Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Are we in the Time of Sorrows?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View Post
    Because man can not save himself spiritual nor it appears even physically. Any viewpoint that teaches that man can save himself is ultimately doomed to disappoint one who follows that view.
    This is a common misperception/misrepresentation and is in no way expressed or implied by having a optimistic expectation for the future. An optimism with respect to the future of the world is based on a belief in the power of what Jesus did and how it can and has changed the world. It is also based on plain evidence of the success of the gospel. This is not man saving himself.

    In my experience premillenials and futurists do not believe that the gospel has the power to change the world or indeed that it has changed the world materially. Their belief that Revelation lies entirely in the future and at the end of time means that they expect the world to eventually devolve into near complete chaos and tragedy. All signs of improvement are mistaken and attributed to deception, lies, and temporary localized anomalies. The millions and perhaps billions who name Christ are somehow deceived or insincere or lack some critical knowledge that voids their salvation. Or if their salvation is recognized, futurists believe some event in the near to distant future will reverse the growth of the church. In short, the devil and human nature are too powerful for the message of Christ to overcome.

    Peace.
    Last edited by AlphaBravo; 12-22-2014, 01:05 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by AlphaBravo View Post
      This is a common misperception/misrepresentation and is in no way expressed or implied by having a optimistic expectation for the future. An optimism with respect to the future of the world is based on a belief in the power of what Jesus did and how it can and has changed the world. It is also based on plain evidence of the success of the gospel. This is not man saving himself.

      In my experience premillenials and futurists do not believe that the gospel has the power to change the world or indeed that it has changed the world materially. Their belief that Revelation lies entirely in the future and at the end of time means that they expect the world to eventually devolve into near complete chaos and tragedy. All signs of improvement are mistaken and attributed to deception, lies, and temporary localized anomalies. The millions and perhaps billions who name Christ are somehow deceived or insincere or lack some critical knowledge that voids their salvation. Or if their salvation is recognized, futurists believe some event in the near to distant future will reverse the growth of the church. In short, the devil and human nature are too powerful for the message of Christ to overcome.

      Peace.
      It seems you're creating a false dichotomy between success of the gospel/growth of the church (though I argue the faith is waning and this has been shown in various polls, especially in the west) and the chaos in the world. The two are not mutually exclusive, at least I as a futurist don't believe this. I also don't believe the gospel's purpose is to change the world as it is now, but to call those "out of the world" as per John 15:18-19. The New Testament never indicates the church will change the world as it is presently (or prior to the return of Christ). To the contrary, it clearly implies the purpose of a Christian is to walk a different spiritual course in the world as the world continues to run its own course, and for those "few" Christians that manage to pass through the straight and narrow way to endure as this would in many cases lead to much friction with the rest of the world.

      In any event, I'm also wondering how you explain the apostles and their outlook on the things to come which generally correlates with what futurists believe, i.e. 1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 2:9-12, 2 Timothy 3, 2 Peter 3, James 5.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by seanD View Post
        It seems you're creating a false dichotomy between success of the gospel/growth of the church (though I argue the faith is waning and this has been shown in various polls, especially in the west) and the chaos in the world. The two are not mutually exclusive, at least I as a futurist don't believe this. I also don't believe the gospel's purpose is to change the world as it is now, but to call those "out of the world" as per John 15:18-19. The New Testament never indicates the church will change the world as it is presently (or prior to the return of Christ). To the contrary, it clearly implies the purpose of a Christian is to walk a different spiritual course in the world as the world continues to run its own course, and for those "few" Christians that manage to pass through the straight and narrow way to endure as this would in many cases lead to much friction with the rest of the world.

        In any event, I'm also wondering how you explain the apostles and their outlook on the things to come which generally correlates with what futurists believe, i.e. 1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 2:9-12, 2 Timothy 3, 2 Peter 3, James 5.
        Briefly, I think that the language in 1 Th 5 is very similar in tone and content to the language in Mt 24 and Lk 21 which can be tied to the destruction of Jerusalem and with the judgement and reward that occurred at that time.

        The language of 2 Th 2 can also be connected with the events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem. I think that Paul makes the prophesied events very personal to his audience even though he cautions them that the time was not yet upon them.

