Audio and Video for Eschatology Conversation

This is an excellent example of mature debate on a fascinating and difficult subject. I particularly appreciate the effort of the participants to affirm each other and keep the gospel as the central priority. My amillennial views remain intact! Excellent viewing.

From Desiring God:

You can now listen to or watch “An Evening of Eschatology,” a conversation about the end times with John Piper, Doug Wilson, Sam Storms, and Jim Hamilton.

You can also read John Piper’s thoughts on this event for some introduction to the issues being discussed.

Filed under: Amillennialism, Biblical exegesis, Biblical interpretation, Doctrine, Eschatology, John Piper, Sam Storms

The Purpose of Creation, Redemption & Consummation

“The purpose of creation, redemption, and consummation are seen holistically as God’s purpose to glorify Christ by fulfilling the Adamic creation mandate, the universal Noahic promise, the patriarchal covenants, and the Israelite monarchy in Him, thus exalting Jesus as preeminent over the entire cosmos as the agent of creation, the true imago Dei, the Davidic subjugator of all rival powers, the firstborn of the eschatological resurrection from the dead, and the atonement through whom final cosmic peace is found at last (Col. 1:15-23).”

- Russell D. Moore, The Kingdom of Christ (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2004), 108.

(HT: First Importance)

Filed under: Christ our Mediator, Eschatology, Evangelical, Jesus Christ, Redemption

The Kingdom

[T]he Kingdom of God is the redemptive reign of God dynamically active to establish his rule among men, and that this Kingdom, which will appear as an apocalyptic act at the end of the age, has already come into human history in the person and mission of Jesus to overcome evil, to deliver men from its power, and to bring them into the blessings of God’s reign. The Kingdom of God involves two great moments: fulfillment within history, and consummation at the end of history.

~ George Ladd, The Presence of the Future

(HT: Rick Ianniello)

Filed under: Doctrine, Eschatology, God's Kingdom, Jesus Christ, Redemption, Salvation History, The Cross, The word of God

These Last Days

Kim Riddlebarger writes the following in A Case for Amillennialism.

It is clear throughout the New Testament that the “last days” commenced with the coming of Christ and his triumphant resurrection(Acts 2.17; Heb 1.2). These last days are also the time of salvation (2 Cor 6.2), for with the coming christ, the new creation began. The old had gone, and the new had come (2 Cor 5.17). Paul said that certain blessings of “the age to come,” including reconciliation, were won for us by Jesus Christ through his death and resurrection (Rom 4.25; 1 Cor 15.20-28). Paul spoke of these blessings as the present possession of those in union with Christ, for they no longer belong to “the old,” that is, this present evil age. And yet it is equally true that these blessings are not fully realized until the consummation, when creation itself is finally released from bondage (Rom 8.18-25) and when the earthly at last puts on the heavenly (1 Cor 15.53). Paul said, “If we hope for what we do not have, we wait for it patiently” (Rom 8.25). It is the possession of the blessings of the eschatological “not yet” in this evil age that gives Christians hope until these things become a visible reality at the end of the age. In fact, Paul said, God has given us his Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance, which is not a temporal victory in this age but our ultimate redemption (Eph 1.13-14). It is this eschatological dimension that gave Paul a theological basis for the hope Christians need in the face of suffering until this present evil age comes to an end – “the fellowship of sharing in his [Christ's] sufferings” (Phil 3.10). Indeed, we may be, as Paul said, crushed but not perplexed. We are not abandoned or destroyed, though we may be stricken down by our enemies. As Christians, we are to “carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake” (2 Cor 4.7-12).

(HT: Rick Ianniello)

Filed under: Already Not Yet, Amillennialism, Doctrine, Eschatology, Jesus Christ, The word of God

More blessings than Adam lost

A simple sentence from Herman Bavinck, overflowing with truth and an unquantifiable hope:

“Christ’s obedience returns us not to the beginning
but to the end of the road Adam had to walk.”

