Think Wink.

When trying to articulate my exact eschatological position, I often have a difficult time because I fall somewhere between amillennialism and postmillennialism. Here is Jason Robert’s position as he laments the problems with labels,

But here is the problem with labels:
I am postmillennarian when it comes to the nature of the kingdom. But I am amillennarian when it comes to the start of the kingdom and its length. I am postmillennarian when it comes understanding that Jesus will return at the end of the “millennium.” But I am amillennarian when it comes to understanding that the “millennium” is not actually a literal thousand years but is the biblical description of the New Covenant ministry of the Church in which we live. I am postmillennarian when it comes to understanding that the Bible is the sole source of human ethics, which is also known as theonomy. But I am amillennarian when it comes to fact that I do not believe that there will be some future “Golden Age” where this cursed world will someday operate according to Biblical law and be filled with a universal development of Biblical theocratic republics where unbelievers will be punished by death. Simply put, in the Covenantal sense I am generally postmillennial, with a historical amillennarian perspective of the starting point, nature and length of the “millennium,” and convinced of an early dating of Revelation.

While I do not ascribe to Covenant theology as Jason does, I like this paragraph on how I fall between the amil and postmil positions. Here is the full post: The Inadequacy of Labels

A Blissful Headache

When I think of “euaggelion” or “gospel”…

Another look into euaggelion

Since January, I have become more and more fascinated with Paul Washer. His website is HeartCry Missionary Society. He is an amazing preacher. Here is a sermon on the judgment of God at the last day. It is amazing!

The Lord Is Moving

James White on Steve Gregg

James White and Molinism

I have made known in earlier posts that I am a partial preterist, postmillennialist (or better yet an optimistic amillennialist–amilliennialism tends to view the success of the church in her commission [Matthew 28:18-20] very pessimistically). My understanding of the rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4 is closest to a post-tribulation view, although I don’t really think we need to have a separate category for what happens at the Resurrection when those who are living are translated into their resurrection-bodies.

The following link is for a two-hour debate hosted by Covenant Radio. It is between Don Preston is a full preterist and his opponent is Lou Ruggiero who is a dispensational premillennialist. While I think that full preterists push certain texts too far (i.e. 1 Thessalonians 4) and thus loosing the eternal estate, there is a great deal that I agree with in regards to full preterism. Listen to this debate and note one thing. The dispensationalist’s commitment to a literal reading of the OT prevents him from allowing Paul and Peter to interpret the OT prophets. Also, the dispensationalist must avoid the texts that speak of timing issues (i.e. texts that say “quickly”). Also, the hyperbolic language in the OT prophets are not allowed to be taken hyperbolically. I enjoyed the debate and I have a great deal of respect for one Don Preston. His website is www.eschatology.org. Here is the link to the debate.

The Second Coming Debate (Preston vs. Ruggiero).

If you liked this debate, Don Preston is going to debate Melvin Jones on June 26, 2008 on the topic of eschatology. Check out the Covenant Radio website (linked above) for more information.

This Sux

The Right Time and the Right Place

My Comfort in Romans 9

Has past since my grandfather passed away. I spoke of it the day after he passed (click here to read it) here on the blog. It hit me the Sunday before last that it has been a whole year. He died on a Friday and we had the funeral on Tuesday. As I remember that sorrowful weekend, Friday to Tuesday, I am drawn back to the funeral. However, I can still see my grandpa’s face as he slipped out of life and into death. It isn’t so much burned into my memory in a painful way, rather it is stitched in my memory seeing him at peace for the first time in years.

But I remember the funeral. It will always be a special time for me. My grandfather always loved to hear me preach God’s Word, but due to his ailments, he could never come to hear me. So the only thing that I could think of to honor his memory was to speak at the funeral. When I pondered on what I could speak of, only one thing came to mind: the resurrection. What better time to speak of our blessed expectation than at a time where death is so prominent. So I took 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 as my text and probably made every dispensational, pre-trib, pre-mil Christian everywhere upset when I said that the resurrection and rapture are the same event. But that was the hope I wanted and still want my family to cling to: we will be raised to eternal life to enjoy Christ face to face.

