A SUMMARY OF AMILLENNIALISM

Okay, tonight I'm glad that Pastor Nathan and Pastor Jeremiah has allowed me this opportunity to

teach a lesson on Amillennialism.

So if you will, we'll go to the Lord in prayer before getting started.

Heavenly Father, I thank you for this time and opportunity to dig in your word and just give a brief

overview of what I like to call is Reformed Amillennialism.

So Father, let tonight be edifying to those here tonight to hear your word and I want to look

further into these things and this particular view on Reformed Amillennialism.

Father, in Jesus name we pray, Amen.

Alright, tonight we are going to be discussing the eschatological view known as

Reformed Amillennialism.

There are different ways in which we will look at this view tonight, but it will not be an exhaustive study.

I just want you to be equipped with the basics so that you can further your studies after tonight.

I want to look at one particular verse tonight, it's Revelation 1 .10.

John states that I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day.

This is important because it's to bring about an understanding that John is

talking merely symbolic here.

Imagery is going to be given and this should not be taken absolutely literal.

There is a handout that everybody has.

The first part of it there that I want to highlight is a statement of faith and doctrine.

Regarding eschatology, we apply the dictum in essentials unity, in non -essentials

liberty, in all things charity.

We believe that this doctrine regards personal eschatology, the coming of Christ

and the eternal state are clearly expressed in scriptures and therefore essential.

Yet we hold that the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel and the nature of the millennium are

less clear and are therefore non -essentials.

So therefore various corporate eschatological views are free to be discussed and taught side

by side as long as we maintain unity and love is preeminent.

When Pastor Jeremiah gave his brief overview of the three views, he pointed out

three essential points in eschatology.

I will add a fourth one.

The first three are the second coming of Christ bodily.

We see that in Acts 1 .11.

The resurrection of the dead.

We see that in Daniel 12 .2 and John 5 .28 and 29.

Eternal life, John 3 .16, John 17 .12.

The fourth one I wanted to put in there is final judgment and as Pastor Jeremiah says with the other

three it's kind of implied but I just wanted to be more precise and

hold that final judgment which is Matthew 12 .36 and 37 and John 16

.8.

The non -essential points in eschatology, the two are still the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel

and the nature of the millennium.

A few things I want to talk about in the lesson.

First I'm going to talk a little bit about the history of our millennialism.

In this part we will look at some of the theologians who held this view, the word itself and what does it mean.

Secondly I'm going to talk about the two age model.

When we get there you can look at the chart to help you visualize and apply this point of

view.

The already and not yet is better understood in this paradigm taught in scripture.

The third thing is just a brief touch on recapitulation.

The fourth thing I'm going to go over is the text of Revelation 20.

There's a few things there, the topics I want to go over to help you better understand what's going on.

Moving on.

Therefore, there are three parts of history that I'm going to share with y 'all tonight.

The first use of the word, the meaning of the word amillennial and the

use of the principles being applied and those who held this view with some nuances within this view.

If you want you can take notes or I can just give you a copy of this lesson.

I will be more than happy to make that happen for you.

As we press forward the first part of this section is, this is directly from the howtoblog

.net, a brief note on the history of amillennialism.

The first use of the word, the term amillennial is probably about a century old.

Remarkably it is not widely used as to merit an entry into the Oxford English

Dictionary.

The exact origin of the word is not known.

In an article by Kim Ritterbarger it says he cites that

Albertus Peters was the source of the term.

Others cite Dutchman Statesman and theologian Abraham Kuyper as being the

one that brought this word about.

A search of Google books show no clear instances between 1850

and 1900.

There are a few instances in 1900 and 1930.

A guy named W .H. Rutgers used the term in his volume Premillennialism in

1930 and Louis Burkhoff used it in his Reform Dogmatics, later

Systematic Theology in early 1930s.

But it does not appear to have become widely used until after World War II

in 1957.

In that time it was apparently sufficiently well known that an editor of Christianity today

felt comfortable using the term without explaining it.

So it is unclear to exactly when or who started the use of the word

amillennial, but it is a word nonetheless.

