I'm an antiantidisestablishmentarianist!
| Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/ |
|
| End Times http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3337 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | JoeyDay [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Eschatology |
Because of the subject matter, this topic will probably be of interest only to Christians, though I have no problem with anyone else chiming in (I'm not trying to be exclusive here). Eschatology is the study of "last things." It can be in reference to the end of an individual person's life (e.g. final states), but is more often applied to the end of time (the end of the world). There are three views of eschatology in Evangelical Christianity: Premillennialism, Postmillennialism, and Amillennialism. There are also various intermediate views, and if you adhere to one of these, I would be interested to hear about it. Within Premillennialism, there is an additional debate between two views: Post-tribulational and Pre-tribulational. The Wikipedia article I linked to explains each of these views briefly. I can elaborate on my own view if anyone is interested. Okay, here's my question: Ever since I read Millard Erickson's Christian Theology, I've been leaning toward Post-tribulational Premillennialist. I just started a new job at a Christian bookstore, and found out the other day that my boss is an Amillennialist. He showed me several scriptures and made what I felt to be a pretty solid preliminary case. He didn't convince me so much as he simply piqued my interest. Does anyone know much about Amillennialism? Is there a solid Biblical case for/against it? What do you think? |
|
| Author: | AgentSeethroo [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think I lean the same way, Joey. Christian theology really gets me excited, so this should be fun! Imma get back to this post when I have more time. |
|
| Author: | Tom [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 4:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Eschatology |
JoeyDay wrote: Ever since I read Millard Erickson's Christian Theology, I've been leaning toward Post-tribulational Premillennialist.
What's Post-tribulational Premillennialism? All I could find was that this means that you believe that the Bible teaches that the Lord will return to rule for 1000 years after something called "the Tribulation". And is this the Matthew 24 and Luke 21 thing? Does it have something to do with the Revelation 20:4 thing? [Edit: I see Joey updated his post a bit while I was writing this. My apoligies.] |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Post-tribulationism is the belief that the Second Coming will occur AFTER a Great Tribulation. Premillennialism is the belief that Christ's return will mark the beginning of 1000 years of peace on earth, followed by another war, then the final end. Amillennialism is the belief that the "millennium" has already begun. It started when Christ rose from the dead and will end when He returns. I am an amillennialist myself. The reason is that Revelation relates a number of events that occurred during St. John's life or shortly afterward. In John's time, the Church suffered heavy persecution under the Roman Empire, especially Nero and his successors. Interestingly enough, if you transcribe Nero into Hebrew, and add up the numbers, you end up with 666. Also, if you just add up the numbers according to the Greek, it is 616. 616 is a common alternate reading of that text (just look at the footnotes in most modern translations). I think John meant for us to understand that beast to be Nero, or at the very least, Rome under his reign. Also, if you compare the Beast to those found in Daniel, it is clear that it is Rome. Daniel describes and names four great empires that rule over Israel. Babylon (a lion) is the first. Persia (a bear--NOT RUSSIA!!!) is second. Greece under Alexander the Great (a winged leopard) is third. The last (the horrid monster, the same described in Revelation) is not named, but if you follow the progression, it is clearly Rome. What does all this mean? That the "Left Behind" FICTIONAL series is not the best guide to Christian eschatology. Note on the Two Resurrections (Rev 20): the first is that of Christ (See Matt 27:51ff--when Christ rose from the dead, so did all the saints in Jerusalem). The second will occur when he returns. So how do Christians participate in the first resurrection? Simple: Romans 6:1-7 and Colossians 2:8-15. BAPTISM. Click here for more information. For a more detailed response to LEFT BEHIND, click here. |
|
| Author: | AgentSeethroo [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So, Didymus, are you discounting the "Rapture" even though there is scripture that confirms it? |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Did I say that, AgentSeeThroo? I think if you read my post more carefully, I did not mention anything about the Rapture. 1 Thes 4:13-18 clearly states that the rapture will occur At The Second Coming, not several years prior to it. The "Left Behind" series is wrong in its interpretation. P.S. Revelation doesn't even mention the Rapture, and yet that's where most people look to find information about it. |
|
| Author: | AgentSeethroo [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ah, forgive me, I guess I misread. I was confusing "resurrection" and "rapture". This topic is kinda hard to discuss/learn about because every study is biased in one way or another. |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 5:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes, tight pants can cause those kinds of problems. |
|
| Author: | racerx_is_alive [ Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm pretty sure that I'm a Post-Tribulational Premillenialist. However, I hadn't ever used or heard those terms for it before. |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
If you want to know more, just look at this link: http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/med ... dtme-2.pdf |
|
| Author: | Buz [ Wed Sep 01, 2004 6:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Eschatology |
JoeyDay wrote: Is there a solid Biblical case for/against it? What do you think?