Then I did something that connected me to my aunts and uncles in a way that has never happened before or since. For a moment, all thirteen of us connected on a very personal level that really opens up the soul and really grieve. My mother had this great idea. She is one of twelve siblings, eight girls and four boys. Sibling rivalry in among her brothers and sisters never really went away (but when does it ever?). So my mother wanted to help them see that their father loved them uniquely yet equally. Some of my aunts were really versed in the medical field and so were around him more during his last days than others. Other aunts lived or worked very close by to be there a lot in his last days. So we set out to remind to think of ways to show how unique and special and individual was grandpa’s love for each of this twelve kids.

But what really made that ten minute space of talking was not so much what was said, but how I said it. I personalized it to drive it home, and the Holy Spirit really honored that and moved mightily to help them grieve. I spoke to each of the twelve children (my aunts and uncles). It was difficult to get through, especially when speaking of my mother’s relationship with grandpa because…well it was my mother and I love her dearly. There are aunts or uncles that I don’t see hardly at all. But in that moment, I was more than a nephew or pastor. I don’t know how to describe it. But it was the sweetest of times for me. I thank God for that moment every day I think of my grandpa, which is most days.

I so miss my grandpa that I now have to eat bread with almost everything. From mashed potatoes and gravy to chicken or turkey cooked with noodles to chili. I just love to eat bread now. I really do miss my grandfather a lot. But more than that, I am envious for if he is in heaven, and I really do believe he is, he is experiencing raw, pure, perfect joy and beauty that can only be experienced in the presence of God, for he is that beauty and joy (Psalm 16:11). I remember doing so much with grandpa and wish there was more I could do with him, but oh well. The Lord did not will for me to and I embrace that will whole heartedly and joyfully. I hope my reminiscings bless you as much as they bless me.

This Time Next Year…

Fixing the BCS?

NFL Draft Talk

One of the many ways people try to break down the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament is that the Old Testament is where God is the God of wrath and the New Testament is where God is the God of love. And let us think about it for a second. Yahweh orders the mass genocide of Canaanite peoples under Joshua’s campaign to seize Palestine. Every time Israel would violate the Law of Moses, plagues and famines and wars would break out against the people of God. Read what Yahweh says in Ezekiel 5:8-10, “Therefore this is what the sovereign Lord says: I – even I – am against you, and I will execute judgment among you while the nations watch. I will do to you what I have never done before and will never do again because of all your abominable practices. Therefore fathers will eat their sons within you, Jerusalem, and sons will eat their fathers. I will execute judgments on you, and I will scatter any survivors to the winds.” God’s punishment for Jerusalem is so terrible that God has never done anything like it and will never do it again. There will be such harsh famine (I’m guessing) that there will be cannibalism. And that is for the idolatrous and syncrotistic ways of Judah and Israel.

But in the New Testament, we have Jesus and texts like John 3:16, “For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” Or consider 1 John 4:8 and 1 John 4:16, “God is love.” And all of this talk of mercy and grace in the New Testament. God surely is a God of love and forgiveness in the New Testament.

However, I don’t think people fully grasp the New Testament’s idea of God’s hatred for sin and his wrath waiting for the day of judgment. For one thing, no one speaks more of hell than Jesus himself. Listen to how Jesus describes the rich man’s suffering in Luke 16:24, “Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in anguish in this fire.” This man is “in anguish in [the] fire.” Jesus also calls hell outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The New Testament has a word for hell, γέεννα. It is a Greek transliteration of the Valley of Hinnom outside of Jerusalem. This valley is where all the trash and garbage and the unclean things were thrown out and burned. Jesus uses this term 11 times and James uses it once. It is a horrible thing to imagine being burned.