RD Vol. 2: Sin & Salvation in Christ, p. 326

(HT: Martin Downes)

Filed under: Doctrine, Eschatology, Evangelical, Redemption, Salvation, Union with Christ

The Consummation of the Ages

“The apostles were conscious of standing at the consummation of the ages and were vividly aware that the events that precipitated this watershed in history were the incarnation, obedience, death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus of Nazareth. The coming Messiah fulfilled ancient promises and age-old longings for deep redemption and an eternal Ruler who would reign in holy justice and in mercy. It filled up and filled in previous patterns and shadows in Israel’s communion with her covenant Lord, and this filling process also entailed a transformation of ancient institutions into new forms better suited to more intimate interactions between the King and his joyful subjects.”

Dennis E. Johnson, Him We Proclaim (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2007), 16-17.

(HT: Of First Importance)

Filed under: Doctrine, Eschatology, Evangelical, Jesus Christ, Second Coming, Substitutionary Atonement, The Bible, The Cross, The Incarnation, The word of God

An Amillennial Eschatology Chart!

I like this! Check out the references for your self.

Click Here for larger image

R. Scott Clark recently posted this. This chart illustrates the concurrent events associated with the Second Advent of Christ. i.e. that the resurrection of the just (and unjust) dead, the judgment of all mankind, and the renewal of the entire cosmos will all occur at a point in time: the time of Jesus’ return; the day of the Lord. Could it be so simple and straightforward???

(HT: Reformation Theology)

Filed under: Amillennialism, Doctrine, Eschatology, Eternal Punishment, Eternal judgement, God's Kingdom, Heaven, Second Coming, The word of God

Carson on the Kingdom

This months issue of Evangelicals Now carries an excellent article by DA Carson on the dangers to avoid when seeking to understand the nature of the Kingdom of God. He lists 6 common errors, including a failure to appreciate the tension of the Already Not Yet of Kingdom come and coming. You can read the whole essay here. I reproduce this point for obvious reasons!

Already, but not yet

Indeed, that is the third arena where errors about the kingdom are not uncommon: tensions between the biblical descriptions of inaugurated eschatology (the kingdom has come) and futurist eschatology (the kingdom comes at the end). On the one hand, Jesus tells certain parables of the kingdom in order to get across that the expected ‘big bang’ is not yet. For instance (if I may use the formula much loved by the rabbis when they told their parables, and used by Jesus himself), it is the case with the kingdom as with the soils: there is varying receptivity to the word that is sown, and varying degrees of fruitfulness. The kingdom did not come in instantaneous and utterly effective division. It came slowly, with varying responses. Elsewhere we are told that this side of Jesus’s resurrection and exaltation, all authority in heaven and on earth is his: in other words, Jesus Christ reigns, even though we do not see everything and everyone cheerfully submitted to him.

To use the language of Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, Jesus must reign until he has destroyed all his enemies, the last of those enemies being death itself. So all of the Father’s royal authority is now mediated through Christ: he reigns, even though his reign must be contested until the last enemy is destroyed. All of these images and passages (and there are many more) conjure up a picture of a kingdom already here, already operating, already inaugurated, still contested.

On the other hand, the seer John foresees a time when ‘[t]he kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever’ (Revelation 11.15), when the hosts of darkness face crushing defeat (Revelation 19.11-21); Paul announces a time when every knee will bow (Philippians 2.10-11). Many passages picture believers ‘inheriting’ the kingdom at the end.

There are pastoral implications to this running tension between the ‘already’-reigning kingdom and the ‘not yet’ kingdom. It has been plausibly argued that Corinthian believers were tempted by an over-realised eschatology: already they think of themselves as kings beginning their reign (1 Corinthians 4.8), and thus they have overlooked the call to suffer exemplified by the apostles themselves. By contrast, it appears that some Thessalonians, insufficiently grateful for the gospel blessings they had already received, and eagerly anticipating the coming of the future kingdom which they thought to be right around the corner, could stint on mundane responsibilities, don ascension robes, sit on a hill in California and sing Advent songs. There are negative repercussions to getting the balance of Scripture wrong.