I looked and there is just not a whole lot to say about the first use of the

word which is known as etymology, but I think it is very important to include the parts

that I highlighted tonight so that you can further your individual studies.

God has given us teachers that we can look to and test and compare to scripture and be

edified by their works.

Second thing is the meaning of amillennial.

Normally some would try to qualify since the A or R is in front of the word millennial,

it negates an actual millennium, indicating that the proponents of this position believe that there will

be no millennial reign.

This is not an accurate understanding or meaning of the term amillennial.

It is best defined as present or realized

millennium, indicating that we are currently in the millennial reign

of Christ.

Here is a more detailed meaning of the word amillennialism.

This is a direct quote from the Dictionary of Hermeneutics' Concise Guide to Terms,

Names, Methods, and Expressions by James D. Hernando.

I would personally recommend this book as a study tool to help you in your biblical.

Studies.

As Brian would say, Brian A .G., I love this guy, every time a new

word comes up, he kind of says we're doing the reform dance, we're making up words, so I thank you

Brian for his diligence to want to look into these things.

The meaning according to this hermeneutic is the belief that the thousand year reign of Christ

between the two comings is not to be understood literally, but instead, this reference to a

millennium is understood symbolically as the reign of Christ in heaven

during the church age.

Christ's second coming is understood to occur at the end of history.

Most often, the first being commonly seen as referring to the new

birth, this view is contrasted with premillennialism, which understands the thousand year

earthly reign of Christ to be literal and prior to the revelation of Christ at his second coming.

Amillennialism shows similarities with postmillennialism by rejecting the millennium as the

literal thousand year reign of Christ on earth.

Now to the third point of the history of amillennialism, in point of fact, it is

the amillennial position that can be seen as the reformed position on

eschatology.

I see the methodology we use for this position being taught by Paul and Jesus.

I will explain more on that when we get to the part in the lesson on methods.

We can even look at the confessions like the Heidelberg Catechism, the larger and shorter Westminster

Confession of Faith catechisms also reflect credos and what we believe there to be

seen as an eschatological view towards the amillennial position in these creeds.

It is the position held by the majority of the reformers as it was systematized in the fourth century

by Augustine and this carried the amillennial view as the

dominant view of medieval and reformation periods.

Although this teaching has been reforming from the start to the present

as we will see shortly in some of the differences in methodologies within this view.

As we see the Protestant reformer Martin Luther who 9 to 95 Thesis Statement in

protest on the cathedral door at Wittenberg, Germany in the beginning of the 16th century.

Then we have John Calvin in the mid 16th century who held this view and William Ames who is

an English Puritan in the late 16th early 17th century.

Then from the 20th and 21st centuries we see reformers like Gerhardus Voss which we will be

looking at a chart that he presented for us to kind of look at and we will look at that later

in the lesson along with reformers like John Frame, Anthony Hokema, R .C. Sproul and

Matt Slick of Carham Apologetics Research Ministry.

There are many articles there and I highly recommend if you want to further your studies

like Matt Slick says he don't mind to do your homework for you.

So get on there and there's all kind of doctrinal statements and issues that he's already worked.

Out.

Now on the handout here are a couple of methods that can be seen to be used in this view.

My personal favorite is progressive recapitulation parallelism.

That's a pretty big word to say but in this view it's

an idea that the series of visions in Revelation describe the

course of history between the first and second comings of Jesus Christ each from a

different prophetic perspective although these visions intensify before the time of

the end.

The second method is using the New Testament data

as the determinative category by which the Old Testament and future eschatology is to

be interpreted.

In this method the book of Revelation is the God -given interpretation of the book of Daniel.

There are some other ways of looking at different texts within the framework of our Millennial view but

it's not my intent here tonight to shed light on all the methodologies but to help you see what

eschatology it is important to carry a loose grip on the non

-essentials like this.

Now we are going to look at the two -age view.

You can look at the chart if you want.

We'll get to the verses here momentarily.

This is the framework that will help you understand and see the Amillennial view.

As I press forward do not be discouraged or offended if I say that Paul taught this

or that Jesus himself taught this view of eschatology.

