From an Eschatalogical Dinosaur: Am I the Last Pretribulationalist Left? tagged: , , ,

From an Eschatalogical Dinosaur: Am I the Last Pretribulationalist Left?

Posted by in Bible & Theology

In polite society, you are not supposed to discuss religion and politics. Perhaps in blogging, it is eschatology that we should not discuss. The SBC has 412 varieties of eschatological views and discussing them has the distinct possibility of turning into a free-for-all.

I have never had much patience for puzzles – it’s just too hard to figure out how all the pieces fit together. Eschatology is sort of like a puzzle. You study scriptures from Daniel, Ezekiel, Matthew, 1 and 2 Thessalonians and the Revelation and many other places. Each of those passages is a piece of the puzzle. We then try to fit all the piece together into a unified whole. It is not an easy task. We are not allowed to throw out pieces we don’t like. And we cannot force pieces into places they do not fit. Every one of us, if we are honest, finds a few passage-pieces that are hard to fit in to our view. But our job is to try to fit all the eschatological pieces together as a unified whole while treating each piece with integrity.

Once, many pastors and leaders in the SBC fit the puzzle together in a way very similar to the way I fit them together. There was a large group of Southern Baptists who were premillennial, pretribulationalists like me. Sometimes, in recent days, I have begun to feel like a dinosaur (to mix a metaphor or two). There are a lot of Preterists, Partial Preterists, Amillennialists around. We even find a Postmillennialist lurking here and there. Most of the young bucks I have talked to seem to describe themselves as “historic premillennial.” They believe in a future millennial reign of Christ on earth but believe either that the church will go through the tribulation period, or that the tribulation period is a symbol of our present day suffering.

I hear a lot of disparagement directed towards those of us who embrace (even tepidly as I do) the dispensationalist label. I just don’t hear many folks in the blog world trumpeting their pre-trib status. That’s why I’m beginning to feel like a dinosaur, outdated as a 70’s leisure suit. I’m a Biblicist in an Emergent world. I’m a complementarian in an increasingly egalitarian Christendom. And, I sometimes wonder if I’m the last pre-tribber left in captivity.

So, today, I’m going to share a few reasons why I am still a mildly (progressive?) dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationalist. There is no way that I can be either comprehensive or perhaps convincing on this blog. There’s not enough space. We’ve been arguing this for years and my little effort here probably won’t make much difference. But at least we can have some fun hurling eschatological slush-balls at each other. Actually, my goal is modest. I’d like to give some of the reasons I have stuck with my view. Generally, people think that we are only pre-trib because we haven’t studied scripture or matured in our beliefs. I’d like to think I have a few decent reasons for what I believe.

So, here are my reasons.

1) Let’s face it, folks. Dispensationalists have the coolest charts. Have you ever seen a full-color Preterist diagram of the end-times? Doesn’t happen. How can you folks claim your view is biblical if you can’t even produce a decent map of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks?

2) Another fact, my friends. We have the most entertaining extremists. Actually, they are often used to define my view, which is patently unfair. You don’t define Calvinism by Hyper-Calvinists. And you shouldn’t define pretribulationalism by Jack and Rexella. (By the way, do Historic Premillennialists have anyone who can compare to Rexella? I don’t think so! Strike two!) But we can produce a LOT of really entertaining and strange views. Who else can claim that?

Now, let me take this is a slightly more serious turn.

3) I appreciate the attempt to apply a consistent literal hermeneutic to “prophetic” scriptures. I read a blog (written by someone who does not hold my view) recently that was discussing who the 144,000 Jewish witnesses of Revelation 7 really are. By the time he was done explaining this and that symbolism, based on absolutely no exegetical evidence at all, he had arrived at an interpretation you could never come to simply by reading the text. When you make everything symbolic, you can make it say pretty much anything you want. I know there are lots of things about eschatology that are confusing and difficult. But I like that in my view, 1000 years means, well, 1000 years, 42 months means 42 months, and the 144,000 Jewish servants of God are actually 144,000 Jewish servants of God. No system is perfect, but I like trying to use a literal hermeneutic.

