• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Introduction to Eschatology Schemes...

  • Thread starter Thread starter ReverendRV
  • Start date Start date
R

ReverendRV

Guest
Perhaps at this Forum, I can start learning more about the different Schemes of Eschatology that Christians hold to; to help me choose one to Confess. I call them Schemes, not to be derogatory; but because to me they are Schemes instead of Ortodoxy until I adhere to one. For now, I'm not interested in any books, but would like a discussion as a Primer; before choosing a book to study...

@civic
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let's start with one EXTREME of the spectrum: PRETERISM (click link for source)

Full preterism—or hyperpreterism—is the belief that all prophecy in Scripture has already happened. (The word preterism comes from the Latin preter, which means “past.” As in, the prophecy has already been fulfilled in the past.)

The reason for believing that most of these apocalyptic prophecies were fulfilled before the first century was out is that the book of Revelation is bookended with explicit statements that these prophecies “must soon take place” and that the words should not be sealed up precisely because “the time is near.”

The full preterist, by contrast, believes that all these things have already taken place. The resurrection of the living and the dead has already happened, and there is no future physical second coming of Christ, because that too has already happened.

One theologian sums up the full preterist position like this: “The coming of Christ in judgment was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, Satan and Antichrist have [already] been thrown into the lake of fire, the kingdom of God has arrived, the resurrection is understood in spiritual terms, the Great Commission has been fulfilled, all things have been made new (the old heaven and earth have passed away; the new heaven and earth have come), the promised restoration has arrived, and the world now continues as it is ad infinitum.”


Partial preterism says that prophecies in Daniel, Matthew chapter 24, and Revelation (setting aside the last three chapters) have already been fulfilled. They believe that those prophecies played themselves out in the first century AD, specifically in AD 70 when the Romans destroyed the temple in Jerusalem. What we have in Revelation, therefore, isn’t a symbolic picture of things yet to be fulfilled; it’s a symbolic picture of upheavals and conflicts that happened in the first century. To give one concrete example, “the beast” spoken of in Revelation was Emperor Nero.

That said, to the partial preterist, there are still some prophecies that were a long way off in the first century and are still yet to be fulfilled, such as those given in the last three chapters of Revelation: the visible, physical return of Christ in judgment, the final defeat of death and Satan, the resurrection of the living and the dead, and the coming of the new heaven, the new earth, and the new Jerusalem.

For the partial preterist, the prophecies of Revelation are very much in keeping with the pattern of Old Testament prophetic books: there’s a warning of imminent judgment that applies explicitly to the initial audience of the book, but there’s also the promise of an ultimate restoration that is set firmly in the future.

Partial preterism, then, tries to capture something of an “already but not yet” balance. Enjoying the firstfruits of the Spirit while knowing that our bodies are not yet finally redeemed. Thrilled by the countless prophecies fulfilled by Christ’s first coming, but eagerly awaiting the glorious and very visible return of the King.
 
Last edited:
Let's start with one EXTREME of the spectrum: PRETERISM

Full preterism—or hyperpreterism—is the belief that all prophecy in Scripture has already happened. (The word preterism comes from the Latin preter, which means “past.” As in, the prophecy has already been fulfilled in the past.)

The reason for believing that most of these apocalyptic prophecies were fulfilled before the first century was out is that the book of Revelation is bookended with explicit statements that these prophecies “must soon take place” and that the words should not be sealed up precisely because “the time is near.”

The full preterist, by contrast, believes that all these things have already taken place. The resurrection of the living and the dead has already happened, and there is no future physical second coming of Christ, because that too has already happened.

One theologian sums up the full preterist position like this: “The coming of Christ in judgment was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, Satan and Antichrist have [already] been thrown into the lake of fire, the kingdom of God has arrived, the resurrection is understood in spiritual terms, the Great Commission has been fulfilled, all things have been made new (the old heaven and earth have passed away; the new heaven and earth have come), the promised restoration has arrived, and the world now continues as it is ad infinitum.”