        I think the text in 2 Tim 3 easily matches the times described leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem. Even the Hebrew writer indicates that the "last days" were upon them (Heb 1:2)

        The book of 2 Peter is more difficult. In the book of 1 Peter the writer seems very intent to warn of imminent events whereas in 2 Peter he seems to be trying to do some damage control and indicate that the events are not upon them. This actually seems similar to 1 Th 5 and does not preclude the possibility of the events occurring in their lifetime.

        I believe that the warnings and curses and prophecies in James 5 have very specific fulfillment in the destruction of Jerusalem, just as the warnings and prophecies of Jesus to the rich Jewish rulers were very specific. Many of the parables of Jesus were given to the Jewish rulers and are specific to their judgement.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by AlphaBravo View Post
          Briefly, I think that the language in 1 Th 5 is very similar in tone and content to the language in Mt 24 and Lk 21 which can be tied to the destruction of Jerusalem and with the judgement and reward that occurred at that time.

          The language of 2 Th 2 can also be connected with the events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem. I think that Paul makes the prophesied events very personal to his audience even though he cautions them that the time was not yet upon them.

          I think the text in 2 Tim 3 easily matches the times described leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem. Even the Hebrew writer indicates that the "last days" were upon them (Heb 1:2)

          The book of 2 Peter is more difficult. In the book of 1 Peter the writer seems very intent to warn of imminent events whereas in 2 Peter he seems to be trying to do some damage control and indicate that the events are not upon them. This actually seems similar to 1 Th 5 and does not preclude the possibility of the events occurring in their lifetime.

          I believe that the warnings and curses and prophecies in James 5 have very specific fulfillment in the destruction of Jerusalem, just as the warnings and prophecies of Jesus to the rich Jewish rulers were very specific. Many of the parables of Jesus were given to the Jewish rulers and are specific to their judgement.
          Well then it just comes down to the differences of interpretation between preterism and futurism, that's all. But you can't really blame a futurist and their outlook on the future based on those passages, in spite of the fact you believe their interpretation is incorrect. And I appreciate your responses. You're one of the few people here that can actually respond with a coherent argument without breaking the posts up into a million pieces.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by seanD View Post
            Well then it just comes down to the differences of interpretation between preterism and futurism, that's all. But you can't really blame a futurist and their outlook on the future based on those passages, in spite of the fact you believe their interpretation is incorrect.
            Yes I agree. I think there was a post on the old site that asked the question "Why does Revelation matter?" or something like that. I think that what we are discussing is one of the practical effects of ones opinion on apocalyptic writing.

            Peace.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by AlphaBravo View Post
              This is a common misperception/misrepresentation and is in no way expressed or implied by having a optimistic expectation for the future. An optimism with respect to the future of the world is based on a belief in the power of what Jesus did and how it can and has changed the world. It is also based on plain evidence of the success of the gospel. This is not man saving himself.

              In my experience premillenials and futurists do not believe that the gospel has the power to change the world or indeed that it has changed the world materially. Their belief that Revelation lies entirely in the future and at the end of time means that they expect the world to eventually devolve into near complete chaos and tragedy. All signs of improvement are mistaken and attributed to deception, lies, and temporary localized anomalies. The millions and perhaps billions who name Christ are somehow deceived or insincere or lack some critical knowledge that voids their salvation. Or if their salvation is recognized, futurists believe some event in the near to distant future will reverse the growth of the church. In short, the devil and human nature are too powerful for the message of Christ to overcome.

              Peace.
              I agree with SeanD's response to your post. I want to add my own perspective.

              I am neither premillennial nor futurist - I'm undecided except I have significant doubts about pre-trib. So my view that man is destroying themselves come from looking at how man is behaving in the world. He is busy throwing God out of his life and doing what he thinks best. I know God is sovereign; and man has free will; and I admit I have not resolved how both are true.

              I do not view technological advance as being the equivalent of human advance. I agree the technology advances are impressive but do they really mean society is better. For example, I think its arguable (but way off thread) that Internet has not actually improved society.