NOTE: the literal hermeneutic does not, as is sometimes accused, require that all things be taken literally. We recognize that there are figures of speech in the Bible. We just want to interpret them in their most logical, natural way.

4) I like that my view allows the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel. Replacement theology has never seemed quite fair to me. If God made promises to Israel, shouldn’t they be fulfilled to Israel? If I promised you $100, then gave the money to someone else and said that they had replaced you to receive the gift, you might be upset. One of the key tenets of my belief is that Israel and the church have distinct parts in God’s purpose, but that those purposes remain distinct.

Romans 11 seems to spell this out. In verse 1, Paul makes it clear that God has not rejected Israel. I do not see how you can read that chapter and argue that God has set aside Israel forever. Verses 25 and 26 tell us that Israel has experienced a hardening until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. Then, all Israel will be saved. Israel is beloved for the sake of the forefathers. Verse 29 could not be more clear to me. “God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable.” The context makes it clear that Israel is in view here. God will not revoke his calling of Israel. She will return to prominence in the end times and receive all the promises God gave to Abraham.

5) Premillennial Pretribulationalism holds, in my view, the correct view of Revelation 4-19. In Revelation 4-5, there is a scroll in heaven which only the Lamb of God is worthy to open. On that scroll are written the judgments of God on earth. Jesus breaks the seals and God’s judgment in released in what we call the Tribulation. Historic Premillennialism argues that Christians have no reason to believe we will escape the hardship of the future. But Revelation makes it clear the Tribulation is not about the persecution of the saints primarily, but is primarily about God’s wrath being poured out. God removes his church so that he can pour out his wrath. This requires a much longer discussion than we can have here, but this is a key argument to me.

6) It is clear to me that passages like Matthew 24, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, some of the Old Testament passages, and pretty much all of Revelation beginning with chapter 4 describes future events. Just cannot go with the Preterist flow, folks. When Jesus ascended in Acts 1, the angel promised he would come again in the same way – descending in visible glory – a future event. Revelation 1:19 distinguishes the vision between things that are and things that are yet to come.

7) I admitted earlier that there is a lot of silliness that goes on in pretribulationism. But there are also some amazing things that have happened in this world that were predicted by pretribulationalists well before they happened. I had in my possession (and have subsequently lost) a book from the 19th Century predicting the restoration of the nation Israel. Without going into sensationalism, we can point to a lot of modern events that align with what we have been expecting to see all along. I know this is a proof that will only encourage those who already hold the view and will mean little to those who hold other views. But there’s some pretty cool stuff (and some scary stuff, too) happening out there.

8) Ultimately I believe, after significant study, that the premillennial, pretribulational view fits the pieces of the Bible together the best. It makes sense of all the scriptures without ignoring or doing exegetical violence to any of the individual pieces. I know many, perhaps most of my readers will not agree. But I could wish that those with other views would respect that you can study scripture and come to my view.

Eschatology is, most certainly, a tertiary doctrine. My youth pastor is historic premillennial. I knew this when I hired him and it didn’t affect my recommendation to hire him even a little. My associate pastor used to talk about being “pan-millennialist” but that irritates me so much I think he has stopped saying that. Neither of my staff pastors shares my view. This is not a fundamental doctrine.

I think eschatology matters. We should study it, discuss it, insult one another freely, then continue to serve God together. (One exception – the more extreme preterist view bothers me; I’m not sure it is fundamentally faithful – still working through that one.)

But, we can argue this out, then join hands and sing “Kumbaya” – pretrib, historic premill, amils and postmills alike. We can even let the partial preterists join the circle, if they will sing quietly, with heads down in humility, right? I do not believe that any Christian’s love for the Word should be questioned because of an eschatological view.

At least we can all agree on this. “Even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly.”