You'll see that much more clearly but like I'm going to say other

views can say that same qualifier to some extent that Jesus did this or Paul taught this but

it'll become more clear as we move further into the lesson.

Looking at the biblical writers we see that they understood the course and the future climax of

human history as the progressive unfolding of two successive eschatological ages

known as this age and the age to come.

The two ages have a strong bearing on whether or not there will be an earthly millennium.

These two ages provide a major interpretive category for eschatology in general and

the millennial question in particular.

The case for Amillennialism grows directly out of our understanding of these two eschatological.

Ages.

Throughout the New Testament this age refers to the present course of human history while

the age to come refers to the age of redemption realized at the coming of Jesus

Christ, his bodily resurrection and his exaltation.

The period of time between the first and second advance of Jesus Christ, the

time between the establishments of Christ's kingdom as described in the gospels and the

consummation of all things, is the same period described in Revelation 20 as a

thousand years.

This means that the so -called millennium is the present reality and not a future hope.

The events depicted in Revelation 20 refer not to future but the

present.

The thousand years is the same period of time in which the citizens of this age await

the age to come.

I'm going to go over a few verses that kind of point to the coming

of the kingdom of God here on earth.

But if I expel demons by the spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Matthew 12, 28.

Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, the kingdom of

God is not coming in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, look, here it is,

or there, or behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.

That's Luke 17, 20 and 21.

For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating or drinking, but of righteousness and peace and joy

in the Holy Spirit.

That's Romans 14, 17.

In him, you also who when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation,

and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is a guarantee

of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it to the praise of his glory.

That's Ephesians 1, 13, 14.

I just shared with y 'all a few verses about the kingdom of God and what that looks like briefly.

I'm going to give a fuller picture of how I understand the kingdom of God being a present day

reality.

Bear with me here.

Throughout the book of Revelation, the throne of Christ and his people are invariably said

to be in heaven, and we see that in Revelation 1, 4, 3, 21, and 4,

2, et cetera.

This is a heavenly scene, not an earthly one.

There can be no or little doubt that the portrayal of being sitting on thrones is

not intended to express the literal idea of people sitting on actual pieces of furniture

or ruling from there.

However, it is a figurative way of saying that they are reigning over a kingdom.

Who are these people reigning over this kingdom?

John tells us in Revelation 20 that those who reign while Satan is bound are those who did

not worship the beast or his image in Revelation 4.

This most likely includes those who were killed because of the word of God and the testimony they

had maintained.

We see that in Revelation 6, 9 as well.

As well as those who died of natural causes, Revelation 14, 13.

They have been given authority to judge, John said, which conveys the

idea of God's people joining in the heavenly court where they are thousands upon

thousands of angels who attend the Ancient of Days waiting for the books to be opened as we

look in Daniel 7, 9 -10.

According to Daniel, the beast was waging war against the saints and was defeating them

until the Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the saints of the Most High.

And the saints at the time came when they possessed the

kingdom as we see in Daniel 7, 21 and 22.

From this it is clear that when Satan is bound, the saints not only possess the kingdom which is

cross, but judgment is passed on their enemy on their behalf.

The reign of the saints depicted in Revelation 20, 4 -6 therefore

fulfills the prophecy of Daniel 7 and of the thousand year duration.

We are given the present day reality of the kingdom of God and who is reigning with Christ as we look

at verses that were clear on the topic.

The age to come is already a present reality for

believers in Christ.

This tension between the already and not yet characterizes much of the New Testament eschatology

as Christians await the final consummation of Christ's present kingdom on the great glorious

day of our Lord Jesus Christ's bodily return.

As we will see, both Paul and Jesus repeatedly spoke of this age and the age to come.

As we look to the handout, the two age chart model by

Gerhardus Voss that I spoke of earlier, we will go through several scriptures to give support

of this view.

It will help you visualize the millennial position.

In this age, we got Matthew 12, 32, there is no forgiveness for

blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

The end of the age will be preceded by signs, Matthew 24, 3.

Christ will be with us until the end of the age, Matthew 28, 20.

