by

The Trouble with the Tribulation

21 thoughts on “The Trouble with the Tribulation”

  1. I am already Amill in my beliefs but this was really good. I like how respectful, kind and clear he was with his explanations. 🙂

    Like

  2. Amen brother. I’ve recently preached through the Book of Revelation, addressed to persecuted Christians at the end of the 1st century and persecuted Christians throughout history. The idea of a rapture to avoid tribulation could only come from a society who has never suffered the persecution of our fellow believers in China, Korea, the Middle East and elsewhere. Biblical hermeneutics demand that we interpret the OT in the light of the new and not the other way round.

    Like

  3. Amen, sis. He is a Presbyterian, so there will issues in some of his videos that I don’t agree with, but he is gentle in explaining his views. His 6 short videos explaining the Amill view are excellent!

    Like

  4. Lol I love his use of the phrase “word pictures” when dealing with the Book of Revelation. There’s so much that he says that I disagree with, but I have to say, I agree with Katy – the way he so carefully and patiently explains everything is wonderful. He reminds me of another person I sometimes watch on youtube named husky394xp. Thank you for posting this. I always enjoy listening to alternative views of endtime prophecy. 🙂

    Like

  6. Actually the two questions he refers to are 3 questions, and looked at that way makes the Amill picture even more clear! It also more clearly dismisses the pretrib. disp. heresy!

    Like

  7. Good video, even though I don’t agree entirely with the presenters thoughts[ I do hold to the Amill view], He does debunk Macs premill position , perhaps Mac should discard eschatological teaching in favour of doing what he does best.Can’t help also thinking that we could have endless debates on hermenuetics , even before we get to debating the text itself.

    Like

  8. I on the one hand take the words of Jesus quite literally It is NOT for you to know. On the other hand to recognize the times and seasons.
    Although being reformed I hold to no particular eschatology. I believe that every eschatology has huge gaping holes. Every position seems to require a certain degree of obscurantism. I also find the writings of the earliest of church Father insightful. Explain why the most immediate students of the Apostle John post 70 AD were speculating on the time of the coming tribulation and the identity of the yet unknown anti-Christ. Their writings on the one hand indicate post tribulationism and on the other historical premillinialism.. What do they know, they were merely taught by both John and Paul?
    Personally I cannot get past what is not allegorical in Rev. In Rev. 20: 1-6 Gods “decreed” will is not allegorical. stated simply it is Gods decreed will that during this “1000” year period there will be ZERO satanic deception of the nations. Otherwise the whole passage is utterly pointless. Which one of you will argue that currently there is zero satanic deception? If there is currently any degree of satanic deception at present then this cannot be the “1000” year era or age.
    I also have heard scant discussions on the 2 different resurrections from any camp. The first resurrection is called such because there must be at least a second..
    No on has written much on the possibility of gnostic dualistic influences on escatological thinking.

    Like

  9. T.I. Miller – you made up your own “scripture”. Rev 20 tells us Satan is bound from deceiving the nations during the thousand years, it does NOT say there will be ZERO satanic deception of the nations. His influence has been in the world since The fall and the system of the world and all his demons and children work at deceiving.

    Since the letter John wrote is apocalyptic, one has to look for evidence that something is literal, not merely assume it is.

    I recommend this sermon: http://www.sermonaudio.com/playpopup.asp?SID=1230131011156 with one next week that addresses the two resurrections.

    Like

  10. that he should deceive the nations no more, till…… No more means no more. No more means zero. No more sorrow or tear also means no more….what am I missing here?
    Bound and SEALED by God until released by God to again deceive the nations.
    Sealed is sealed it is not kind of sealed. Are you sealed or just kind of sealed?

    Like

  11. You’re missing this: “His influence has been in the world since The fall and the system of the world and all his demons and children work at deceiving.” Satan is one finite creature. He could be destroyed today and his influence – through these others – would be felt for thousands of years to come.

    No more sorrow and tears applies to those who are with the Lord in Heaven or on the New Earth in the age to come. In THIS age we will have trouble.

    When Christ comes a second time (there will not be a third time) He will judge the nations and the earth and heavens (where the galaxies are, not God’s Heaven) will be destroyed and made new. Satan will be released for a short time and then be thrown into Hell for eternity and God’s people will be with Him. Not until then we will have a cessation of trials.

    Like

  12. Quote
    Which one of you will argue that currently there is zero satanic deception?
    end quote

    It is well within the bounds of reason to assume that the 1000 yrs of Satans binding has expired, and that he has indeed been released to once again deceive the nations, hence the lies and confusion we see today wreaking havoc amongst churches .The 70 th week of Daniel that encapsulates the period between the two advents is truncated in two by 1260 days and 42 months, contrary to popular opinion , I do not believe that these two time,times and half a time periods are the same , the 1260 days [1000 yrs] denotes the time that the church is protected from the wrath and deception of Satan, the 42 months denotes the period of time that Satan is given to wage war on the church, which imho , is the great tribulation.

    Like

  13. mondoray – Please show me from Scripture how it is that the 70th week of Daniel’s prophecy is detached from the other 69 weeks. Show me from Scripture where you see the church protected from Satan’s schemes for 1000 years. Explain when Satan was released, in your view, as Rev 20 says he will be released for just a little time before the end of the age. How long do you recon that will be?