Partial preterism says that prophecies in Daniel, Matthew chapter 24, and Revelation (setting aside the last three chapters) have already been fulfilled. They believe that those prophecies played themselves out in the first century AD, specifically in AD 70 when the Romans destroyed the temple in Jerusalem. What we have in Revelation, therefore, isn’t a symbolic picture of things yet to be fulfilled; it’s a symbolic picture of upheavals and conflicts that happened in the first century. To give one concrete example, “the beast” spoken of in Revelation was Emperor Nero.

That said, to the partial preterist, there are still some prophecies that were a long way off in the first century and are still yet to be fulfilled, such as those given in the last three chapters of Revelation: the visible, physical return of Christ in judgment, the final defeat of death and Satan, the resurrection of the living and the dead, and the coming of the new heaven, the new earth, and the new Jerusalem.

For the partial preterist, the prophecies of Revelation are very much in keeping with the pattern of Old Testament prophetic books: there’s a warning of imminent judgment that applies explicitly to the initial audience of the book, but there’s also the promise of an ultimate restoration that is set firmly in the future.

Partial preterism, then, tries to capture something of an “already but not yet” balance. Enjoying the firstfruits of the Spirit while knowing that our bodies are not yet finally redeemed. Thrilled by the countless prophecies fulfilled by Christ’s first coming, but eagerly awaiting the glorious and very visible return of the King.
Thanks!

While I was still in my Reformed Baptist Church, they taught Amillenialism and Partial Preterism. I've read 'Last Days Madness' and 'The Last Days according to Jesus Christ'. I think I have a decent grasp on Amillenialism and Partial Preterism; if I had to side with an Eschatology now, it would be Based on these two. If you think I need to hear more about Preterism/Partial Preterism; I'm all for it. If I need to learn something crucial, go ahead. If another Poster or a Lurker needs to hear a lesson; feel free...

I always say that Partial Preterism is what ruined my desire to study Eschatology; it just makes too much sense of the Bible. I have never had another book that I've highlighted so much, and written so many notes in; than Last Days Madness. It looked like a coloring book after I was done with it...

If you want to move on to a scheme of Eschatology, go ahead. But I will read any Post you want me to read. I may ask questions and raise objections, but hopefully in a spirit of learning...
 
Consider Matthew 13:24-30,

He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.”’”

Where is a rapture before the end?
 
Thanks!

While I was still in my Reformed Baptist Church, they taught Amillenialism and Partial Preterism. I've read 'Last Days Madness' and 'The Last Days according to Jesus Christ'. I think I have a decent grasp on Amillenialism and Partial Preterism; if I had to side with an Eschatology now, it would be Based on these two. If you think I need to hear more about Preterism/Partial Preterism; I'm all for it. If I need to learn something crucial, go ahead. If another Poster or a Lurker needs to hear a lesson; feel free...

I always say that Partial Preterism is what ruined my desire to study Eschatology; it just makes too much sense of the Bible. I have never had another book that I've highlighted so much, and written so many notes in; than Last Days Madness. It looked like a coloring book after I was done with it...

If you want to move on to a scheme of Eschatology, go ahead. But I will read any Post you want me to read. I may ask questions and raise objections, but hopefully in a spirit of learning...
I’d highly recommend “more than conquers” by William Hendricksen.
 
Here is what I've observed about those who take on an eschatological position (minus dispies). Whichever brand they lend an ear to, study, watch videos, that is the one they adopt. Then if they begin to listen to the other view, they may switch.
 
Consider Matthew 13:24-30,

He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.”’”

Where is a rapture before the end?
I don't hold to Premillenial Dispensational Eschatology, as I understand it. I wouldn't Mind having someone here to begin to teach it to me from Scratch...

My perspective is that this Parable is about the Kingdom of God, that we're IN now; and that the Weeding will take place at the end of the World; perhaps after I have died...

My question is; should I dismiss my Amillenial Presupposition, so I can try and learn a different Eschatology from you about the Parable?
 
Here is what I've observed about those who take on an eschatological position (minus dispies). Whichever brand they lend an ear to, study, watch videos, that is the one they adopt. Then if they begin to listen to the other view, they may switch.
Yes, it's funny how I think Amillenialism is best; because I grew as a Christian on it...
 
Perhaps at this Forum, I can start learning more about the different Schemes of Eschatology that Christians hold to; to help me choose one to Confess. I call them Schemes, not to be derogatory; but because to me they are Schemes instead of Ortodoxy until I adhere to one.