The present age is an age of homes, fields, and families, Mark 10,

30.

Material rewards are given to us in this life, Luke 18, 30.

The people of this age marry and are given in marriage, Luke 20, 34.

We are not to be conformed to the pattern of this world.

The Greek word there is aion, which is age, and that is Romans 12, 2.

Philosophy is the wisdom of this age, 1 Corinthians 1, 20.

Paul goes on to say 1 Corinthians 2, 6 -8.

Wisdom and rulers of this age that Paul keeps on contrasting as well as

Jesus with this age being material, temporal things.

2 Corinthians 4, 4, Satan, the god of this age, blinds people's minds to the truth.

That's not an exhaustive list of this age.

There's plenty more, but now we're going to go to the age to come.

Same verse, start off Matthew 12, 32.

There is no forgiveness for blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in the age to come,

neither this age.

Jesus made that contrast.

That's one of the unforgivable sins.

There's no pardon.

Matthew 13, 40, the weeds will be thrown into the fire.

We see that judgment coming.

Mark 10, 30 and Luke 18, 30, eternal life is a reward to those who believe in Christ

by faith alone.

It's an already reality for his children.

There will be no marriages or given in marriage, Luke 20, 35.

Evildoers will not inherit the kingdom of God, 1 Corinthians 6, 9 -10.

Those who live evil lives will not inherit the kingdom, Galatians 5, 21.

Christ will reign in the age to come, Ephesians 1, 21.

Immoral people will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Ephesians 5, 5.

We can just kind of go on and on about the age to come.

This is a reality that Christ is going to bring about, the age to

come.

It's beneficial for Christians, but for unbelievers, it wouldn't be a

side I'd want to be on.

These texts make it clear that the Lord taught these two age models, successive and

qualitatively distinct ages.

This age, Jesus said, is characterized by marriage and things temporal or

temporary, as Keith would have me say.

The age to come, on the other hand, is characterized by resurrection,

life, and immortality.

It is impossible that the natural, earthly life will continue

after the general resurrection that will occur at the Lord's return, as we see in John 6,

39, 40, 44, and 54, as he points out that Christ will raise

up on the last day, those given to him by the Father.

Also, the harvest of wheat is the end of the age.

As the harvesters are angels, as the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it also

will be at the end of the age.

We see this in Matthew 13, 39 -40.

The impact of this two age eschatological framework on the question of millennium becomes apparent

when we examine how these terms are used throughout the New Testament.

Wherever the term this age is used, it will always be in reference to temporary things

or temporal things destined to perish.

In the age to come, those who partake in the first resurrection, as we will see in

Revelation 20, verse 6, are not characterized by temporal but eternal.

This brings me to the theological term known as the already and not yet.

Sure, other views can assert and hold this method in a loose sense of its

meaning, but in the all -millennial view with the two age framework, we can properly

understand this term already and not yet.

The already refers to the eternal blessings of the age to come which are realized in the

present, while the not yet refers to the blessings of the age to come to be realized

in the consummation at the Lord's second coming.

What does the already look like?

While we see in Romans 5, verse 1, since we have been justified by faith,

this is a present tense reality known as the already.

Paul tells us in 2 Timothy 2, 4, verse 8, that

there is laid up a crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous

judge, will reward to me on that day, and not to me only, but also

to all who have loved his appearance.

This, as we see, is a longing for the bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ.

As Paul continues to say in Philippians 3, 20, that our citizenship is in heaven,

and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly bodies

by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.

This is known as the not yet.

Now we are going to look at, just briefly, recapitulation.

When reading the historical narrative, you start at the beginning and read through the narrative until you come to the

end.

Well, Revelation is not a narratival book.

It's an apocalyptic book, known as apocalyptic, as Jeremiah would say that.

Revelation contains a series of visions, each of

which functions like a different camera angle, getting a different view of the same event.

Therefore, the order in which the different visions in

Revelation are recounted by John does not necessarily reflect the order of historical

occurrence of those realities in which those visions symbolize.

This is known as recapitulation, in which some basic

pattern is repeated in a variety of different formulations.