Some Amillenialists say that Jesus "came again" in A.D. 70, and that this dispensation, the rule of the Church, the metaphorical millennium, is as good as it gets on earth. I turn quickly to 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, which makes it clear that if the letter is true (whether you're into inerrancy or mere infallibility), Christ hasn't come back for round two of the bout. I also exercize my mind in observing that this is not as good as it should be here on earth. As far as the millennium goes, I personally wait for it. As far as the tribulation goes, I believe in both a literal (7-year) and a metaphorical (ongoing) tribulation; as most Biblical prophesy carries. Most prophesies carry a message about the future, and a parallel message for the hearer to implement immediately. Isaiah 7:14 is a good example: a prophesy of the messiah and an encouragement that Assyria would defeat Aram and the Northern Kingdom of Israel. God's will for Christians in tribulation caused by an evil world system (lawyers, politicians, terrorists, wars, credit collections agencies, angry pundits, CEOs outsourcing, unions opressing, having to live in old-folks homes when your children are tired of you, and being intimidated by the jerk in Junior-high all qualify) are given clear orders in Revalation: "Wait. Endure." Eschatology? These are my end days. |
|
| Author: | furrykef [ Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm an antiantidisestablishmentarianist!
|
|
| Author: | Buz [ Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | So... |
furrykef wrote: I'm an antiantidisestablishmentarianist!
So, you oppose Antidisestablishmentarianism? How does that not make you a disestablishmentarianist? And how is it relevant since you don't live under the Anglican church? I mean, there's nothing in Oklahoma City government needing disestablishment... or is there? |
|
| Author: | furrykef [ Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: So... |
Buz wrote: How does that not make you a disestablishmentarianist?
It doesn't. But the word's longer. So they're different. I think. And there's technically "separation of church and state" here, but the religious communities, particularly Southern Baptists, still hold certain sway. - Kef |
|
| Author: | Buz [ Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Gird thyself up |
furrykef wrote: And there's technically "separation of church and state" here, but the religious communities, particularly Southern Baptists, still hold certain sway.
Ah, the Bible Belt. I forgot. Actually, Southern Baptists hold sway even here in the North. Uh, I mean Midwest. They mean well, which is more than I can say for most politically active groups! |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Wed Sep 15, 2004 3:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
We Lutherans tend to be disestablishmentarianist, at least here in the States. This is mostly because of the Prussian Union. In the 18th century, a Prussian king outlawed Lutheranism and forced Lutherans to convert to Calvinism. So the Saxon Lutherans next door to Prussia decided to immigrate to Missouri to escape persecution. We also believe that civil government and the church serve two different functions, and therefore it is not proper for the church to tell civil governments how to conduct their affairs. Now our civil government here in the US is somewhat democratic, so regular voting is kosher. |
|
| Author: | Buz [ Wed Sep 15, 2004 4:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Kosher |
Didymus wrote: regular voting is kosher.
As opposed to the "voting with cheese" which is not Kosher. Just kidding 
|
|
| Author: | Douglas [ Tue May 17, 2005 5:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | End Times |
What do you guys believe about the end of the world? Personally, I believe that there will be a 3 1/2 year of persecution of Christians along wih many other signs such as water turning into blood etc., with the world ruled by an unholy trinity of Satan, the antichrist, and the false prophet. I believe that Jesus Christ will come back at the end of this time for Christians, and setting up his kingdom on Earth for 1000 years. |
|
| Author: | AgentSeethroo [ Tue May 17, 2005 5:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
A lot of our forum users' end time beliefs are discussed here. |
|
| Author: | Douglas [ Tue May 17, 2005 5:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gah! My bad! Please lock then. |
|
| Author: | AgentSeethroo [ Thu May 19, 2005 5:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
How's about this? MERGE'D! For great justice! |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Thu May 19, 2005 6:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thanks, SeeThroo. As I've stated on this thread and others, I believe that most of the events described in Revelation center around the Roman Persecution of the church in the first two centuries, with some events yet to occur (specifically those associated with the Second Coming). So what does this mean for us? That the Church must always follow the Way of the Cross. This means, on occasion, suffering torment and death for our faith. While some of us live in relative peace here in America and other free countries, there are churches around the world that are suffering intense persecution, particularly Afghanistan, China, Saudi Arabia. For us here in America, it is our duty to enter into their struggle through our prayers and support. Anyway, about that 1000 years. In apocalyptic literature, numbers are always symbolic. Remember when Jesus told St. Peter that he had to forgive a person 77 times? He didn't mean that on the 78th, he didn't have to forgive anymore. 