              The story of God's relationship with man is God striving to restore man to relationship with himself. The benefit to society has always been a consequence of this restoration. The Moral Majority movement messed up when they flipped to "lets change society so we can save people." Now we have neither saved people nor a better society.

              I don't believe the Devil or human nature are stronger than God either. God wants followers who chose to follow Him. The natural consequence of this is people who won't follow God. God has to then permit this world to suffer the consequences of man who will not follow Him. So as more people ignore God the world will run down into ruin.

              Like I said, I'm not certain of my Eschatological position. I do know that God has to return to save this world from man. Man will never be able to build Heaven earth.
              "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

              "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

              Comment


              • #82
                Technology unquestionably has it's benefits, but it has dire costs, especially in regards to the privacy/surveillance issue. Assume hypothetically that the powers that control just the surveillance apparatus already in place now (I can't imagine what it will be like 5-10 years from now) was hostile to the faith. Christians would have to totally avoid the technological grid and pretty much go underground to avoid being detected. This is a hypothetical that is not at all farfetched even right now as the Constitution has pretty much become impotent versus the will of the executive power, and "terrorist" is becoming more and more of a loose and murky term. In other words, the technology is already pretty much in place to fulfill Rev 13 and Luke 21:12-19 if it were to happen right now (this fact can't be disputed). All we need is the social and governmental shift from tolerance towards Christians to intolerance towards Christians. The latter part can be disputed only because we're not seeing it now in western countries (of course, if your overseas, then this can't be disputed either).

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View Post
                  So as more people ignore God the world will run down into ruin.
                  I guess my point is that this expectation is largely a product of a premillenial/futurist eschatology and perhaps also a Calvinist persuasion of total hereditary depravity. If this eschatology/soteriology is untrue then I believe that this kind of pessimism does a great, if unmeasurable, disservice to the growth of the gospel. Furthermore, I am not convinced that the decline you describe is occurring. Rather the gospel is being accepted in greater and greater numbers around the globe. I feel that this cannot be dismissed easily and that casual dismissal shows a bit of callousness.

                  Having said that, I realize that there are also textual hurdles in supporting a more optimistic, post millennial view (Mt 7 being one). I think that the vision in Daniel 2 is a good place to start. The stone made without hands strikes the image in the feet and subsequently grows to become a mountain that fills the whole earth. This suggests a gradual and victorious process under the sun that initiated at the origin of the kingdom during the Roman Empire...a product of my eschatology I know.

                  Peace.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by AlphaBravo View Post
                    I guess my point is that this expectation is largely a product of a premillenial/futurist eschatology and perhaps also a Calvinist persuasion of total hereditary depravity. If this eschatology/soteriology is untrue then I believe that this kind of pessimism does a great, if unmeasurable, disservice to the growth of the gospel. Furthermore, I am not convinced that the decline you describe is occurring. Rather the gospel is being accepted in greater and greater numbers around the globe. I feel that this cannot be dismissed easily and that casual dismissal shows a bit of callousness.
                    Peace.
                    I live in the Northeast US and this article matches up with my experience of Christianity in the region. http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ine-northeast/ This isn't the first article I've seen along these lines but it is the most recent. Maybe the Gospel is being accepted in more numbers around the globe, but its being rejected in my corner.

                    To make it clear, I am not saying this because I have a theological position and then am trying to make the facts fit it. I am simply trying to determine what the facts are and following where they lead. I will agree that others may use their theology to determine the facts.
                    "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

                    "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Thing is, though statistics can be skewed certain ways, statistics generally don't lie, especially when other factors are included with the numbers, such as things occurring on the social and political fronts against Christian beliefs. What makes it so unfortunate is that America (though I've never argued it is or ever was a "Christian nation") was a at least a major beacon for Christianity to the rest of the world (from which came much of the global charity and missionary work to the rest of the world). So it's exceptionally troubling that the number of American believers (though still very great in number) is beginning to dwindle.
                      Last edited by seanD; 01-07-2015, 06:41 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by seanD View Post
                        Thing is, though statistics can be skewed certain ways, statistics generally don't lie, especially when other factors are included with the numbers, such as things occurring on the social and political fronts against Christian beliefs. What makes it so unfortunate is that America (though I've never argued it is or ever was a "Christian nation") was a at least a major beacon for Christianity to the rest of the world (from which came much of the global charity and missionary work to the rest of the world). So it's exceptionally troubling that the number of American believers (though still very great in number) is beginning to dwindle.
                        Speaking of statistics, here is an interesting study on the size and distribution of the worlds Christian population in 2011. I pasted in a few relevant bits.