    Like

  14. Brother Manfred
    I again point to my original point that all eschatologist theories have holes and all require adherents to some degree of obscurantism. I cannot at this time claim that I can resolve or prove anything beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt. Nor can anyone else. I currently believe that I can expose serious flaws in all of them. Just as this article easily blew holes in in an opposing view. I recently re-read the very words of Jesus that skewered my end times inclinations. What I refuse to do is attempt to explain it away so that I can stick to my guns and my eschatological security blanket.
    One final thing concerning “no more, till” Nothing can thwart the intent of any of Gods decreed will statements. He has declared it and it will come to pass. Gods primary INTENT was to PREVENT satanic deception of the nations. were God to allow either Satan or his demons to continue to deceive the nations His will would be nullified. God forbid. this cannot be. What God has sealed God alone can break that seal. One would almost have to argue against God being immutable and all powerful to accommodate a sealed and forbidden satanic force loosening Gods grip enough to deceive the nations during the “1000” years. This is what is so untenable to me.
    all I ask is that you think about it.
    I am most leery of any eschatology that seems to emulate so many false teachings. The kingdom now 7 mountain dominionists, the social(ist) gospel works righteousness movement the emergent pseudo-ecumenical social salvation movement the spiritual formation mystics movement the entire new age movement to name a few. they all seek to set up a new world neo-edenic order prior to the physical return of Christ.
    I tend to lean toward ruling and reigning WITH Him rather than in His stead.
    I pray that this little exercise brings more light than heat.

    Like

  16. Miller – I agree with you about those various groups focused on what’s going on in the here-and-now. They miss the eternal focus, wherein we are reigning with the Lord Jesus. Press on!

    Like

  18. Manfred
    It is my belief that the 70 wks are consecutive, I believe that the scripture teaches that the 70 th week began with Christ being cut off , this being the confirmation of the covenant with many.This covenant with many [the Elect ] continues until the last of the elect has been sealed, which I believe to be the “consummation ” that is spoken of in vs 27.

    The bible indicates in Rev 12:14 that the “woman” , the new covenant church is protected from the face of the serpent for 1260 days, this being the first of the time,times and half a time.

    The 5th trumpet heralds the release of Satan from the bottomless pit[ Rev 9], a parallel account of this woe is given in Rev 16.This period is also denoted as being the forty two months.We are not enlightened as to how long this time will actually be , but i believe that we must be content to accept that in scriptural terms it will be for a short time.

    Like

  19. http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/early_church_on_the_millennium.htm

    this is a link to quotes of the ante-nicean fathers. concerning the “1000” years. these men were taught by John or Polycarp. There are more.
    I did listen to message concerning the first resurrection. Plausible but not without its problems. Rather than list them I will ask your help on these other passages.
    “Were there no sinners there would be no need of laws”. In the age to come all will be regenerate glorified saints and or the heavenly hosts. What need is there for the saint to rule and to reign? rule and reign over who?
    What need is there in the age to come for Christ to rule with a rod of iron over the nations? I don’t buy into the concept of ruling with Christ at present.
    Isa. 46:11 “I have spoken it , I will also bring it to pass….”
    Does God brings things to pass literally or figuratively?
    When will God bring to pass the marvelous things of Isa. 11? When will the lion graze like and ox? What of the talk of living long, but not eternal, lives?

    Like

  20. Miller,

    Chiliasm (historical premillennialism) has been around a long time – that doesn’t mean it’s the best eschatological framework.

    In the age to come, why wouldn’t there be hierarchy and positions that correspond that? In the new earth, there will be greater and lesser rewards, as there will be with punishments in hell. Do you think God doesn’t rule in Heaven presently? Though there are only heavenly angels and the souls of saints, He rules. He cannot but rule – He is God!

    The kingdom of is among you! Christ said. His kingdom is here, in the midst of His saints – how He be among His people as described in Romans 12 and 1 Cor 5 if that were not so?

    God brings things to pass spiritually and temporally – terms I prefer to figuratively and literally. That which is spiritual is literal – it’s just not temporal. Scripture is not always clear about which is spiritual but the entire book of Revelation is clear that it’s apocalyptic and cannot reasonably be read as one would read Genesis, for example.

    Here’s a good primer on the Amillennial perspective: http://www.the-highway.com/amila_Hoekema.html

    and here’s a good primer on why historic premil is problematic: http://eschatologystuff.wordpress.com/2007/03/13/problems-with-premillennialism-by-sam-storms/

    No system of eschatology is without problems – God’s Word is not as clear on this topic as we would like it. And that’s for a reason. I happen to agree with Kim Riddlebarger, who moved from dispensationalism to amillennialism when he said that the amillennial framework does the least violence to the scriptures of all the perspectives.

    Like

  21. thank you for this exchange. I have said all I have wanted to say. ( even though I did not take the occasion to also shoot holes in the preterist.) As for the links do not think that because I have not been convinced by any position that I am under informed. I have never met a premill that knew what to do with Matt. 13:39. ( I am also aware of how much theology I do not know). I think the article on “reformed traditions”, in my mind is applicable to reformed eschatology as well. I will not fight to the death over this topic. With all due respect to Riddlebarger, any violence to the scripture is still doing violence to the scripture. This is why I am so reticent to take a dogmatic position in an area not essential to salvation.

    Like

Tell us what you think:

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.