77 represents completeness. In other words, he was saying, "You keep on forgiving until it's a done deal." Anyway, back on point. Anyway, that 1000 years is similar. It represents a vast indefinite period of time. The first resurrection has already occurred. See Matthew 27:52f. So how is it that we Christians can participate in that first resurrection? Easy: Romans 6:3-4! We participate in that first resurrection through Holy Baptism. Here's where part of the problem lies: Revelation was not written to be interpreted literally. It is apocalyptic literature (incidentally, the word "apocaluptw" means "to reveal what is hidden"), and apocalyptic liturature always uses symbolic language. It strikes me as odd that modern Christians tend to literalize Revelation, but allegorize the Sacraments. This is the exact opposite of how we are to understand these things. Anyway, the second problem is that modern interpretations ignore the historical context of the epistle. It was written to specific people at a specific time. It stands to reason that, if we want to understand its meaning, we should look to how the early Christians understood it. As I've stated before, early Christians understood the drama of Revelation to be the Roman Persecution and the Cult of the Emperor (i.e., worship of Nero and other emperors). Modern Christians, highly influenced by people like Tim LaHaye, Hal Lindsey, and Jack Van Impe, read Revelation and see Russian tanks, nuclear bombs, the European Union, 9-11, and other current events. What strikes me as funny is that they then apply this same hermeneutic to Old Testament prophecy, which foretold events in the history of Israel. They see the prophecies of the Babylonian Captivity (585 b.c.) as referring to modern day Iraq. They see the prophecies of the rise and fall of the Greek nations after Alexander the Great (particularly the Ptolemaic and Seleucid dynasties) as referring to Russia and Iran. The key to understanding Revelation is the Book of Daniel. In his vision, he foresaw the coming of four great empires that would rule over the Holy Land. It also identifies three of them: Babylon, Persia, and Greece. The fourth, which at that time was unnamed (probably because it didn't exist in Daniel's day), is the same beast described in Revelation 13. But following the historical progression, we end up where we started: ROME. As a wise professor once told us, the best way of understanding Revelation is to see it as an unfolding drama of human history, the conflict between Light and Darkness. Ultimately, the Darkness will be overthrown, regardless of how tough things get in the meantime. Jesus will win, and those who are on his side will benefit from his victory. There are therefore three things concerning the Last Day of which we can be certain:
(2) We won't know when. (3) Be ready. Knowing the details of the End Times is far less important than being ready for them. Whether right before the Second Coming, or 2000 years ahead of time, the Church is called to follow the Way of the Cross, and that means facing suffering and death head on. It means being what God has called us to be, both as the community of his saints and as individuals, and being faithful to that calling when he returns. Anyway, it is not my intention to belittle those who believe in Dispensationalism (the "Left Behind" theology, as I like to call it). It is my intention to stir up God's Church on earth to face the Way of the Cross. The "Left Behind" theology offers Christians an escape from the Way of the Cross by making false promises of exemption from suffering. Don't believe them. As God himself suffered on the Cross, so he calls each of us to suffer in our own way, especially when that way involved persecution and hardship. We are God's "Martyrs", both in the original sense of the word (i.e., "witnesses") and in the modern (i.e., "one who suffers for a cause"). In summary, do not place your hopes in the false promises of escape offered by "Left Behind" theology. Be faithful to God's calling for your life, and be ready to suffer for it. Then you'll be found worthy of Christ when he returns. |
|
| Author: | Simon Zeno [ Fri May 20, 2005 12:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, at the end of the world, the Fenris Wolf will devour Odin, and... Wait, I'm no Norseman! There are many other theories outside the Christian theology. For example, I suppose that if you asked an atheist, they'd say that the world will end when the sun swells in size to a red giant, then burns all life from the Earth. Or, there're the bunches of other religions which all most likely have their own end of the world beliefs. Personally, I've given very little thought to the end of the world, since the chance of it happening in my lifetime is quite slim. And even if it did, well, I don't think it's something that you can really prepare for much... |
|
| Author: | DJ Soul Camel [ Fri May 20, 2005 1:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Pre-empting the possibility that a forty-page discussion is going to erupt as with the "going to hell?" topic, is it really worth debating how the world is going to end? I mean, the existence or otherwise of God, fate vs. free will, Malcolm Mooney or Damo Suzuki, I could see how those things might impact on day-to-day life. But the apocalypse? Meh, next question |
|
| Author: | Didymus [ Fri May 20, 2005 3:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I would agree with Camel Man. Knowing the details of the end is not nearly as important as living out our callings here and now. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|