                        http://www.pewforum.org/2011/12/19/g...stianity-exec/

                        A comprehensive demographic study of more than 200 countries finds that there are 2.18 billion Christians of all ages around the world, representing nearly a third of the estimated 2010 global population of 6.9 billion.

                        In 1910, about two-thirds of the world’s Christians lived in Europe, where the bulk of Christians had been for a millennium, according to historical estimates by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity.2 Today, only about a quarter of all Christians live in Europe (26%). A plurality – more than a third – now are in the Americas (37%). About one in every four Christians lives in sub-Saharan Africa (24%), and about one-in-eight is found in Asia and the Pacific (13%).

                        The number of Christians around the world has nearly quadrupled in the last 100 years, from about 600 million in 1910 to more than 2 billion in 2010. But the world’s overall population also has risen rapidly, from an estimated 1.8 billion in 1910 to 6.9 billion in 2010. As a result, Christians make up about the same portion of the world’s population today (32%) as they did a century ago (35%).

                        This apparent stability, however, masks a momentous shift. Although Europe and the Americas still are home to a majority of the world’s Christians (63%), that share is much lower than it was in 1910 (93%). And the proportion of Europeans and Americans who are Christian has dropped from 95% in 1910 to 76% in 2010 in Europe as a whole, and from 96% to 86% in the Americas as a whole.

                        At the same time, Christianity has grown enormously in sub-Saharan Africa and the Asia-Pacific region, where there were relatively few Christians at the beginning of the 20th century. The share of the population that is Christian in sub-Saharan Africa climbed from 9% in 1910 to 63% in 2010, while in the Asia-Pacific region it rose from 3% to 7%.
                        Last edited by AlphaBravo; 01-12-2015, 06:34 PM. Reason: quotes added

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by seanD View Post
                          NOT the tribulation (so please don't drone on about making careless predictions about the end of the world), but the troubling times that precede it. I know what the preterists will obviously say. I'm wondering what futurists think.

                          Wars and rumors of wars* -- pretty much every major power in the world is involved in some kind of conflict or dispute with another country (so many that it would have been tedious to list them here).

                          * I think we should include the economic/currency wars between the world powers (for those privy to the current situation in global economics).

                          Nation against nation (or tribe against tribe) -- all the protests, demonstrations, riots and coups in Latin America, North America, Europe, Middle East and Asia (again, too many for me to give links).

                          Pestilences -- MERS, ebola outbreaks, resurgence of measles and mumps.

                          Earthquakes -- not just magnitude and frequency, but earthquakes happening in unexpected locations.

                          Persecution of the church -- discussed here.

                          False prophets -- impending doom of Y2k, to comet Elenin, to 2012 and everything in between.

                          The love of many will wax cold -- I don't think I need to elaborate on this one as it's all too obvious based on the cruelty we're seeing in society and how uncaring it is (i.e. few examples: here, here, here here here).
                          So I come back to the original post after reflecting on all that has been said. So what has the discussion resulted for me?

                          You can certainly justly claim that the world is not in a Time of Trouble. I think AlphaBravo is right on this. There are too many positives for Christianity on the globe to think less.

                          Yet what does a revival in Africa or South America, or China mean to me? God is sovereign and working out His plan. Miracles still happen. Its encouraging.

                          But revival over there has a minimal effect on the society I live in here. I still live in an area that doesn't have faith anymore. I live in area where most of the people are as ignorant of God and the Bible as the unsaved when the first missionary arrived. I don't have to worry about going to the mission field anymore. The mission field has come here.

                          People I respect say a revival is coming here. I hope they're right. I don't claim to have a special connection with God to know His plans for this area. I sense that this area still has to plumb the depths of rebellion against God and utterly fail before revival can come. And its not going to be pleasant. And the Christians that are here are not preparing for the storm that is coming. How can it be otherwise when "In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit." - Judges 21:25? When a people do not accept Jesus as their King, do not follow His commandments and will, they do what is right in their own mind, how can trouble then be avoided? It can't.