Put simply, they are arranged topically and not chronologically.

As an example of this, a careful study of chapter 20 will reveal that this chapter

describes a period which is synchronous with that of chapter 12.

This can be demonstrated by simply comparing Revelation 12, 7 through 11, with

Revelation 20, verses 1 through 6.

I will do that briefly if y 'all will turn to y 'all's chapter on that that

I have paralleled beside each other.

Revelation 12, 7 through 11 in comparison with Revelation 20, 1 through 6.

The first scene, we're looking at a heavenly scene, verse 7 in chapter 12 with verse 1 in chapter

20.

The second set of verses is 7 and 8 in chapter 12, which is angelic battle against Satan and his host.

And the presupposed angelic battle with Satan in verse 2 of chapter 20.

Chapter 12, Satan cast to the earth, verse 9.

Satan cast to the abyss in verse 3 in Revelation 20.

The angel's evil opponent called the great dragon, that ancient called

the devil or Satan, who leads the whole world astray in verse 9 of chapter 12.

Then, same reflective chapter 20, 2 through 3 says the

angel's evil opponent called the dragon, that ancient serpent who is the devil or Satan,

restrained from deceiving the nations anymore.

To be released later to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth, and

that's in 7, verse 7 and 8.

I don't want to kind of go through all of it, but the charts there before you to kind of show what we

mean by when we say recapitulation.

You're looking at two of the exact same events when they're laid side by side.

You see the same thing going on, just said differently, like it's got a different camera

angle view.

And this is one of them that I wanted to highlight tonight.

This is not an exhaustive look at everything in the passage of Revelation 20.

I will, however, bring light to a few more topics on the passage.

As I already pointed out, some of the references to the kingdom of God earlier as Revelation

24 through 6 is the fulfillment of Daniel 7.

The language of Revelation is highly symbolic.

According to one scholar, John sees the angel coming down out of heaven.

He has a key with which he is going to lock the abyss,

Revelation 9, 1 and 11.

The abyss is a deep hole provided with a deep shaft, with a shaft, 9, 1, with

a lid.

This lid can be unlocked in 9, 2, locked in 20, verse 3,

and even sealed in chapter 20, verse 3.

Bear in mind that this is all symbolism.

There are good reasons not to take John's references to a thousand years literally.

For one thing, numbers are always used symbolically throughout the book of Revelation.

In addition, the immediate context and figurative nature of many words used by John,

such as chain, abyss, serpent, beast, and so on,

should remind us that numbers are also symbolic of something else.

What is the binding of Satan?

What this binding of Satan means is that after the coming of the long -expected

Messiah, Satan lost certain authority which he possessed prior to the life, death,

burial, resurrection, and ascension of the Savior.

The first place to look for help in interpreting the meaning of the binding of Satan is

earlier in the passages within the book of Revelation itself.

As we see in Revelation 9, the abyss is symbolic of death and Hades.

G .K. Bill points out that the abyss is one of the various metaphors representing the

spiritual sphere in which the devil and his accomplices operate.

Revelation 9, 1 -11 portrays an angelic being, probably the

devil, using the key of the shaft of the abyss, opening the abyss and

releasing demonic creatures so that they can torment unbelievers on earth.

If Christ takes authority over this realm through his own death and resurrection, as

was stated in Revelation 1 -18, then the binding of Satan is a direct result

of Christ's resurrection.

Although Satan is bound during this present age, this does not mean that he ceases

to be the god of this age, who blinds the minds of unbelievers.

2 Corinthians 4 -4, he is the ruler of the age of the air.

Ephesians 2 -2, and the one who prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to

devour.

1 Peter 5 -8, Satan continues to do all these things.

John did tell us, however, that with the binding of Satan, he is now prevented

from deceiving the nations until he is released.

2 Thessalonians 2.

This text supports Satan being restrained from having complete

abilities as he did before the Son of God became incarnate.

The binding of Satan is, as the text indicates in Revelation 20,

verses 2 -4, during the thousand year reign of the saints with Christ.

