What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

For Vic - problem with premillennialism

D

Dee Dee Warren

Guest
Hey Vic, here is the thread that I promised. As I requested, I am not intending to go into heated debate, and I would like to ask that the thread be restricted to orthodox eschatologies.

As I had mentioned, I had been a dispesensational, pretrib, premill, futuristst. I had abandoned functionally premillennialsm before I came to the preterist position. I had stated this thread at your invitation to give what pushed me over - I am not claiming that this is something that will, or is even intended to convince anyone, just my experience. I have found that nearly any verse has altnerate explanations and our job is to decide which is plausible ultimately. I have heard premill interaction on this but to me it doesn't pass the plausibility test.

I used to be very much into Christology defense against Arianism. In fact, not to tout my own work, but one of my Christology articles is considered to be very good, but then again, I am usually good for one or two good pieces every three years unlike some talented folks who can regularly put out good pieces. Just for reference, here is the article I am referring to:

http://www.tektonics.org/guest/ddwao.html

Anyways, in studying Christology, I came to learn something to me surprising, and that is the most often quoted and/or alluded OT passage in the NT is the first two verses of Psalm 110. It is extraordinarily important to Christology. Then in my studies, I came to realize how bound up Christology is with eschatology. That understanding explains how such a polemic Christological Creed, the Athanasian Creed, makes some of the most explicit eschatology statements. If you have never considered that angle, it is quite facsinating.

Anyways, I believe that Psalm 110:1-2 in its entire NT context defeats premilennialism roundly. The passage that first set me down this road was 1 Corinthians 15 which describes death as being the LAST enemy to be defeated, which coincides with the resurrection (at that time I would have said "rapture") of Christians at which time the Kingdom is consummated. I find that passage makes premillennialism impossible. I would like to reference an outside work on this for your consideration:

http://www.wordmp3.com/gs/postmill.htm

(for those interested in refuting the NeoHymenaean heresy there is an appendix to that article also dealing with that - however that is not my focus or burden in this discussion)[/img]
 
Thanks! I don't know much about your chronology, so, could you explain to us who this is and where it fits into your chronolgy?

Revelation 19:11
 
Umm I am lost... who "this" is? What this? I am confused :oops:
 
Oh nevermind, the link didn't show up at first - I do not though wish to get far afield of what I presented here. To go into an entirely different passage/passage group is afield of the focus.

To quickly answer your question - that is Christ. But I really do not have much intention into getting into Revelation. One can be nonpremill preterist with regard to say the Olivet, and idealist with regard to Revelation. I have a mixture of preterist and idealist views of Revelation at this point and hope to write a commentary/some commentaries on Revelation in the future.

I am NOT saying you did this just now, or will do this, but I find in some eschatology discussions when something is presented, there are a bunch of "yeah but" objections. I often satirically say, "I am not interested in your big but, I am interested in this passage." :)

Just to forstall anyone trying to show me their big buts. Obviousling holism requires that other passages be brought to bear, but I would like to do so with the home base of the ideas presented.
 
To quickly answer your question - that is Christ. But I really do not have much intention into getting into Revelation. One can be nonpremill preterist with regard to say the Olivet, and idealist with regard to Revelation. I have a mixture of preterist and idealist views of Revelation at this point and hope to write a commentary/some commentaries on Revelation in the future.
Click to expand...
That's ok, I will look for this commentary. Maybe it will answer the second half of my question. We both agree it is Jesus... good.

The reason I posed the question was because of something I read here:

http://www.wordmp3.com/gs/postmill.htm

I have an issue with their chronolgy in 1 Corinthians 15:22-26. I brought up the Rev verse because, as a premil, it points me to the second advent. We seem to disagree; that's ok. I will continue to read and study.

Peace,
Vic
 
I will listen to that MP3.... without listening to it am taking a stab in the dark, but I believe Revelation 19 does refer to the Second Coming in part (I say in part because I have a somewhat radically different - for modern interpretaters, not ones in history - concept of the meaning of the Second Coming - in short, I confess the final physical return of Christ, but I find the dichtomoy we make today that the "coming" is entirely future is unBiblical - to me, the coming of Christ is ONE event bookended by TWO physical appearances - so Revelation 19 is about the entire coming in my view).

Thank you for not showing me a big but. ROFL

Yes, I have a twisted sense of humour
 
Oh heck, I saw mp3 in that title and assumed it was a recording. I will read the article for that statement. I didn't put two and two together as I link to it from my index and don't pay attention to the real address.... so when you posted the home address it confused me.

Never mind, I multi task too much.... be back soon.
 
Vic, I don't see an issue with the chronology except that it nullifies premillennialism... which is of course the point. I believe that 1 Cortinthians 15 is, in context with the NT use of Psalm 110, a clincher against premillennialism - it was the passage that set me to rejecting premillennialism before I had even considered outright rejecting futurism. Usually for most, who come from a dispensational futurist background, it is the opposite, they get yawning cracks in their futurism first.

The chronology is indeed very dense in 1 Corin 15, and IMHO says something very opposite from what many Christians believe today.
 
Dee Dee Warren said:
...

The chronology is indeed very dense in 1 Corin 15, and IMHO says something very opposite from what many Christians believe today.
Click to expand...


"Well, I say! Went right over my head!"

Please go into this further, for those of us that don't quite get it??

Coop
 
Sure coop. Weekends though are generally when I can post, so sometimes I disappear for stretches at a time. And as I hinted before my health is not so hot, so I covet your prayers.
 
lecoop said:
"Well, I say! Went right over my head!"

Please go into this further, for those of us that don't quite get it??

Coop
Click to expand...
I'm with Coop. Please explain so we might unstand. I read it much differently than you. I brought up Revelation 19:11 because I "see" it in the Cor. passage. Because Revelation 19:11 is before the 1,000 years, an explaination of your timeline would help.
 
Okay, again it might be a bit. I had some time off this weekend but getting back into the busy times.
 
FYI - TheologyWeb did a major redesign and that has consumed every moment of my time since my last post here and likely will for the near future. For those of you familiar with us it is a huge design change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top