.
I have been studying Bible and books on rapture spent many hours all day till 1:30 a.m. Finally, at last I determined left pretrib camp for good, and realized that Bible is clear telling us that we must face tribulation first before our gathering. I left pretrib camp in year 1992.
But, I wa still premill during in that period.
Till year 2000, I started to digging deeper on God's word on Eschatology.
While studying Bible. Matthew 25:31-46 caused me trouble the mostly whilst myself was premill. Matt 25:31-46 tells me clearly, when Christ shall come with angels, angels will separate believers aparted from unbelievers from all nations. And bring them to face before Christ sits on throne. This is very picture of Great White Throne. And there is no "a thousand years" mentioned in Matthew 25:31-46.
Also, another passage in John 6:39.40. 44, and 54; that passage bother me mostly. Christ ells us, the resurrection shall be on the LAST day.
Pretrib teaching that the resurrection shall be 7 years earlier before Second Advent. That is about 2,700 days aparted between "Rapture" and "Second Adevnt". But, that passage clearly telling us, the resurrection shall be on the LAST day. I understand, "last day" simple mean it will be on the last day of humankind era- "end of the world", that shall be follow at Second Advent.
Even, also, John 6:39,40, 44, & 54 did not say, there will be 1000 years aparted. That passage telling us, resurrection shall be on the LAST day. I notice in the four gospels, Christ never teaching them of 'a thousand years'. Clear, Christ doesn't teaching premill doctrine.
Also, in John 5:28-29 telling us very clear, WHEN the "hour" is come, both believers and unbelievers in their graves, all shall hear Christ's voice. All shall be raise out of graves, some go into everlasting life, some go into everlasting punishment. This is very clear of ONE resurrection event, and one judgment day. This passage didn't saying anything of 'a thousand years'.
I better stop this post. I better continue discuss this post into part two in another post. To be continued...
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
The more appropriate title for this view of eschatology is Realized Millennialism. We believe the Kingdom of God began with Jesus' ascension and His sitting on the throne (of the Kingdom) at the right hand of God ruling the kingdom, the devil has been bound or limited in his powers on earth and that there is one second coming at which time the Christ will judge the saved and the unsaved.
There are far more details, but that is it in a nutshell. The viewpoint is mainly held by reformers. A goodly number of Baptists in Canada hold to amillennialism and it was taught in the major Baptist theological seminary here.
The current schools are mainly led by graduates of Dallas Seminary and hence the dispensational viewpoint has reared its head quite strongly in recent years.
Cheers,
Jim
There are far more details, but that is it in a nutshell. The viewpoint is mainly held by reformers. A goodly number of Baptists in Canada hold to amillennialism and it was taught in the major Baptist theological seminary here.
The current schools are mainly led by graduates of Dallas Seminary and hence the dispensational viewpoint has reared its head quite strongly in recent years.
Cheers,
Jim
The devil has been bound in the sense that he has limited powers under the sovereign Christ. If he wasn't bound to some degree we would be very limited in our lives and the preaching of the gospel.
Cheers,
Jim
A very good book covering all 4 viewpoints written by capable men is: The Meaning of the Millennium by InterVarsity Press. All 4 men are very capable proponents of their respective viewpoints. The book was written in 1977, but hopefully is still in print
Cheers,
Jim
A very good book covering all 4 viewpoints written by capable men is: The Meaning of the Millennium by InterVarsity Press. All 4 men are very capable proponents of their respective viewpoints. The book was written in 1977, but hopefully is still in print
Thanks Jim. I'll look it up.Jim1999 said:
So, you're saying that being "bound" doesn't take away all of Satan's influence (he is still tempting us, for example), but the gospel couldn't be spread if he had full freedom? How does that square with this verse?
1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
How can the devil be walking around if he is bound? Or is bound not in the literal sense? God has restricted him somehow?
When we see the word "bound" we instantly see a man completely wrapped about with rope or chains so that he cannot move anywhere. In scripture "bound" has another meaning. Rev 20: 1-3..Satan will not be able to deceive the nations as he did in past history and Christ's disciples will be able to preach the gospel and make disciples of all nations.......my paraphrase of those verses. When the gospel period is over, Satan will again be loosened (verses 7-9) and once more able to deceive the nations and create havoc...THis he could not do whilst bound.
Matthew 12:29, when the pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons by the power of Satan, Jesus responded: "How can one enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?" Incidentally, the same word is used here for binding the strong man as is used in Rev 20 for the binding of Satan.