In verse 4, the souls of those who have been beheaded for the testimony

of Jesus and the word of God, sees Revelation 6 -9,

and those who had not worshipped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their forehead

or their hands.

They, those people just talked about, all those people, came to life and reigned with Christ for a

thousand years.

Then John brings more clarity in verse 6, blessed and holy is the one who shares in the

first resurrection.

Over such, the second death has no power, but they, the same people talked about

earlier, will reign with him for a thousand years.

John understands the binding of Satan to be synonymous with the resurrection ascension.

At this time, the thousand years began and the saints reigned with

Christ.

As Revelation 20, verse 6, established further, those who partake in the first resurrection, who

is Christ, mind you, as John points out in John 11 -25, he says, I

am the resurrection and the life.

Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live.

That's a beautiful truth from our Lord.

As the Greek word there, live, is zao, this can be seen as born

again.

This is not necessarily a resurrection because resurrection always entails a body.

Jesus is the only one in his resurrected glorified body.

When we look at John 5, John makes a distinction from the souls that live through faith

in Christ and the bodies that are resurrected at the general resurrection as we look at verse 25 and

28.

Verse 25 says, Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and is now here

when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear

will live.

This is not the resurrection, but is evidence of those who partake as John talks about in

the first resurrection by faith in Christ.

Further in John 5, 28 and 29, Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming

when all those who are in the tomb will hear his voice and will come out, those who have done

good to the resurrection of life and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

Okay, tonight we have gone over some essential eschatological views,

points in this view and some of the non -essentials.

I briefly went over the word amillennialism, the history of the word, when the word come about

and when the principles date back to.

And some of these great theologians like John Calvin and John Frame.

There were some others that bring validity to some doctrinal points made by this camp.

We have discussed the two age model that works best with the already not yet

paradigm.

Also touched on recapitulation and a few topics concerning Revelation 20, 1 -6.

Like the binding of Satan and who reigns with Christ as well as the fulfillment of Daniel 7 in

Revelation 20.

Before we get moving to the Q &A, I want to just look at one more

view of parallelism in Revelation 16 -14.

I didn't write the whole scripture down, just kind of draw you to it.

This will be recorded for everybody that wants to go back and look at this.

Revelation 16 -14, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world to assemble them

for battle on the great day of God, the Almighty.

Them for battle, when we look at the Greek, it's tanpolymon.

It's talking about the war.

It's a recapitulation.

This is the starting point as we see as they're assembling for the battle.

Then Revelation 19 -19, And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth with their

armies gathered to make war against him who is sitting on the horse and

against his army.

Same Greek word there, tanpolymon.

And Pastor Jeremiah is a very stickler as am I when you look at the definite article.

Pastor Nathan can definitely hit you up with that.

It's talking about a specific event.

It's a one time thing, the war.

Looking at one more, we're going to look at Revelation 20 -8.

The nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for

battle.

This battle is the final battle that the

unbelievers and the saints will meet.

I think it's the judgment day.

That's just my preferred opinion, but we can now open the floor up for Q &A.

Go ahead Mr. Christian.

Yes, we're in the millennial reign now.

As the chart I gave you, it helps explain because the

age to come doesn't end until the pericy of the return of Christ.

So that whole thousand years would be from when Christ first came and until

Christ's return.

That whole period there in that chart, that's the thousand year reign.

All we look at is symbolic.

I'm not saying anything in Revelation that I wouldn't take symbolically.

Anybody else?

If you're not, tear me down.

Excuse me.

Somebody like me, that's just what I believe, and I have researched it and

believe it.

What would your main apologetic

be for someone who believes in pre -millennialism versus online?

How would you try to maybe slay into online?

That's a good question.

For the audience that didn't know me here, she was raised and saturated with pre -mill.

Even I, I was pre -mill in the vagueness that I had coming

into it.

What would I have done to persuade?

Man, nothing.

I'm not here to persuade you into a different view.

Eschatology is one of those things that we can hold like this.

I see them as brothers in Christ.

I just find it more fascinating for the theological push and drive that I have.

You may be, you're still my sister in Christ.

Your eschatology view is not something that's going to sway you from partaking of

the Lord's table here.