Or consider what John the Seer says in Revelation 14:9-11,

9 A third angel followed the first two, declaring in a loud voice: “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and takes the mark on his forehead or his hand, 10 that person will also drink of the wine of God’s anger that has been mixed undiluted in the cup of his wrath, and he will be tortured with fire and sulfur in front of the holy angels and in front of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke from their torture will go up forever and ever, and those who worship the beast and his image will have no rest day or night, along with anyone who receives the mark of his name.”

The Revelator records the declaration of the third angel to say that if anyone worships the beast and takes his mark on their forehead or hand the will “drink of the wine of God’s anger that has been mixed undiluted in the cup of his wrath.” The symbolism of wine is very interesting. In ancient Israel, the Jews would drink their wine diluted with water, somewhere between 3 parts to 10 parts water to 1 part wine. It was very much diluted. But the angel declares that God will not dilute his wrath. But this implies that it had been diluted! That what was seen Ezekiel 5 or in the campaigns of Joshua and the genocide there were diluted forms of God’s wrath. But now, in the end when Christ reveals himself to defeat the beast and the false prophet, God’s wrath that is poured out on those who worship that beast is no longer diluted down. It is now ratcheted up! It is increased! It is so much more violent than what Ezekiel foretold.

Keep reading Revelation 14. The one who worships that beast and takes his mark “will be tortured with fire and sulfur in front of the holy angels and in front of the Lamb.” That person will be before Jesus tortured by fire and sulfur for taking that mark and worshiping that beast’s image. It is torture, βασανισθήσεται. It will be like one being tortured, tormented with flames of fire and sulfur and brimstone. That is God’s wrath against sin! And if the thought of God doing that to one who does not repent and come to Christ for mercy, think of the duration of this torture. “And the smoke from their torture will go up forever and ever, and those who worship the beast and his image will have no rest day or night, along with anyone who receives the mark of his name” (Revelation 14:11). The smoke of that torture by fire and sulfur (14:10–βασανισθήσεται; 14:11–βασανισμοῦ) will rise forever and ever. It will never end! God’s wrath is no longer temporal, but eternal! The siege of Jerusalem ended, the ensuing exile ended. The fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 ended. These things ended. But John says that the undiluted wine of God’s anger in the cup of wrath is eternal torture by fire and sulfur lasts forever. My question for someone to ponder: is the God seen in the New Testament just a God of love, mercy and grace? God is a God of wrath and his wrath is more severe than anything the Old Testament could dream up.

But my next post will show us something else in the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament: as God’s wrath is ratcheted up from Old to New, so is God’s love, mercy, and grace. Please check back here later, most likely Thursday or Friday.

V-Tech Massacre

BW3 and The Seer’s Tower

How Many, How Many?

I return to Mark 1:14-15,

Now after John was imprisoned, Jesus went into Galilee and proclaimed the gospel of God. He said, “The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the gospel!”

I have recently been listening to D.A. Carson speak on the NT usage of the OT. Each lecture that I listen to is about how the NT uses Psalm 2:7, “You are my son! This very day I have become your father!” Gearing up for the discussion for Jesus proclamation ἤγγικεν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, this has helped me make a vital connection to the preceding context of Mark and to understand what was coming and how it ties into the whole work of Mark’s Gospel.
Read more

Dr. Jerry Falwell

Writing Scripture out

The Jesus Christ Gospel part 2

Dr. Kim Riddlebarger is, I believe, concluding a series of weekly lectures on the doctrine of antichrist. So far he has given four lectures: Biblical Doctrine of Antichrist; Man of Lawlessness: Nero? The Pope? Someone Yet to Come?; The Dragon, Beast, and False Prophet; Problem for Preterists.

The lectures are really good if you want to hear the arguments for reformed amillennialism and his critique of preterism and dispensationalism (also post-mil and pre-mil as well). So far I think his weakest point is his critique of preterism’s view of the Whore of Babylon as Jerusalem. Do check these out and the lectures to come.