Filed under: Already Not Yet, Christian Ministry, Church, DA Carson, Discipleship, Eschatology, Evangelical, Hermeneutics, Jesus Christ, Second Coming, Suffering, The Christian Life, The Cross, The Gospel, The word of God, Theology

Jesus Christ: The True Israel

Jesus Christ: The True Israel

By Dr. Kim Riddlebarger

If we stand within the field of prophetic vision typical of Israel’s prophets after the exile and captivity, and with them we look to the future, what do we see? Israel’s prophets clearly anticipate a time when Israel will be restored to its former greatness. But will that restoration of the nation of Israel to its former glory mirror the days of the monarchy? Or does the monarchy itself point us to the monarch?

Such a prophetic vision includes not only the nation, but the land of Canaan, the city of Jerusalem, the throne of David, as well as the temple in Jerusalem. Since the nation had been divided and the people were hauled off into captivity in Babylon some five centuries before the coming of Jesus, the magnificent temple destroyed and the priesthood gone, such prophetic expectation related to Israel’s future quite naturally spoke of a reversal of fortune and the undoing of calamity which had come upon the nation.

But with apostolic hindsight Peter speaks of how “concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.” (1 Peter 1:10-12).

In Isaiah 41:8-9, the prophet spoke of a future restoration of Israel in these terms. “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, `You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off.’” The same promise is reiterated in the next chapter of Isaiah (42:1-7), when the LORD declares of his servant, “I am the Lord; I have called you in righteousness; I will take you by the hand and keep you; I will give you as a covenant for the people, a light for the nations”( v. 6). Isaiah continues to speak of this servant in chapters 44 (vv. 1-2) and 45 (v. 4).

Dispensationalists, given their so-called “literal hermeneutic,” are bound to interpret such passages literally, thereby assign the fulfillment of these prophecies of Isaiah to a future earthly millennium in which Israel co-exists with Gentiles under the reign of the Davidic king (See Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, 302-304; and Pentecost, Things to Come, 503-508). In effect, this amounts to the restoration of the monarchy as Jesus takes his place on David’s royal throne and rules the nations from this restored Israel.
But is this how the New Testament interprets these messianic prophecies regarding the servant of the Lord? Who is this servant of the Lord? It is the nation of Israel, or is it Jesus, Israel’s Messiah?

In order to answer this questions, we must see that the gospel writers interpret these prophecies from Isaiah as fulfilled in the messianic mission of Jesus. First, in Matthew 12:15-21, for example, when Jesus withdrew from the crowds who had followed him, Matthew reports that this event fulfilled what had been spoken in Isaiah the prophet. This event serves to demonstrate that Jesus is the true servant of the Lord.

Second, as Jesus cast out demons and healed the sick, Matthew saw in this the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecies of a suffering servant who would take upon himself our infirmities and carry our diseases (Matthew 8:17 with Isaiah 53:4).

Third, in Luke’s gospel, Luke speaks of both Israel (cf. Luke 1:54) and David as the servant of God (Luke 1:69). Yet in Acts, Luke pointedly speaks of Jesus as the servant of God (Acts 3:13). After his crucifixion, God raised Jesus from the dead so that people everywhere might be called to repentance (3:26).

Fourth, when the Ethiopian eunuch hears a reading from Isaiah 53:7-8 and asks Philip about whom this prophecy refers, Luke tells us that Philip informed the Ethiopian that this passage does indeed refer to Jesus (Acts 8:34-35).

But this is not all that is in view here. In Hosea 11:1, Hosea predicted a time when “Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” But in Matthew 2:15, the evangelist tells us that Hosea’s prophecy was fulfilled when his parents took Jesus to Egypt to protect him from Herod’s “slaughter of the innocents” (Matthew 2:3-18). Yet, after Herod had died, God called Jesus and his family to return to Nazareth. Matthew takes a passage from Hosea, which clearly refers to Israel, and tells his reader that this passage is now fulfilled in Jesus Christ! He does this to prove to his largely Jewish audience that Jesus is the servant of the Lord, foretold throughout the Old Testament (especially Isaiah).

By now it should be clear that according to many New Testament writers, Jesus is the true servant, the true son and the true Israel of God. Recall too that it was Isaiah who spoke of Israel and the descendants of Abraham as the people of God. It as through the seed of Abraham that the nations of the earth would be blessed.

