Eschatology Views

I don't believe this is the case at all. There are other topics more talked about in the pages of the Scripture than this.

Seems to me lots of people in Israel believed this about Christ, and most of them missed it when He stood before them. I think that should lead us all to humility in the pursuit of understanding God and His ways.

 

I detect a bit of hostility in your words; but I don't know where it came from.
I might ask when you "inform" visitors who might be lost, do you give them the various choices in salvation of the other teachings, or do you tell them as you believe it?

I agree there are other topics more talked about by man; but I was referring to the main topic of the Bible which is the reclaiming of creation in the Second Coming.

I bet they wish they had a teacher who stood up and flat out taught them the truth of prophecy.
But the nice thing about the rapture is that one does not have to believe it to take part in it. :love2:

 

??????????

You got some statistics that show that? I know of absolutely NO splits on account of eschatology; but there's been bookoo problems caused by FAMILIES within the Church, IME. (but this is clantucky too )

 

No statistics in hand, sorry, somehow I knew you would ask.
Did you ever spend any time in Missouri, the "show me" state? :smilewinkgrin:
I do know that when we go to the area meetings in the 'big' city up the road that the premies set on one side and the posties on the other.

You maybe right, caliber and carpet color maybe right up thar'.

 

I am not talking about a test of faith; but I think we are talking about a test of Biblical truth.

I feel in all areas of scripture God said what He meant and meant only one thing by what He said. Our job is to discern the true meaning.
I don't think there are some areas like salvation in which God certainly has one thing in mind; while in other areas like unfulfilled prophecy God says here are several options, just pick the one you like.

So in that respect are you teaching the other views of eschatology as other options, or as false teaching?

 

In the last few weeks I have moved from Amill to Preterist. One of the clinchers was Matthew 16:27-28.

Just got back from Guate. Will elaborate on the above when I find where I misplaced my wits.:smilewinkgrin:

 

The March/April issue of "Israel My Glory" magazine has several good articles on the different views of Eschatology which might be helpful.

http://www.foi.org/img

 

Make sure you learn each end time position before you hold to any one end time calendar.
Make sure you do not get a prophecy "sweet tooth" and forget to serve God like we are told we should in verses 74-75 here

Jesus returns on the last day, after the last person is saved. Then the white throne judgement,and the eternal state

 

Not to be outdone:

http://www.fulfilledcg.com/Site/Video/watch_intro.htm

 

I checked out this site, and as I said, previously, this is not what I believe, except very generally, which I think we all pretty much already know anyway, right? If you want to know what I believe, why, and all the ridiculously strong & consistent scriptural evidence for it, that would have to come from me.

This very general, and again as I previously stated, negatively portrayed presentation of my position -- does me no justice, and God -- very much less, if what I believe is true. Extensive research & study with me -- or of course, whomever's view you really wanted to know, would be the only way to give a "fair" representation of my view.

To "lump" me in with what is on that website simply would not serve the truth.

 

Thanks Grasshopper. I wish all would take the time to listen/watch this overview of the Preterist view. It's very informative. I appreciated the comments from R.C. Sproul also. I reckon I need to get his book.

 

Funny Tom that you should mention that. I'm doing a personal private study on eschatology. I've been at it for over a year now with no end in sight. At the moment I'm studying Kim Riddlebarger A case for Amillennialism. I wrote on the flysheet Matt 25:31 which is one verse that really puts a crimp in his contention that we are in the millennium (he advocates as you may know the already/not yet theory). My verse and your verse have a simular message.

Thomas

 

Tom Bryant,

You gives the three animate charts of three view mills. I'm Amill. I notice Amill animate chart of timeline shows so very clear and make sense!

By the way, there are two or three classes of premill: Pretrib, Posttrib, and Pre-wrath.

I consider, pretrib/premill is far more complex and nonsense to me. To make Christ have to be yo-yo's, three judgment days, two or three resurrection days, two new earths, and even, also two elects too.

Bible teaches us very clear that Christ shall come again one more time, there will be general resurrection and a judgment day. Then come eternality. That why I am amill.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Fair enough. As I mentioned above, I'm reading Riddlebarger right now but I have quite an few other Amill writers in my library. So, please give me a reality check, who would you recommend to the person who desires to be well read in covanent Amill theology? I want to see if I have books that are represenative of the mainstream thought.

 

You might find Don Preston's revised edition of, "Like Father Like Son, On Clouds of Glory", helpful.

"In addition, this new version has extensive interaction with the amillennial paradigm, and specifically the writings of Kim Riddlebarger, widely considered to be one of the top amillennial scholars of the day".

http://www.eschatology.org/index.ph...ow-available&catid=62:announcements&Itemid=61

 

Thomas,

I have a book, "A Case For Ammillennialism" by Kim Riddlebarger. It is very good and very simple to read. I already read throughout this. For everyone, I highly recommend you to order this.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Yes, and there are a few other verses that are likewise irrefutable. Riddlebarger is good for showing many of the blind spots of Dispensationalism. In that book you cite - my copy is well-marked - he does an especially in-depth investigation into Daniel 9 and Matt.24 that seemed to me - at the time - to be pretty thorough.

But he just does not give those time statements proper weight. None of the Amill authors do, as far as I can tell.