Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non-Nicene, non-Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
Brother Jason

Best Arguments Against Premillennialism

Recommended Posts

Hello all. I abandoned my premillennial eschatology over two years ago but have recently returned to it. I don't want to accept a theology for a second time only to find out later that I was wrong (yet again). So I thought I'd come into the amillennial forum to ask you for your best arguments against premillennialism. I'm sure you all have objections to premillnnialism, so if you would kindly share with me what you feel are the best knock-down arguments against it so I can evaluate them now and see if there's any good reasons not to adopt that eschatological framework, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. :RpS_biggrin:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Hello all. I abandoned my premillennial eschatology over two years ago but have recently returned to it. I don't want to accept a theology for a second time only to find out later that I was wrong (yet again). So I thought I'd come into the amillennial forum to ask you for your best arguments against premillennialism. I'm sure you all have objections to premillnnialism, so if you would kindly share with me what you feel are the best knock-down arguments against it so I can evaluate them now and see if there's any good reasons not to adopt that eschatological framework, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. :RpS_biggrin:

 

Hello Brother Jason,

 

Please read my recent blog "THE STATE OF THE DEAD" for some of your answers.

 

Yours.

 

Deade

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I am a premillennialist, but by grace the management lets me stay despite my short comings. I much rather be wrong on eschatology as a host of other doctrines.

 

As the bible says, "Live long and prosper" (or was that Spock?) :RpS_rolleyes:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
I am a premillennialist, but by grace the management lets me stay despite my short comings. I much rather be wrong on eschatology as a host of other doctrines.

 

As the bible says, "Live long and prosper" (or was that Spock?) :RpS_rolleyes:

That was Spock -- Star Trek -- good , Fun sci-fi -- as one premillennialist to another -- good choice. (seems that the emoticons won't work on 'here'. So. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Hello all. I abandoned my premillennial eschatology over two years ago but have recently returned to it. I don't want to accept a theology for a second time only to find out later that I was wrong (yet again). So I thought I'd come into the amillennial forum to ask you for your best arguments against premillennialism. I'm sure you all have objections to premillnnialism, so if you would kindly share with me what you feel are the best knock-down arguments against it so I can evaluate them now and see if there's any good reasons not to adopt that eschatological framework, I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. :RpS_biggrin:

 

Hello Brother Jason,

 

Please read my recent blog "THE STATE OF THE DEAD" for some of your answers.

 

Yours.

 

Deade

 

New blog out "White Throne Judgement." Some same topics covered.

 

Deade

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Topics

    • Best arguments for Covenant/Household Baptism

      Really short version by JTB.SDG:   1) The covenant promises to Abraham were about salvation in the fullest sense (Gen.17:7-8; NT scripture). "...to be God to you and to your descendants after you." This is the essence of God's covenant with Abraham; and if you get this, everything else falls into place (below).   2) The covenant promises were made not only to Abraham but also to his offspring (Gen.17:7-8). "I will be God" --not just to Abraham--But: "to you and to your descendants after you. . .I will be their God." The exact same promise that is made to Abraham is equally made to his descendants.   3) The covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham as a sign of THAT salvation. The sign of the covenant represents what the covenant is. If the covenant is about salvation, the sign is about salvation. This means that circumcision wasn't actually an ethnic or national sign--it was a spiritual sign. a) Abraham was marked with circumcision to signify his faith only after he believed (Rom.4:11). True. So why infant baptism? Abraham believed FIRST, and then and only then did he receive the sign.   b) Because he was then to apply that same sign to his infant sons before belief was possible (Gen.17:7-8). The exact same sign that he only received AFTER believing, he was to mark his infant sons with at 8 days old. It's what God commanded. Adult-circumcision for Abraham; but infant circumcision for his sons.       4) New Testament believers have entered into the SAME covenant promises made to Abraham (Rom.11:17 makes it clear there was not an OT tree and separate NT tree, but we are grafted into the same tree begun with Abraham). Galatians 3 and other Scripture make it really clear that the promises made to Abraham are GOSPEL promises that extend also to us as NT believers. Our only hope as NT believers are the covenant promises made to Abraham.   5) The NT Scriptures confirm that those covenant promises still extend to our children (Acts 2:39; household baptisms in the NT; and think about 1Cor.7:14--children of believers are "holy"--in what sense? Are they automatically saved? No. In the sense that they are "set apart" from unbelieving children. How set apart? They are part of the covenant--the same pattern as OT children).   6) THUS, our infant children should continue to be marked with the covenant sign.   IMPORTANT CLARIFICATIONS:   7) This doesn't mean that all Abraham's children (or ours) will be saved: this is by faith alone (cf. Ishmael, Esau; Rom.9:6-8, etc).   8) But it does mean that our children are included in the covenant and should receive the sign.   So--a question for you--I would love to hear. What about this would you object to?

      in Covenant/Household Baptism

    • Ruth Bader Ginsburg To Miss Arguments Following Lung Cancer Procedure |

      By Kevin Daley - Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg missed oral arguments Monday as she recuperates from cancer surgery. It’s not clear when the 85-year-old justice will return to work, though the Supreme Court’s public information office said she will continue to participate in official business from her home in Washington. Monday is the first time that Ginsburg has missed arguments since she joined the high court in 1993. Doctors at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York removed two cancerous nodules from Ginsburg’s lungs on Dec. 21. She was discharged on Dec. 26. The growths were detected when Ginsburg was hospitalized for a rib fracture in November 2018. On that occasion, the justice fell in her chambers at the Supreme Court and was admitted to a Washington-area hospital after experiencing discomfort in her chest. In a public appearance just days before December’s procedure, Ginsburg said that her health was “fine”. The Supreme Court returned from its holiday break Monday and will hear cases through Jan. 16. This is breaking news. This post will be updated. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected] Ruth Bader Ginsburg To Miss Arguments Following Lung Cancer Procedure | is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust - Conservative News Website for U.S. News, Political Cartoons and more. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Supreme Court To Hear Arguments In Census Citizenship Case

