What happens to the Jews after the Millennium?

Where are you taking your class and what textbooks are you using?

 

http://www.satsonline.org/

Textbooks:

Ladd GD 1981. The Gospel of the Kingdom
Williams JR 1992. Renewal Theology
Lewis GR and Demaris BA 1994. Integrative Theology

Gaffin RB 1988. The kingdom of God. In SB Ferguson and JI Packer (eds), New Dictionary of Theology, 367-368

Goldsworthy G 2001. In TD Alexander and BS Rosner (eds), New Dictionary of Biblical Theology
Ridderbos HN 1996. In DRW Wood (ed.), New Bible Dictionary

Morphew DJ 1991. Breakthrough: Discovering the Kingdom

Erickson MJ 1996. Contemporary Options in Eschatology

Grudem W 1994. Systematic Theology

Erickson MJ 1996. Christian Theology (2nd ed.).

MacArthur J 1992. Charismatic Chaos

Wimber J 1986. Power Healing


Williams JR 1994. Renewal Theology (vol. 2)

Moriarty MG 1992. The New Charismatics

Obviously since it is the "Doctrine of the Kingdom", it involves much more than just eschatological discussion.

 

You need a better understanding of exegesis and hermeneutics. "Literal interpretation" does not preclude taking verses of scripture and understanding them figuratively, as long as such is justified literally from corroborating scripture. Such is the case here: Paul states that we (the Church) ARE Israel. There is no "allegory" in Ladds interpretation.

"Allegorical" interpretation, such as used by amillennialists, takes passages, such as in Revelation, etc., and states that the events described are allegorical explanation of an ongoing spiritual battle. Historic premillennialism does not generally do this: they interpret those events as actual future happenings, which are being predicted.

Amillennialism is in a class of it's own, in regards to eschatology.

 

What does the Bible tell you about it? I dont put much trust into what some book writer says he thinks how it says in the Bible, I put more truth in what I think by rightly dividing the word and applying it to my life. There is very few books other than the Bible I trust out there unless it is by Moody or Garner too many put their own spin on things that is not always right.

 

FWIW, I've heard many dispies maintain a permanent (yes, eternal) division between Israel and the believers. I guess we get the basement in heaven while Israel gets the main floors. Fine with me. :thumbs:

 

This is why I started a thread on dispensational eschatology vs ecclisiology. While there are some similarities in CP and DP in the order of future events, the rest of the story is indeed WORLDS APART.

Those covenantalists that hold to a future saving of "all [genetic] Israel" view it as a Gospel work, a grand sweeping of Jewish people into the CHURCH. Completely different from dispensationalism.

 

Don't confuse "figurative" with "allegorical" - they're not the same thing, even though people often use them interchangeably. And preterism is not "allegorical" explanations - it is just as literal as futurism, on which premil/dispy is based. You're assuming that a "literal" interpretation necessarily points to future fulfillment of prophecy. You need to consider what is called "historicism" also, which is similar but not exactly the same as preterism. "Historic Premillenialism", which is what most covenantal premils follow, is the view that MUCH (but not all) of Revelation speaks of historical events.

The smear against amil that it interprets "allegorically" is patently false. A "vision" is a literal "vision", which speaks to literal events or phenomena. The chief difference between premil and amil is how the thousand years of Rev 20 is approached and applied.

Most reformed churches allow for variation in understanding covenantal eschatology among its member and even elders, but exclude dispensationalism from its teachings. Why do they do this? Because dispensationalism completely changes one's view of the Church. It is a different system altogether.