"Streams" might be useful. It's also a good visual when trying to chart them out.

For now, I'm not interested in any books, but would like a discussion as a Primer; before choosing a book to study...

Well that's going to put a damper on Pre-Mil. It runs towards books...Like most of reformation theology. I posted a link to a very short book ( 112 pages ) elsewhere if you change your mind.
 
Here is what I've observed about those who take on an eschatological position (minus dispies). Whichever brand they lend an ear to, study, watch videos, that is the one they adopt. Then if they begin to listen to the other view, they may switch.
I agree. That’s the way it was for me. Back in the early 80’s I was a ……pre-mill. Yes, dispensational.
It wasn’t until years later that I was able to take the colored lens glasses off and read it for myself.

But when I did, I spent a few years studying into eschatology. Finally gave up because of the depth of it. I came out an amillenislist.

But I have studied the major views.
 
I don't hold to Premillenial Dispensational Eschatology, as I understand it. I wouldn't Mind having someone here to begin to teach it to me from Scratch...

My perspective is that this Parable is about the Kingdom of God, that we're IN now; and that the Weeding will take place at the end of the World; perhaps after I have died...

My question is; should I dismiss my Amillenial Presupposition, so I can try and learn a different Eschatology from you about the Parable?
I don’t think you should dismiss Amilennislism. I didn’t dismiss pre-mill when I studied.

I’m not so sure I’m a good teacher either.

But notice the parable has no rapture in the middle, no where does it say the wheat took over, nor the tares. The grew together until the end. That’s a good picture of amilliamism.
 
Last edited:
I agree. That’s the way it was for me. Back in the early 80’s I was a ……pre-mill. Yes, dispensational.
It wasn’t until years later that I was able to take the colored lens glasses off and read it for myself.

But when I did, I spent a few years studying into eschatology. Finally gave up because of the depth of it. I came out an amillenislist.

But I have studied the major views.
Did you have any "Left Behind" books?
 
I don’t think you should dismiss Amilennislism. I didn’t dismiss pre-mull when I studied.

I’m not so sure I’m a good teacher either.

But notice the parable has no rapture in the middle, no where does it say the wheat took other, nor the tares. The grew together until the end. That’s a good picture of amilliamism.
I don't suspect I would switch Schemes/Streams, but I do want to give other POVs a chance. I would have to give up Covenant Theology to begin holding to Premillenial Dispensational Eschatology; so I doubt that is going to happen...

But I do want to understand it as best as I can, through an honest inquiry...
 
Did you have any "Left Behind" books?
No...

I have a cursory understanding of Premillenial Dispensational Eschatology, because of those two movies. But I suppose what I'm looking for are Biblical reasons (or a Biblical explanation/assumption) for Premill Eschatology...

May as well shorten the Term for now...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, it's funny how I think Amillenialism is best; because I grew as a Christian on it...
After being saved, the Christians I was amongst were almost entirely Dispensational Premillenialists. I got a job in a Christian bookshop, where they strongly supported DP and they encouraged me to read what they considered one of the best books on the subject (by Walvoord). I read some of it, but although my knowledge of such things was minimal, I got a very strong sense of confusion, from the book (the Lord has often protected me from harmful things by such discernment, if I lack the necessary knowledge). I stopped reading it.

I put eschatology on the shelf; but, years later, I read another couple of books, from different viewpoints, and the amillenial one I read made the most sense (and without the confusion).
 
After being saved, the Christians I was amongst were almost entirely Dispensational Premillenialists. I got a job in a Christian bookshop, where they strongly supported DP and they encouraged me to read what they considered one of the best books on the subject (by Walvoord). I read some of it, but although my knowledge of such things was minimal, I got a very strong sense of confusion, from the book (the Lord has often protected me from harmful things by such discernment, if I lack the necessary knowledge). I stopped reading it.

I put eschatology on the shelf; but, years later, I read another couple of books, from different viewpoints, and the amillenial one I read made the most sense (and without the confusion).
I reckon I'm in a similar boat. I just thought a good Forum might be a good place for me to begin again with Eschatology...
 
Back
Top