Therefore, even as Jesus is the true Israel, he is the true seed of Abraham. This is the point that Paul is making in Galatians 3:7-8, when he says “know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, `In you shall all the nations be blessed.’”

Paul’s words here, are important for several reasons. First, Paul tells us that Abraham believed the very same gospel that he preached to the Gentile Galatians. There has only been one plan of salvation and one gospel from the very beginning. This, of course, raises very serious questions about the dispensational notion of “clearly distinct” redemptive purposes for national Israel and the Gentiles, as is evident when Paul goes on to say in Galatians 3:29, that “if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”

Second, the one gospel promise from the very beginning of redemptive history is that the true children of Abraham, whether they be Jew or Gentile, are heirs of the promise, if they belong to Jesus Christ, the true seed of Abraham. But as Robert Strimple points out, an important word of clarification is certainly in order. “We [amillennarians] say: `Yes, the nation of Israel was the people of God in the old covenant. Now in the new covenant the believing church is the people of God.’ And thus we quickly run past (or we miss the blessed point entirely) the fact that we Christians are the Israel of God, Abraham’s seed, and the heirs to the promises, only because by faith, we are united to him who alone is the true Israel, Abraham’s one seed.” (See Strimple, “Amillennialism,” in Bock, ed., Three Views of the Millennium and Beyond, 89).

The ramifications for this upon one’s millennial view should now be obvious. If Jesus is the true Israel of God, and if the New Testament writers apply to Jesus those Old Testament prophecies referring to Israel as God’s son or servant, then what remains of the dispensationalist’s case that these prophecies remain yet to be fulfilled in a future millennium? They vanish in Jesus Christ, who has fulfilled them!

For more information, Click here: Riddleblog – A Case for Amillennialism – Understanding the End

Filed under: Amillennialism, Eschatology, Hermeneutics, Jesus Christ, New Covenant, The Bible, The glory of Christ, The word of God, Theology

We are the Temple of the Living God!

Sam Storms  on 2 Corinthians 6:16b – 7:1

. 

On the one hand, I don’t want to be guilty of unwarranted exaggeration. On the other, I’m hard-pressed to think of a more theologically important, spiritually encouraging, and eschatologically controversial statement than that of Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:16b. “For we are the temple of the living God”!

.

The starting point for understanding this crucial concept is the Old Testament narrative in which we find the visible manifestation of the splendor of God among his people, the shekinah of God, his majestic and radiant glory without which the Israelites would have been left in the darkness that characterized the Gentile world.

.

Before Solomon’s temple, God revealed his glory in the tent or tabernacle which Moses constructed. It was there that God would come, dwell, and meet with his people. “Let them make me a sanctuary,” the Lord spoke to Moses, “that I may dwell in their midst” (Ex. 25:8). It was there that “the pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the entrance of the tent, and [there that] the Lord would speak with Moses” (Ex. 33:9). It was there that “the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle” (Ex. 40:34). The tabernacle was where the people of Israel would draw near to hear from God, to worship God, and to stand in his presence (cf. Lev. 9:23; Num. 14:10).

.

What was true of the tabernacle during the days of Israel’s sojourn was even more the case in the temple of Solomon. When the Ark of the Covenant was brought “to its place, in the inner sanctuary of the house, in the Most Holy Place, underneath the wings of the cherubim” (2 Chron. 5:7), “the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the house of God” (2 Chron. 5:14).

.

It is against this preparatory backdrop that we read the stunning declaration of John that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). The word translated “dwelt” (skenoo) literally means “to pitch a tent” or “to live in a tabernacle” and unmistakably points back to the OT when God’s glory took up residence in the tent of Moses, the portable tabernacle, and eventually in Solomon’s temple.

.

