1. Different views on Eschatology (End Times)

[Josh]

Eschatology is the Biblical study of "last things": it is a way of viewing Bible prophecy and how it has been or is to be fulfilled.

The following is from an earlier discussion on our previous message board:

We kind of started a bit of a discussion about end times earlier. Nate and I have been talking about this for some time and Sarah, Elizabeth and I have had some dialogue about it. I think we probably have a wide diversity of perspectives on the subject in our group, which could make for some interesting discussions. I thought I'd start a thread on the subject for those interested.

In general, the three dominant viewpoints on 'end times' or 'eschatology' in Christendom are the Futurist, Preterist, and Historicist perspectives.

Futurist Currently popularized by books like the Left Behind series (which is, of course, not necessarily descriptive of every brand of futurism), the futurist perspective basically holds that many prophetic passages in the Old and New Testament are still awaiting a future fulfillment. These passages concern topics like: the Great Tribulation, the Anti-Christ, the Rapture, the Second Coming, the Millennium, the Judgment, the Resurrection, and the New Heavens and the New Earth, all of which are seen as future events. Futurists further divide into many subcategories where the specific future order of events such as the Rapture, Tribulation, and Millennium are debated.

Preterist  This view has two main subcategories. Full Preterists believe that all of these events/topics were already fulfilled in history.  Because this includes the Resurrection and the Second Coming, many might consider this view heterodox.  Partial Preterists believe that many eschatological predictions in the Bible were fulfilled in the first century AD and some remain to be fulfilled; typically, the Second Coming, the Judgment, and the Resurrection, leaving the Beast and the Tribulation as past, 1st Century events.  Both of these views placed great significance on the destruction of the Jewish Temple in AD 70 and it's surrounding events.  This view also frequently holds that the Church is currently in the Millennium described in Revelation 20.

Historist This view, held by the Protestant reformers, holds that the prophecies of Revelation have been progressively fulfilled throughout Church history, placing great emphasis on the fall of Rome and the rise of the Roman Catholic church/ papacy.

---

A version of Partial Preterism, similar to what I have just described, is what I currently hold after wrestling with the subject for years. I've tried to flesh it out in some of the postings here.

Other views include the Idealist/ Spiritualist perspective which sees Revelation primarily as a book of generalized, spiritual themes which apply to all Christians at all times.

NOTE: You may choose up to 2 options for the poll just because I know some of you may feel you hold to a blend of more than 1 perspective.



I welcome other's thoughts and perspectives on this subject and think that dialogue about eschatology is healthy and profitable as long as it is done with gentleness and respect.

If you have any questions about my current stance, please throw in a question and then we can go from there.

[asaph]

I am a historicist pretty much because of the way in which the book of Daniel lays out prophetic history. Daniel and Revelation join together. The Reformation held historicist views and retained them until the effects of the Jesuit counter reformation took hold centuries later. Jesuitism could not have imagined such success when their efforts were roundly rejected in the 16th century. Francisco De Ribera's throwing of the 70th week in Daniel 9 into the future has changed the entire viewpoint of Christianity as to the identification of antichrist. Who'd have thought? Nice play, as they say.

Praeterism never made sense to me in any way. Even as an atheist, reading my family Catholic Bible, the liner notes in the Apocalypse made no sense, based on the little I knew of Christian history. The notes make sense now, given I know why and where they came from.