Cheers,
Jim
Matthew 12:29, when the pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons by the power of Satan, Jesus responded: "How can one enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?" Incidentally, the same word is used here for binding the strong man as is used in Rev 20 for the binding of Satan.
Cheers,
Jim
Jim, I really appreciate you talking with me about this. I'm not debating you. I'm just full of questions.Jim1999 said:
I have led a sheltered life and am just now learning about the different views of eschatology. It's really enjoyable too, I might add.Back to the binding of Satan, the Bible says that an angel bound him in chains and threw him into the pit. What do the chains and the pit represent? Is he physically there? If so, how does he influence the world? Sorry to ask so many questions. :saint:
DeafPosttrib
New Member
Tonight, I will post to discuss deep on Revelation chapter 20. Premills always emphasis on Revelation chapter that, it tells us there will be a future literal a thousand years on earth because of "a thousand years" or "the thousand years" saying so. I will discuss on Revelation chapter 20, what it is talking about-tonight. Because I am off from work.
By the way, we are aware that, all 65 books in the Bible did not mentioned 'a thousand years' or 'the thousand years'. Revelation chapter 20 is the only ONE chapter or six verses that mentioned of 'a thousand years' or 'the thousand years'.
Suppose, if book of Revelation was not written, then, the rest of 65 books of Bible would have easily teaching amillennial.
In other words, I am sure that premills would argue toward to amills, 'Why not we tear book of Revelation out of the Bible?' Or, 'Why not tear chapter 20 out of Revelation from Bible?'
This is a poor arguement.
Later, I will discuss on Revelation chapter 20 with deep meanings and understanding of spiritual meanings.
Right now, I am working on next post on Revelation chapter 20. Please be patience with me.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
By the way, we are aware that, all 65 books in the Bible did not mentioned 'a thousand years' or 'the thousand years'. Revelation chapter 20 is the only ONE chapter or six verses that mentioned of 'a thousand years' or 'the thousand years'.
Suppose, if book of Revelation was not written, then, the rest of 65 books of Bible would have easily teaching amillennial.
In other words, I am sure that premills would argue toward to amills, 'Why not we tear book of Revelation out of the Bible?' Or, 'Why not tear chapter 20 out of Revelation from Bible?'
This is a poor arguement.
Later, I will discuss on Revelation chapter 20 with deep meanings and understanding of spiritual meanings.
Right now, I am working on next post on Revelation chapter 20. Please be patience with me.
In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
ReformedBaptist
Well-Known Member
DeafPosttrib said:
Where is post 2!!! :laugh:
Marcia
Active Member
As I said on another thread (I think the one on History of Dispensational Theology), I do not think that Satan is bound at all. He is quite active and it seems to me that there is more and more deception each day.
If he is bound now, does that mean he was in charge before? Satan has always been limited because he's a creature and God has him on a leash. But for sure he is not bound now.
Didn't the Reformers take amillieniaism (sp!) from the Catholics, just like they took infant baptism? Luther was not trying to leave Catholicism, he was trying to reform it. I appreciate Luther and the Reformers, but I am not going with all their theology just because they were the Reformers.
If he is bound now, does that mean he was in charge before? Satan has always been limited because he's a creature and God has him on a leash. But for sure he is not bound now.
Didn't the Reformers take amillieniaism (sp!) from the Catholics, just like they took infant baptism? Luther was not trying to leave Catholicism, he was trying to reform it. I appreciate Luther and the Reformers, but I am not going with all their theology just because they were the Reformers.
Hi Marcia. I'm not for or against the Amil position. I'm just trying to learn all the different views. As far as Satan being bound, it does seem there is a difference today in his workings from that of Jesus' time. We do not see all the demon possessions that were common 2000 years ago, although I know some claim it happens. Just a thought.Marcia said:
Marcia
Active Member
Amy.G said:
Amy, did you read the scriptures I posted on the other thread? I was saying that Satan's power is lessened for believers, but not unbelievers, but still we are warned. If Satan is bound, we'd have to disregard all those scriptures in the NT warning us against his schemes and deceptions.
I think the demons were more active when Jesus incarnated - they knew who he was and were actively trying to keep people from knowing Him. That is why I think we see a lot of demon possession in the Gospels.
Bound does not mean he's just a little less active - if that's all it means then there is not much meaning to the concept, imo.
I know you are exploring but I just want to make some points.
Amills think that the MK is now. I see no evidence for that.
- Status