John’s point is that God has now chosen to dwell with his people in a yet more personal way, in the Word who became flesh: in Jesus! The Word, Jesus of Nazareth, is the true and ultimate shekinah glory of God, the complete and perfect manifestation of the presence of God among his people. The place of God’s glorious dwelling is the flesh of his Son! The glory which once shined in the tent/tabernacle/temple of old, veiled in the mysterious cloud, was simply a foreglow, a mere anticipatory flicker, if you will, of that exceedingly excelling glory now embodied in the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ (cf. Col. 1:19).

.

God no longer lives in a tent or tabernacle built by human hands, nor will he ever. God’s glorious manifest presence is not to be found in an ornate temple of marble, gold, and precious stones, but rather in Jesus. Jesus is the glory of God in human flesh, the one in whom God has finally and fully pitched his tent.

.

The point is that the temple of the Old Covenant was a type or foreshadowing of the glory of Christ. It was the place where the Law of Moses was preserved, of which Jesus is now the fulfillment. It was the place of revelation and relationship, where God met and spoke to his people. Now we hear God and see God and meet God in Jesus. It was the place of sacrifice, where forgiveness of sins was obtained. For that, we now go to Jesus. Israel worshipped and celebrated in the temple in Jerusalem. We now worship in spirit and truth, regardless of geographical locale (cf. John 4:20-26).

.

To meet God, to talk with God, to worship God, you no longer come to a building or a tent or a structure made with human hands. You come to Jesus! Jesus is the Temple of God!

But the story doesn’t end there. We, the church, are the body of Christ and therefore constitute the temple in which God is pleased to dwell. The shekinah of Yahweh now abides permanently and powerfully in us through the Holy Spirit. When Paul describes this in his letter to the Ephesians, he refers to Jesus Christ as the cornerstone, “in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit” (Eph. 2:21-22). Simply put, God’s residence is “neither a literal temple in Jerusalem nor simply heaven, but the Church, of which the Gentile Christian readers in Asia Minor were a part” (Lincoln, 158).

.

This formation of the temple is an on-going divine project, a continuous process (see also Eph. 4:15-16). Although it may seem strange to speak of a “building” experiencing continuous “growth”, Paul surely wants us to conceive of the church as an organic entity. Recall that Peter also refers to believers somewhat paradoxically as “living stones” (1 Peter 2:5)!

.

Again, Paul grounds his appeal to the Corinthians in this truth: “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple” (1 Cor. 3:16-17). In his plea for sexual purity, he again asks: “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body” (1 Cor. 6:19-20; see also the graphic portrayal of this truth in 1 Peter 2:4-10).

.

All this bring us to Paul’s consummate declaration in 2 Corinthians 6:16b: “For we are the temple of the living God”! To reinforce this point he conflates several OT texts (Lev. 26:11-12; Isa. 52:11; Ezek. 11:17; 20:34,41; 2 Sam. 7:14) which prophesied of a coming, end-times temple, one of which is Ezekiel 37:26-27 where God declares: “I will make a covenant of peace with them. It shall be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will set them in their land and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in their midst forevermore. My dwelling place shall be with them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”

.

Let me come straight to the point. Beginning with the incarnation and consummating in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, together with the progressive building of his spiritual body, the Church, God is fulfilling his promise of an eschatological temple in which he will forever dwell.

.

But what of the literal, physical temple in Jerusalem? Has it lost its spiritual significance in God’s redemptive purposes? To answer this we must return to Jesus’ words in Matthew 23-24.

.

In judgment against the Jewish people, the temple complex was abandoned by our Lord, both physically and spiritually, as he departed and made his way to the Mount of Olives. “Your house,” said Jesus, “is left to you desolate” (Mt. 23:38). It has thus ceased to be “God’s” house. When Jesus died and “the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom” (Mt. 27:51), God forever ceased to bless it with his presence or to acknowledge it as anything other than ichabod (the glory has departed).

.

Just as dramatically as Jesus had entered Jerusalem (Mt. 21:1-17, the so-called “Triumphal Entry”) and its temple, he now departs. This once grand and glorious house of God is now consigned exclusively to them (“See, your house is left to you desolate,” Mt. 23:38). The echoes of God’s withdrawal from the temple in Ezekiel’s vision reverberate in the words of our Lord (see Ezek. 10:18-19; 11:22-23). The ultimate physical destruction of the temple by the Romans in 70 a.d. is but the outward consummation of God’s spiritual repudiation of it. Jesus has now left, never to return. Indeed, the action of Jesus in departing the temple and taking his seat on the Mount of Olives (Mt. 24:3) recalls Ezekiel 11:23 where we read that “the glory of the Lord went up from the midst of the city and stood on the mountain that is on the east side of the c ity.”