      By DCNF - The U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday that it will hear a challenge to the citizenship question the Trump administration inserted into the 2020 census. Supreme Court To Hear Arguments In Census Citizenship Case is original content from Conservative Daily News - Where Americans go for news, current events and commentary they can trust. View the original full article

      in Political Conservative News

    • Premillennialism

      Premillennialism teaches that the Second coming will occur before a literal thousand-year reign of Christ from Jerusalem upon the earth. In the early church, premillennialism was called chiliasm, from the Greek term meaning 1,000, a word used six times in Revelation 20:2-7. This view is most often contrasted with Postmillennialism which sees Christ's return after a golden "millennial age" where Christ rules spiritually from his throne in heaven, and Amillennialism which sees the millennium as a figurative reference to the current church age.   Background   Premillennialism was the most widely-held view of the earliest centuries of the church. Philip Schaff has said, "The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene Age (A.D. 100-325) is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, . . . a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papia, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius." (History of the Christian Church, Scribner, 1884; Vol. 2, p. 614)   Premillennialism began to die out in the established Catholic Church during the life of Augustine (A.D. 354-430). Chiliasm was suppressed by the dominant Catholic Church, but survived through various "fringe" groups of Christians during the mediaeval period. During the Reformation, Anabaptists and Hugenots helped to revive premillennialism and it was adopted among some Puritans during the Post-Reformation era.   The greatest development and spread of premillennialism since the early church came in the late 1800's - early 1900's with the rise of U.S. Fundamentalism and Dispensationalism. Starting in the British Isles and spreading to America, premillennialism (in its dispensational form) has become prominent in the Evangelical faith.   Two varieties of premillennialism   Premillennialists fall into two primary categories: historic premillennialism and dispensational premillennialism. Historic premillennialism is so called because it is the classic form which may be found in writings of some of the early church fathers (mentioned above), although in an undeveloped form. Dispensational premillennialism is that form which derives from John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) and dispensational theology. It is dispensational premillenialism that first taught the notion of a pre-tribulation rapture.   Historic premillennialists reject the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture and the uniquely Jewish nature of the dispensationalist's millennial kingdom (see below). It is often assumed that all premillennialists are dispensational in their theology. This is a confusion that should be avoided. Historic premillennialists such as George Eldon Ladd are consistent Calvinists who did not accept the basic tenets of dispensationalism.   Uniqueness of dispensational premillennialism   Classic dispensationalists (ala C. I. Scofield and Lewis Sperry Chafer) are pre-tribulationists and believe that the second coming will be in two stages separated by a 7-year period of tribulation. At the first he will return in the air to rescue those who are Christians at that time (the rapture). Then follows a seven-year period of suffering in which the Antichrist will conquer the world and kill those who refuse to worship him. At the end of the seven years, the final witness will go out before men and angels and Christ will return to the earth. He will defeat the Antichrist, and rescue the Jews and those who have converted to Christianity during the tribulation period.   Dispensationalism has also spawned Mid-tribulationists who believe that Christians will not be removed until 3-1/2 years of the final seven years have elapsed. They place the Rapture when the Temple sacrifices have been halted and the Antichrist has enshrined himself in the Temple, calling himself God.   By contrast, historic premillennialists would be generally categorized as "Post-tribulationists" because they see no appreciable difference in the timing of the rapture and the "official" second coming. Thus they hold that Christ will not return until the end of the Great tribulation and that Christians will suffer for the faith as they bring forth the final witness associated with the 5th seal of the book of Revelation.   The belief in the pretribulation or midtribulation rapture theories of dispensationalism is often criticized, on the grounds that it results in the division of Christ's single return into two stages. Some see it as an impossible "apartheid of the Elect" of sorts which is not seen in Scripture. Pretribulationists defend it on the basis of a Scripture passage which affirms that God has not appointed His people to wrath and the promise to the Philadelphian church: "I also will keep thee out of the hour of trial, which is about to come upon the whole habitable world, to try them that dwell upon the earth." Post-tribulationists counter that the tribulation associated with the final witness of the saints is in no way connected to the wrath of God. This wrath of God will only only come at the last day and it will fall upon the heads of the wicked at the last judgment.   Some specifically criticize dispensational premillennialism for its uniquely Jewish character of the Millennial Kingdom. Specifically for anticipating the rebuilding of the Hebrew Temple and the offering again of animal sacrifices during the millennial reign of Christ. In dispensationalism, the return of the sacrifices will be ceremonial in nature. Like the ceremony of Communion or the Lord's Supper they believe that the sacrifices will be performed on the appointed feast days in the future Millennium. They say that the reason the animal sacrifices will continue is because they will be enacted as a memorial to the Savior who came to earth as the Sacrifice Lamb. However, critics view the idea of blood sacrifices re-instututed after Christ's return as incompatible with Christ's completed work and find the idea abhorrent (O. T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church, p.248).

      in Premillennialism

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.