There has been some eschatological chatter on Twitter since John MacArthur dropped a zinger re posmillennialism during an otherwise great sermon. You can read my thoughts HERE
Since then there have been the odd tweets in support of amil and postmil. I prefer not to debate eschatology on Twitter. I like most of the folk I disagree with on eschatology and get a lot from them in other areas. I'm used to seeing generalizations and pejoratives flung at premillennialism and dispensationalism. But it turns out my amil/postmil friends can get pretty defensive.
One comment I've seen more than once is this...
"The positions are all named in reference to the Millennium which is only mentioned one time in the Bible. Revelation 20...It's ironic because it's a notoriously difficult passage in a difficult chapter in a difficult book."
Personally, I don't find the passage notoriously difficult. But then I'm not trying to force it to say something different to what it appears to mean. I also don't get how frequency relates to anything being biblically correct. How many times is the Covenant of Grace mentioned - only once or...? Or the Trinity for that matter. Now there's irony if you like! Then you get the odd dismissive (and irritating) lecture about genres and types, whatever: as if premillennialists get their eschatology from the Left Behind novels or Hal Lindsey books and don't know any better.
So this is another excuse for me to post some helpful links:
The Parameters of Meaning
No comments:
Post a Comment