Is everyone here Dispensational in their Eschatology?

I'm Amillennial and partial or "moderate" preterist. My intention with this question isn't to debate the subject but just to see the views held by others here.-David

Hi David.I'm not a dispensationalist. But to be completely honest, I'm not 100% clear on pre-, post-, or a- millenialism yet. As far as when Jesus returns, however, it's up to God. ;) He's got perfect timing, and He'll come when He comes. I don't believe we'll be raptured before the tribulation, however.And as for as this question not being up to debate...lol, just wait. ;)

Hi DavidI suspect I am pretty close to your description. For a number of years I was a passionate pre-trib, pre-mill advocate and had everything worked out neatly.The thing that changed almost everything for me in my understanding was the comprehensiveness of the New Covenant. The more I saw its fullness the less I was inclined to fit in a Jewish post script.I have studied the topic quite a bit over the years but as each advocate gets to their punch line I find myself saying "I'm not convinced". I find myself in the odd position of being much more clear about what I don't believe that what I do. I am particularly suspicious of those who build contemporary church phenomena into their eschatological schedules eg manifested sons etc.

I became a Christian some thirty years ago by the eager help of dear, then young, friends in the Jesus Movement. Of course we were expecting Jesus to come back any minute.Today I try to keep myself within the framework of 1 Thessalonians 1:10, waiting for Him to come, being made ready by the Spirit, filled with anticipation, the tougher the better – the Cross at workLike Ron, I have to say that none of the systems regarding the time of the arrival are watertight. Waiting keeps me occupied to the utmost.Lars

Hi David, I suppose I too am a partial preterist, although some of my beliefs might be described as dispensationalist (I wouldn't use that term myself). I do believe that the kingdom of God will be visibly manifest on the earth at some time, as to how it all fits togheter I am uncertain. But look forward with great hope to the time when all things become new.Jon Zens hosted an "end times" conference last July, there were pre-mils a-mils preterists and others who gave there views and were questioned by the other speakers and congregation. the tapes are available from: www.searchingtogether.org

almondbranch's reference to the conference reminded me of something that happened to me some years ago. I had been invited to speak at the OICCU (Oxford Universities Christian Union) on 1 Thess 4. This would not have been my choice but I consented. I then received a standard disclaimer from OICCU that as there was a wide representation of Christian viewpoint represented in OICCU I was required to undertake that I would not preach extremes to the exclusion of other viewpoints.I wrote back, accepting the disclaimer, and promising that I would endeavour not to offend the pre-millennialists, post-millenialists, a-millennialists, pre-tribulationists, mid-tribulationists, post-tribulationists, or even the partial rapturists. I also suggested that if I succeeded they might recommend my services to the United Nations where such diplomatic skills could clearly be put to useful purpose!The session went well and no more martyrs were added to Oxford's lists.

I never knew there were so many categories, it's a good thing there are only two events to think of...the millenium and the tribulation.

I also suggested that if I succeeded they might recommend my services to the United Nations where such diplomatic skills could clearly be put to useful purpose!Haha.... then you could solve the Cyprus problem as well!

Haha.... then you could solve the Cyprus problem as well!I think we have some good mutual friends in Cyprus. Give my regards to John P when you are home. Do you have any links with the Cypriot groups in North London?

I think I'd like to rescind my previous post. Scripture is to be interpreted by Scripture, and it's not open to our own personal interpretation. According to 1 Corinthians 1, it's not a good idea to label ourselves either, unless we're calling ourselves followers of Christ and Him alone. Whatever happens happens -- God and His plan are perfect.

Chosen7Stone Said: "I think I'd like to rescind my previous post. Scripture is to be interpreted by Scripture, and it's not open to our own personal interpretation. According to 1 Corinthians 1, it's not a good idea to label ourselves either, unless we're calling ourselves followers of Christ and Him alone. Whatever happens happens -- God and His plan are perfect."How is it possible to not interpret scripture when reading it or studying it? I think you should interpret it using scripture as the guide by which you interpret scripture. Sola Scriptura is scripture alone but that does not mean you just need the Bible and never read it or study it. I do think I understand what you meant though. There is a wrong way to interpret scripture "isogesis" and a right way "exegesis", isogesis would be reading a meaning INTO the text or picking verses out of context in order to defend a position, exegesis is letting scripture interpret itself within context. I don't know if I really label myself since the words I used were nothing more than the definition of what I hold to. For example I don't believe in a literal millennium so I am by definition amillennial, I do feel most of the prophecies in the book of Revelation have been fulfilled (not all, but most) so I am by definition a moderate or partial preterist. The two words are just the actual words to describe those two positions. amillennial literally means "no millennium" (A=no, such as amoral i.e. no morals), preterist literally means "One who believes the prophecies of the Apocalypse to have been already fulfilled." so by me saying I am a "partial or moderate preterist" that means I agree partially with the definition of preterisim when applied to the understanding of fulfilled prophecies in the book of Revelation but not fully. Sorry for my diatribe LOL.-David

Greg wrote The problem is in the church today we have lost that knoweldge of the gospel somewhere down the line and only the plainly obvious in Scripture is the foundation of our beliefs and the rest are given up to human opinion. And I call it human opinion because of all the varying viewpoints on certain passages or principles in the bible.. ie eschatology (endtimes).I think this is such an important point in our study and debate. I sometimes say that all topical Bible teaching should be called Bible Hypotheses. We are gathering together facts and producing a 'best fit'. The examples Greg gives are classic ones and in the face of these partial knowledge we really do need to constantly remind ourselves that "we know in part". That was Paul's testimony, how much more ours?Topical Bible Study is somewhat unnatural in that we are doing something which the Bible doesn't do; assemble truth together to the exclusion of other truths. If you buy a manual you expect subjects to be gathered together under headings. All you need to know about baking bread will be in one chapter of the cookery book. But the Bible doesn't work like this. Truth can never be studied or defined in isolation from other truth. It is truth in isolation that creates heresies and cults.Bible teachers have a great responsibility to understand that in extracting topical truth they are doing something which is unnatural to the Bible. It may be useful, but we need to put the truth back into context of all truth as quickly as possible.Anyone who has not felt the weight of James's words ought not really to be teaching. My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.