We love you and we'll help you learn more about pre -millennialism.

That's where we come from.

We're not going to take each other's knowledge.

When you're at my house, I'm going, but here we use a loving way to walk with each other and encourage

you.

So I'm a John Carpenter.

So I grew up pre -mill, pre -trib, the whole thing.

So what started to make me kind of back away from it was looking at all of that discourse.

Matthew 24 and the other three Synoptic Gospels.

Because that's kind of how you're going to view revelation.

So when you really look at the context of this generation that Jesus is speaking to, you kind of have to conclude

one of two things.

Is he speaking to this generation that's hearing him that will be around for the next 30, 40 years?

Or is he talking about a future generation that will be in this future thousand year reign?

And so for me, I was looking at how Matthew views this generation throughout his Gospels.

And it seemed like he was talking to, like when he was rebuking the Pharisees in a chapter earlier, he called them this generation.

And so if that's persuasive to how you read all of that discourse that this generation is those people,

well, necessarily you have to lead pre -millennials.

You interpret this generation to be immediate rather than something future.

To me, that was pretty strong exegesis.

And I'm not saying it's the one and only view, but that's what made me kind of step back and say, okay, well, this is going

to change how I look at Daniel 9 and the whole book of Revelation.

Oh, that just closed my mind.

Go ahead.

Well, Adam, I thought you did a good job.

I wish you'd stop and change course.

Yeah, I'm here to go oxygen, like I

said,

on until God returns.

What matters the most?

I mean, pre -mill makes back 1600.

Technically, pre -mill goes back farther than that.

That's right.

All right.

And post -mill is about 200 years old.

All of a sudden, I mean, just 200 years makes a package.

Let's look at this a little differently.

Well, actually, it dates back to Paul and Jesus, because they taught in the two -age model.

And that makes more sense in the omnibus view, because that's our push.

That's how we categorize our view in omnibus.

We look at the two -age view, this age and the age to come, the already and the not yet.

Now, I get what you're saying.

And if we looked at something on the dating, that wouldn't be a foundational issue

on whether to believe something or not.

Because, I mean, we got a lot of heritage that believe some of the right things in different ages.

So we're trying to get to the Word of God, and that's why we have three biblical and

theological views.

I just wanted to think that if

this were right forever, I'm going to be

there with you.

That's right.

That's what we're rallying around each other about.

Yes, sir.

Trump.

Paul.

Oh, yeah, we're all entitled to have different opinions and views.

Like I said, John Frayn said it best, perspectival.

I mean, how you were raised and what you are surrounded with, that's going to change your perspective when you come

into any particular doctrine or view.

I mean, because I've looked at it from a whole different view, and that could be why I'm omnipotent.

So, I mean, Don Eastwood, historic, pre -mill, I believe, right?

Yeah, I might be.

Yeah, he's historic.

So, I mean, we all want the perspective we come into this doctrine with.

I mean, you could say it's not a foundational issue like soteriology.

That we will combat together as brothers and sisters in Christ.

Well, you know, he was Christ.

Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly that I presented the Holy Spirit with blood,

with blood not his own.

For then he would have had to suffer repeatedly, talking about Christ, since the foundation of the

world.

But as it is, talking about Christ, he has appeared once for all

at the end of the age.

He took away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

So, what age is that talking about in Gwen?

Is that talking about when he died on the cross?

Is that the end of the age?

Or is that talking about when he comes again?

And sin, supposedly, according to Amillennialism, is done away with.

What verse are you saying?

It's Hebrews 9, 25, 28.

I don't know if I'm saying it.

I'm not saying it.

It appears context is sacrifice.

But then when it talks about put away sin by the sacrifice, put sin away,

it's talking about...

Okay, Alon?

Yeah, I can get down a little bit.

This doesn't... mine.

Don't say anything.

It says ages, A -G -E -S.

But then this is... this is Grudens, John.

Yeah.

Revise, Sam.

Particularly to talk on that, man, I couldn't.

Because when it says ages, it's always a plurality.

I've never seen them do plural on a singular verb.

Ages would include ages.

