What makes one's eschatology good?

[Greektim]

In my opinion, it is less about hermeneutics and more about biblical theology or the theological motif that runs throughout both the OT and NT. Yes that means reading the Bible w/ continuity rather than discontinuity.

The best eschatology is one that coheres with a sound protology that will inevitably flow into a spectacular display of redemptive history climaxing at the cross and culminating all parts of the story. In essence then, eschatology is only as good as the biblical theological storyline it completes. If it is isolated in a vacuum away from the storyline of Scripture, it is nothing more than flights of fancy that will inevitably lead to misunderstandings about the purpose of God’s movement towards the end.

What say you?

 

[preachinjesus]

One that remains theologically humble in light of the historical reality of massive disagreement over the nature of the return of Christ while upholding the reality of His actual return.

That's what I would say.

 

[Revmitchell]

while upholding the reality of His actual return.

Bingo!.............

 

[Yeshua1]

In my opinion, it is less about hermeneutics and more about biblical theology or the theological motif that runs throughout both the OT and NT. Yes that means reading the Bible w/ continuity rather than discontinuity.

The best eschatology is one that coheres with a sound protology that will inevitably flow into a spectacular display of redemptive history climaxing at the cross and culminating all parts of the story. In essence then, eschatology is only as good as the biblical theological storyline it completes. If it is isolated in a vacuum away from the storyline of Scripture, it is nothing more than flights of fancy that will inevitably lead to misunderstandings about the purpose of God’s movement towards the end.

What say you?

ALL views are acceptable, within orthodox view except for full pretierist/realized fully eschatology!

THAT view been seen as outside orthodoxy by historical church!

 

[Bluefalcon]

If he is a fightin fundie, dispensational, pre-mil, pre-trib.

 

[Greektim]

ALL views are acceptable, within orthodox view except for full pretierist/realized fully eschatology!

THAT view been seen as outside orthodoxy by historical church!

Didn't ask for acceptable... I asked for good.

 

[Yeshua1]

Didn't ask for acceptable... I asked for good.

Any that has jesus having a MIllinium reign upon the earth at His Coming!

 

[Luke2427]

In my opinion, it is less about hermeneutics and more about biblical theology or the theological motif that runs throughout both the OT and NT. Yes that means reading the Bible w/ continuity rather than discontinuity.

The best eschatology is one that coheres with a sound protology that will inevitably flow into a spectacular display of redemptive history climaxing at the cross and culminating all parts of the story. In essence then, eschatology is only as good as the biblical theological storyline it completes. If it is isolated in a vacuum away from the storyline of Scripture, it is nothing more than flights of fancy that will inevitably lead to misunderstandings about the purpose of God’s movement towards the end.

What say you?

If it does not chop the Bible and human history up into numerous unconnected pieces like a cleaver-happy butcher- that would be a good thing.

In other words, if your eschatology comes from dispensationalism it is HORRENDOUS!!

 

[Greektim]

Any that has jesus having a MIllinium reign upon the earth at His Coming!

Not sure if you jest... but you are saying that a presupposed conclusion must be forced for eschatology to be good. That is scary, even if there really is a millennium.

 

[DrJamesAch]

Not sure if you jest... but you are saying that a presupposed conclusion must be forced for eschatology to be good. That is scary, even if there really is a millennium.

Isn't saying for a fact that there is no millennium a presupposed conclusion?

 

[DrJamesAch]

If it does not chop the Bible and human history up into numerous unconnected pieces like a cleaver-happy butcher- that would be a good thing.

In other words, if your eschatology comes from dispensationalism it is HORRENDOUS!!

So in other words, there's no difference between the Old and New Testaments.
In other words, we are still under the law.
In other words, the church lives by the Davadic Covenant.
In other words, there's no coming tribulation, no antichrist, no second coming of Christ, and no millennium and no rapture (pre, mid , or post).
In other words, we are still under the covenant of circumcision

Gotcha!:thumbsup:

 

[Greektim]

Isn't saying for a fact that there is no millennium a presupposed conclusion?

I you look at the OP, I've said neither. That is not the goal or culmination of Scripture.

 

[Greektim]

So in other words, there's no difference between the Old and New Testaments.
In other words, we are still under the law.
In other words, the church lives by the Davadic Covenant.
In other words, there's no coming tribulation, no antichrist, no second coming of Christ, and no millennium and no rapture (pre, mid , or post).
In other words, we are still under the covenant of circumcision

Gotcha!:thumbsup:

Or you could try to understand what he means.

The NT is continuing Israel's story as opposed to being an interregnum of their story. So the Law can find its completion in Jesus and still continue the story, the church being Israel redefined around Jesus rather than ethnicity. But the mission is the same for redefined Israel as it is for OT Israel--to bless the nations.

 

[Yeshua1]

Or you could try to understand what he means.

The NT is continuing Israel's story as opposed to being an interregnum of their story. So the Law can find its completion in Jesus and still continue the story, the church being Israel redefined around Jesus rather than ethnicity. But the mission is the same for redefined Israel as it is for OT Israel--to bless the nations.

understand that is what you think, but just think that God has not fully cast away national jews/isreal, nor refefine that to mean "Church!"

 

[Greektim]

understand that is what you think, but just think that God has not fully cast away national jews/isreal, nor refefine that to mean "Church!"

It is... but I also believe it is the hallmark of an eschatology worth its salt. Israel has a prominent place in the drama of Scripture. But how that comes about in the NT is remarkably different. Jesus is presented as Israel and gathering around him 12 disciples to indicate it is defined around him rather than ethnicity. When seen in this light, along with the truth that Israel's covenants have been fulfilled in Jesus, there is no more use for a national/ethnic Israel to fulfill the mission of God. That is mainly why I converted to Amillism.

 

[Yeshua1]

It is... but I also believe it is the hallmark of an eschatology worth its salt. Israel has a prominent place in the drama of Scripture. But how that comes about in the NT is remarkably different. Jesus is presented as Israel and gathering around him 12 disciples to indicate it is defined around him rather than ethnicity. When seen in this light, along with the truth that Israel's covenants have been fulfilled in Jesus, there is no more use for a national/ethnic Israel to fulfill the mission of God. That is mainly why I converted to Amillism.

understand, but that would requie one to spiritualizeall the prophetic textsregarding end times, future Kingdomunder messiah on earth etc right?

 

[Greektim]

understand, but that would requie one to spiritualizeall the prophetic textsregarding end times, future Kingdomunder messiah on earth etc right?

Jesus himself! What I mean by that is he is presented as fulfilling all of those texts (which seems strange to literalist), but that is something Paul confirms in 2 Cor. 1:20.

Jesus method of interpretation was centered around himself as being fulfilled. He interpreted OT Scriptures messianically seeing things fulfilled in a non literal fashion. The apostles do the same thing when they use the OT in the NT.

And the kingdom concept takes its roots farther back than Israel. Gen. 1-2 has at its center the kingdom of God. Adam is the first king/priest. So the kingdom expected is one in which fulfills the Adamic mission.

So this isn't about spiritualization. It is about picking up the themes and trajectories begun in Gen.