                          I believe there will someday be a worldwide time of trouble. It may well be when the spiritual poison being brewed in Western Europe and the US is spread throughout the world. But it is not now.

                          But there certainly may be local times of trouble and only a fool says "It can't happen here."
                          "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

                          "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Maybe it's because we have it good in America (right now). If we were Christian living in the Near East right now I bet we'd think it was the apocalypse.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by seanD View Post
                              Nation against nation (or tribe against tribe) -- all the protests, demonstrations, riots and coups in Latin America, North America, Europe, Middle East and Asia (again, too many for me to give links).
                              The Greek word is ethnos: tribe against tribe, race against race, people against people, and this pretty much includes everything that divides us across cultural and social lines.

                              Most of us are familiar with the civil unrest spreading across numerous countries across continents such as Africa, EU, Middle East and even here in America because these are headline news events for the most part. Civil unrest has also been occurring or occurred in places like Hong Kong, Taiwan, Venezuela and Brazil in the last three years. The Economist does a decent job chronicling most of these events...

                              http://www.economist.com/topics/civil-unrest

                              Social scientists argue that this new phenomenon is sparked much quicker and more efficiently by modern network technology that has never existed in any time in recorded human history...

                              Espousing public discontent over a range of sometimes unrelated, even conflicting issues, they were driven largely by new communication technologies coupled with an abiding distrust of government policies.

                              Unlike the formal, planned protests of earlier times, the latest ones are, for the most part, informal and relatively spontaneous. As such, scientists say, they reflect a shift away from conventional social hierarchies towards what some call leaderless networks.

                              http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/d...730-2qoyd.html
                              So, as situations become even more unstable worldwide (due to economic -- ESPECIALLY economic -- political and social factors), which we wouldn't expect to improve on any even level within the current sovereign-nation global structure we're in now, the logical conclusion here is that we should see more of this civil unrest as network technology continues to advance and availability becomes easier as it gets cheaper.

                              And you don't even need a thorough understanding of the current dire global economic situation (the massive upon massive amounts of accumulating debt loads in major economies around the world) to believe this, as these disenchanted tribal sentiments, being fueled by communication technology, are driven by raw human nature.

                              Hence, if logic serves us well and these uprisings grow and intensify, the need of a radical global power structure to emerge and improve these situations on an even level will become more and more inevitable.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by seanD View Post
                                So, as situations become even more unstable worldwide (due to economic -- ESPECIALLY economic -- political and social factors), which we wouldn't expect to improve on any even level within the current sovereign-nation global structure we're in now, the logical conclusion here is that we should see more of this civil unrest as network technology continues to advance and availability becomes easier as it gets cheaper.

                                And you don't even need a thorough understanding of the current dire global economic situation (the massive upon massive amounts of accumulating debt loads in major economies around the world) to believe this, as these disenchanted tribal sentiments, being fueled by communication technology, are driven by raw human nature.
                                As materialism rises as people's world view, economics will become more important. Your economic status is becoming the scorecard of your worth. I'm seeing this at work. Our customers are increasingly not viewed as people but as sources of money. How to get them to buy one more thing is the problem to solve. As a consumer, I feel the same anymore. I'm not a person, I have money that I have to be relieved of.

                                Look at how the Internet has gone from the Information super-highway to the Advertising super-highway. Facebook has done the same.

                                As people lose their sense of being/of being valued for more than the material being and possessions, unrest is going to increase. As we lose our sense of community (on-line community isn't the same as face-to-face community), unrest is going to increase. I think we're also losing our trust of authority and leadership. All of these are the seedbed for a revolt or revolution.

                                Originally posted by seanD View Post
                                Hence, if logic serves us well and these uprisings grow and intensify, the need of a radical global power structure to emerge and improve these situations on an even level will become more and more inevitable.
                                This is referred to in the Bible as the system the Anti-Christ will establish as he takes control of the world. I'm not sure how close we are to that.
                                "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

                                "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X