Do you...

Wait a second, Pastor.

Is that it?

Yeah, I mean, you could talk about it more if you just looked at it a little bit.

It says once and for all, at the end of the ages, put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

And then that put away sin, is it a lighter sin or is that...

Hey, don't go over here.

But in context, it's talking about...

Yeah, but the sacrifice would entail all of our sins, which are atoned for.

So there's a broader context there that could kind of be smoothed over if I had more time.

We could just kind of go over that verse bit by bit because it's talking about our sins being atoned for.

It's not necessarily specifying the ages.

It's just talking about our sins no more counted against us because the sacrifice

has come.

So there's no more counting our sins upon...

But somewhere right now, they're trying to bring back...

They're trying

to bring

back the degree that Daniel referred

to in the end.

I mean, some man is

coming to see that

possibility.

The old stuff is destroyed.

God used a nation.

But I see a possibility that he

could be

referring to in the scope

of all these...

Oh yeah, yeah, that's also the view that I would hold it being a

judgment on the fowl because when you tie that with Daniel 7, like

I spoke of earlier, Revelation 12, it's talking about the ascension of Christ.

Daniel 7, where is it?

9, where the thrones are there and the answer of the days comes and

he takes a seat.

We'll see the Father taking down a seat where he's going to

announce judgment on the fowl.

The Son of Man comes to the answer of the days.

So the Son, which is Jesus Christ, at his ascension came to the answer of the days and

it's judgment as we see in the Olivet Discourse where the temple was

destroyed.

I mean, me and my wife were arguing a lot about if that would be worse

ever because we see in some of the Old Testament where women were arguing over who was going to

eat whose baby and it was this weird thing me and my wife were debating, but

yeah, that would be judgment because he said it's coming up to the answer of the days, it's not a

descent.

So you can't talk about it being like the old pluralist heresy claim

that Christ is coming to the answer of the days.

Some man's coming up to the answer of the days, he's not descending.

So it's talking about judgment.

Our great hope is the return of Christ bodily.

And I love Paul Washer, he said that he's going to come back.

Mine, mine, mine.

I mean, that's what I love about my Lord and Savior.

He's going to come back and he's going to take what's his bodily.

So I mean, that's a great view you guys have.

One more question.

One more question.

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

Just to kind of touch post -millennialism.

They look at, like B .J. Warfield looked at 1 John 2 where he says

that he's not going to put this in for our sins, but the sins of the whole world.

So post -mill is looking at the Christianization of the entire world when the gospel is going to, and

theology is going to convert hearts and minds of everybody on the

planet.

It's your view.

I think it's just a, it's a false, I don't want

to say false, I don't want to mislead people.

It's another view of Judaism.

The Judaizers thought, oh man, he's coming back to making everything right.

Well, what draws that from post -millennialism, we're looking at things spiritually because those

that are, who live, who hear the Son of God and live are born again.

We're part of the kingdom of God.

And we see in the Lord's Prayers that thy kingdom come on earth as

it is in heaven.

So we're getting a picture where the kingdom is being built in heaven and we want that

to be saturated here on earth.

So that would be the distinction I would say.

Yes.

Well, there's a sloppy distinction because some post -mill have a nuance where they're trying to say the end of the

age was time to the Jewish age.

And I really wouldn't be able to fall upon that.

Maybe Jeremiah has got something?

Yeah, I was going to say the biggest difference between post -mill and old age is how you view it.

So this age of the post -mill is this Jewish age.

And what he's showing with the two -age model, this age is the typical age that began with Adam

and with the preaching

of God so that everything would be better.

In this view, Omdell is saying we're solving lives, suppressing the stench of the world, and

heal Christ's wounds.

I want to go to the

reading

of the Lord's Prayers.

Heavenly Father, I just want to thank you tonight that we were able to discuss this view of

Amillennialism and also some of the downfalls of the view.

Father, we always look to you, to the Savior's Son, and to what we

can have, to be edified according to your word.

Father, just bless those here who are not, may they be edified, and seek your will in everything they do in their lives.

In Christ's name we pray.

Amen.