.

This applies equally to any supposed future temple that many believe will be built in Jerusalem in the general vicinity where the Dome of the Rock now stands. It’s entirely possible, of course, that people in Israel may one day build a temple structure and resume their religious activities within it. The political and military implications of such, not to mention the religious furor it would provoke, are obvious.

.

Whether or not this will ever occur is hard to say, but if it does it will have no eschatological or theological significance whatsoever, other than to rise up as a stench in the nostrils of God. The only temple in which God is now and forever will be pleased to dwell is Jesus Christ and the Church, his spiritual body.

.

It would be an egregious expression of the worst imaginable redemptive regression to suggest that God would ever sanction the rebuilding of the temple. It would be tantamount to a denial that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. It would constitute a repudiation of the Church as the temple of God and thus an affront to the explicit affirmation of Paul here in 2 Corinthians 6 and elsewhere.

.

Finally, let’s not lose sight of the practical point Paul is making. It is because we as the church are the place of God’s presence in the world today that we must guard ourselves against any and every expression of idolatry. We are not simply another cultural institution or “social service meeting the felt needs” of our neighbors. “Instead, as the new covenant people of God, the church is the ‘family of God’ united by a common identity in Christ and gathered around her common worship and fear of ‘the Lord Almighty’” (Hafemann, 292). May our lives always reflect that glorious and gracious identity. 

Filed under: Church, Discipleship, Eschatology, Evangelical, God's Glory, Grace, Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ, New Covenant, Salvation, Sam Storms, Sanctification, The Bible, The Christian Life, The Cross, The Gospel, The glory of Christ, The word of God, Truth, Worship

Eschatology Q & A: What Are the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Different Millennial Views?

This is a very helpful article on the Millennial views by Kim Riddlebarger.

Lëmi asks (October 31, 2007): “Could you explain briefly all the millennial positions pointing out their main strengths and weaknesses?”

Thanks for the question Lëmi. Although I could write a book-length answer to your question (and hopefully will one of these days), I’ll do what I can to give you as concise an answer as possible.

Lets start with premillennialism. As for its strengths, there seem to be two. One is the fact that Revelation 19 depicts the return of Christ, while Revelation 20:1-10 depicts the reign of Christ on the earth. If these chapters describe consecutive events (a point with which I would take issue) then this would place the millennial age after Christ’s return. A second apparent strength is that a number of church fathers state that this was the teaching passed on to them by the eyewitnesses to the ministry of the apostles, although this was not the only view in the early church (see Charles Hill’s Regnun Caelorum)–Click here: Amazon.com: Regnum Caelorum: Patterns of Millennial Thought in Early Christianity: Books: Charles E. Hill

There are several serious weaknesses with premillennialism. The first weakness is that premillenniarians have to explain how it is that people make it through the return of Christ and yet remain in natural bodies. Jesus taught that his return marks the end of the age (Matthew 13:39) and that after his return, people no longer marry or are given in marriage (Luke 20:34-36). At Christ’s return, he judges the world, making it tough for someone to be judged and yet not eternally condemned or rewarded with eternal life (Matthew 25:31-46). This is especially problematic for premillennarians, since they claim that their view is based upon a “literal” interpretation of prophecy. Where, then, is the one-thousand year gap between the return of Christ and the judgment (which, according to premillennarians takes place at the end of the millennium) when Jesus teaches that judgment takes place at his return? Those who take the Bible “literally” find themselves having to insert a gap into the biblical text which isn’t there.