Israel, John Hagee, and Eschatology

The Second Coming Debate

Newspaper Eschatology

Lee Shelton at The Contemporary Calvinist posted a link to a John Hagee book in which he claims to have proven that Jesus never claimed to be ὁ Χριστὸς, the Christ, the Messiah (You can read Shelton’s post here).

I don’t know what to say about this. When I first watched the video my jaw hit the floor. I have not read his book and do not know the evidence from the Scriptures he presents. But what do you call his words? Heresy? Blasphemy? It is flatout denying what the gospel writers believed. In his post, Lee Shelton references John 10:24-25 where Jesus told the crowds that he did tell them that he was Christ and they did not believe him; and John 20:30-31 where John says that Jesus’ teaching and deeds were to demonstrated that he is Christ and the Son of God.

There are two other texts that I want to look at from the gospels. First is in Matthew 16:15-17 where Jesus converses privately with his disciples at the conclusion of his Galilean ministry. Matthew writes,

15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Jesus questions his disciples about who they believe he is in light of what they have witnessed. Peter speaks up for the twelve (eleven if you discount Judas Iscariot) and proclaims Jesus as ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος, the Christ the son of the living God. But Jesus’ response is not to deny that he is the Christ or to rebuke Peter for making such a ridiculous statement that is obviously not true. Rather Jesus pronounces a blessing upon Peter and grounds it in the revelation of the Father, “Blessed (μακάριος ) are you Simon Bar-Jonah because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you but my father in the heavens!” This isn’t Jesus denying his messiahship but affirming it.

The other text I want to look at is from Mark’s recording of Jesus’ trial before the high priest in Mark 14:61-62. Mark writes,

61 But he remained silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” 62 And Jesus said, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”

When Jesus refused to answer the allegations against him the high priest asks the crucial question that Mark wants his readers to themselves to ask Jesus, “You are the Christ the son of the Blessed?” Jesus’ answer cannot be more to the point than the one he gave in Mark 14:62, ἐγώ εἰμι, “I AM.” Jesus uses the same phrase that nearly got him stoned in John 8 and that Yahweh used to reveal himself to Moses in Exodus 3:14 LXX. Jesus cannot be any clearer than to say, “Yes I am” to the question “Are you the Christ?” How can a person say that Jesus never claimed to be the Jewish Messiah when it is so clear?

It seems to me from this clip that Hagee has put his allegiance to Israel over Jesus whom Thomas not only agreed with Peter’s confession in Matthew 16:16 but also himself confessed in John 20:28, ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου “My Lord and My God!” He seems to be so caught up in his dispensational eschatology that he is willing to deny who Christ claimed to be. In doing so, Jesus is not the hope of Israel found in Isaiah 53. They are still under the Law of Moses that Paul said in Galatians 3 that Jesus Christ removed the curse that failing to uphold it brought upon mankind. We cannot allow one part of theology to cloud other parts of our theology. We cannot be willing to compromise on who Christ is so that we can maintain our allegiance to Israel.

I will attempt to read this book and try to discern the full extent of what Hagee claims and the evidence he puts forth as proof that Jesus never claimed “in word or in deed” to be the Jewish Messiah. If I can get that read, I will review it.

No related posts

Here is an interesting video filmed by a young Jew, Max Blumenthal. The eschatology promoted by the people interviewed in this video is troubling and gives just one of the many reasons I quit being a Dispensationist.

H/T: Ben Witherington III

What can I say?

The Second Coming Debate

All of the Bible

Here is an amazing poem that places the correct emphasis on eschatology that dispensationalism often misses: let us be loving people and caring for our poor and leave the return of Christ to the Father. I heartily recommend this poem to you.

BW3 and the Gabriel Stone

Are God’s glory and love at odds with each other?

Thoughts in Light of 9/11