Premillennialism vs. Amillennialism

  • Posted by kevin
  • March 14, 2007

The events of the Shepherd’s conference have caused many to begin to think through their eschatology. Some people are not happy that MacArthur chose this issue to put his stake in the ground, saying there are other issues more important to discuss. Well, what is done is done, and here we are. Below is the collection of links that bloggers wrote concerning eschatology.

Summary of controversy

Outside Comments on the Debate

Premillennium Position Defenders

Amillennium Position Defenders

Posmillennium Position Defenders

Thanks to The Pastor’s Resource for some of these links

I found a book on my shelf last night I had forgotten about, it’s Premillennialism or Amillennialism by Charles Feinberg. Has anyone heard of it? Do you have any thoughts on this book? Let me know!

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Information
March 14th, 2007
17 Responses
Feeds and Links
Comment Feed
From This Author
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Categories
General
Theology
Blogs In Review
Eschatology

Other Posts
Thoughts on Eschatology Debate and Blogging
Peter Rollins - How (Not) to Speak of God

Pages


Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

Reader Comments

Comment Number:
1
Written by:
Jason Robertson
Posted on:
March 14, 2007 at 4:24 pm

Great looking site.

Comment Number:
2
Written by:
ekvile
Posted on:
March 14, 2007 at 7:37 pm

Thanks for the compliment. I’ve appreciated your recent posts on the amillennial position, very helpful.

Kevin

Comment Number:
3
Written by:
Phil Johnson
Posted on:
March 16, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Your list needs a couple of adjustments:

“The Pyromaniac (Phil Johnson) -
Adds some of this own thoughts.”

Read the post again. Those were Spurgeon’s thoughts; I have yet to post “[my] own thoughts” about the issue under debate.

“He has some thoughts on John MacArthur and his premillennial position. (Added 3/16/07)

Well, in a very limited sense I suppose that’s true, but it’s misleading as to the full substance of the post, especially when it’s listed in a category titled “Premillennium Position Defenders.” The main point of that post was a lengthy explanation of why I have refused to enter the fray, followed by a single obbservation about why I think expressions of artificial shock and outrage like this are foolish.

But from the start, I have declined to become a participant in the actual debate over eschatalogical positions. Your annotated listing gives an entirely wrong impression. Put me in the category of “People who selectively snipe from the sidelines” if you like. But don’t imply that I have exhausted all my best arguments in favor of premillennialism, when I’ve deliberately avoided making any such argument in the first place.

Comment Number:
4
Written by:
ekvile
Posted on:
March 16, 2007 at 12:33 pm

Phil,

I apologize for the misleading headings to your posts. I will reassign them under another category. I never intended to mislead anyone, was just trying to categorize as best I could the posts that were out there. Thanks for letting me know about the needed adjustments.

Kevin

Comment Number:
5
Written by:
Phil Johnson
Posted on:
March 16, 2007 at 12:52 pm

Thanks. Well done.

And how do you keep up with the flow of words? I think you’re ahead of Technorati listing some of these.

Comment Number:
6
Written by:
ekvile
Posted on:
March 16, 2007 at 1:02 pm

RSS readers are the greatest thing! I use bloglines to help me keep up, but sometimes i just check around if i have time. It’s actually been a bit of a struggle! Thanks for stopping by!

Comment Number:
7
Written by:
Puritan Lad
Posted on:
March 19, 2007 at 1:02 pm

Hello,

You’ll find some postmill defenses on my blog. I respect John MacArthur and Nathan Busenitz, and appreciate them for making Pulpit Magazine available for such a fruitful discussion. Unfortunately, the four days and format make it really impossible to get too much depth in the discussion.

I have answered Nate’s two biggest objections to Amill/Postmill eschatology on my blog. We’ll see if it leads anywhere.

Keep up the good work and God Bless.

PL

Comment Number:
8
Written by:
kevin
Posted on:
March 19, 2007 at 2:28 pm

Puritan Lad,

Thanks for the updates, I’ve put your links on the post.

Kevin

Comment Number:
9
Written by:
Words - » Blogs in Review 4/3/07
Posted on:
April 4, 2007 at 7:08 am

[…] Jason Robertson (http://fide-o.blogspot.com) continues his looks at the millennium with four views of the millennium, for the full debate you can see my post here. […]

Comment Number:
10
Written by:
Words - » Shepherd’s Conference MacArthur Explosion
Posted on:
April 6, 2007 at 6:45 pm

[…] This post is currently being updated at: Premillennialism vs. Amillennialism […]

Comment Number:
11
Written by:
Haley
Posted on:
April 17, 2007 at 3:19 pm

Ran across your site while doing some research for an Eschatology paper at DTS. I actually am holding Feinberg’s book right now! funny..will be looking at your links..hope they have some info that i can use for my paper!

Comment Number:
12
Written by:
kevin
Posted on:
April 17, 2007 at 6:35 pm

Hope that the links will provide you with some information for your paper! I have yet to open Feinburg’s work and dig in, let me know if you found it useful! Thanks for stopping by my little site.

Kevin

Comment Number:
13
Written by:
Words - » Blogs in Review - 4/18/07
Posted on:
April 19, 2007 at 7:17 am

[…] Kim Riddlebarger (http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com) has some thoughts on premillenialism and amillenialsim as you may be aware, at little while back there was a large blog discussion on this. You can find the links to that discussion here. […]

Comment Number:
14
Written by:
Words - » Blogs in Review - 4/25/07
Posted on:
April 25, 2007 at 7:47 pm

[…] Sam Waldon (http://www.mctsowensboro.org/blog) posts on the millennium issue with regards to John MacArthur’s statements at the Shepherds conference. (HT: Jason Robertson). See all the links on this issue at my post here. […]

Comment Number:
15
Written by:
Words - » Blogs In Review - 4/26/07
Posted on:
April 26, 2007 at 9:15 am

[…] Sam Waldon (http://www.mctsowensboro.org/blog) continues his blogging a book on the millennium issue with chapter two: All Calvinists should be what?? You can find the list of links on this issue here. […]

Comment Number:
16
Written by:
Jason Robertson
Posted on:
May 16, 2007 at 1:08 pm

Hey brother,
Again I wish to commend you for your hard work in producing such a helpful list of links so that one may easily read through the blogs on this topic.

One note of importance (maybe). Some of the FIDE-O post are not written by me. I think one of them is by Scott Hill and one is by Gene Cook.

I just wanted to give credit to these men. We all three write on FIDE-O, and do not necessarily agree with each other on everything. So making such a distinction as to who is writing what is therefore important.

Thanks.

Comment Number:
17
Written by:
kevin
Posted on:
May 16, 2007 at 2:38 pm

Jason,
Thanks for the clarification on the links to your blog. I’ll be sure to update the links to give credit where credit is due!

Kevin