The other problem with premillennialism is, if it be true, there is a great apostasy on the earth after one thousand years of Christ’s rule (Revelation 20:7-10). If there cannot be people on earth in natural bodies during the thousand years (which supposedly comes after Christ returns), then who are the people who revolt against Christ at the end of the millennium? And that after Christ’s own rule? It makes much more sense to see Revelation 20:1-10 as a description of the entire inter-advental age, since the scene takes place in heaven where the thrones are (vv. 1-6), before shifting to the earth in verses 7-10.

As for dispensational premillennialism, both the strengths and weaknesses of premillennialism generally apply. But if we consider dispenationalism on its own terms, its main strength is a stress upon progressive revelation (the careful consideration of how God interacts with his people throughout the different stages of redemptive history). We can also say that one of its strengths is its emphasis upon the imminent return of Christ.

As for weaknesses, there are many. One is that the presuppositions of dispensationalism (which, despite protests to the contrary, is a hermeneutic) cannot be sustained. The belief that God has distinct redemptive purposes for Israel and for the Gentiles is highly problematic in light of a text like Ephesians 2:11-22. Another serious problem with dispensationalism is the way in which the “literal interpretation” of Scripture is worked out in practice. The dispensational stress upon “literalism” actually amounts to an Israel-centered hermeneutic, largely taken from the Old Testament prophets which then predetermines what the New Testament authors can tell us about Israel.

As I have argued elsewhere (Click here: Riddleblog – A Reply to John MacArthur), this approach is seriously flawed. The New Testament presents a Christ-centered reading of redemptive history and reinterprets the place of Israel in that redemptive history in light of the coming of Jesus Christ, who is the true Israel.

As for postmillennialism, remember that both postmillennarians and amillennarians hold in common the idea that the millennial age precedes the return of Christ and the consummation. So the structural strengths and weaknesses of each will be similar. The essential difference between postmillennialism and amillennialism is in how we understand the nature and character of the millennial age.

Postmillennialism’s greatest strength is the rhetorical stress upon optimism regarding the kingdom of God and its ability to transform the nations of the earth before Christ returns. Postmillennarians extend the kingdom of God beyond spiritual matters (word and sacrament) to the transformation of culture–a point with which I would disagree. Postmillennarians generally believe that Jesus returns to a saved earth, he does not return to save the earth (as amillennarians believe).

This means that the biggest weakness of postmillennialism is the determination of the beginning of the millennial age–”when do the thousand years begin?” Some have seen this in the conversion of Israel, the overthrow of Antichrist (usually defined as Romanism or Islam) and the conversion of the nations. Obviously, these things have not yet happened. Therefore, the biggest weakness of postmillennialism is the denial of an imminent return of Christ–which explains why so many postmillennarians are attracted to preterism, the understanding Christ returned in judgment upon Israel in A.D. 70.

As for amillennialism, it has no weaknesses whatsoever, since it is the biblical position (I’m being facetious). In all seriousness, Amillennialism’s strength is its understanding that imminent return of Christ is the consummation of all things and marks the fullness of both the kingdom of God and the age to come. Christ will return to judge the world (Matthew 13:36-43; Matthew 25:31-46; 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9), raise the dead (1 Thessalonians 4:14-17; 1 Corinthians 15:54-57) and make all things new (2 Peter 3:3-15). He does not return to set up a kingdom (as in premillennialism), but to usher in the eternal state and create a new heaven and earth–the final consummation.

The biggest weakness of amillennialism is in the details–what does John mean by the binding of Satan? Can we really say Satan is bound now? (I say “yes”). What about the first resurrection in Revelation 20? Is John referring to regeneration, or the bodily resurrection? These things require a fair amount of explanation, especially since most American evangelicals know only the premillennial view.

That’s a very brief answer. For more information, I would suggest my two books: A Case for Amillennialism (Click here: Riddleblog – A Case for Amillennialism – Understanding the End), and Man of Sin (Click here: Riddleblog – Man of Sin – Uncovering the Truth About Antichrist), or the book by Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Click here: Amazon.com: The Bible and the Future: Books: Anthony A. Hoekema)

Filed under: Eschatology, Evangelical, Hermeneutics, Jesus Christ, New Testament, Reformed, Second Coming, Sovereignty of God, The Bible, The Gospel, The glory of Christ, The word of God