John Piper on Hal Lindsey & End-Times Speculation

Well, if I haven’t thoroughly outed myself as a “Piperite”, two posts in one day featuring my favorite pastor should do the trick.

———————-

I read Piper’s 1974 essay on Hal Lindsey’s The Late, Great Planet Earth this morning, and could not pass on the opportunity to forward it along.

Since reading Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins’ Left Behind and witnessing the ensuing marketing phenomenon more than a decade ago, I have been uncomfortable with the assurance, and often the stridency, with which some adhere to the Premillennial/Dispensational eschatological system.

I occasionally listen to a weekend radio program on the local Christian AM station that deals exclusively with this topic. While I do not doubt the sincerity of the host’s faith, I am often disturbed at the passion attached to such a tangential issue (the precise outworking of Biblical prophecy in current events). I am more disturbed by the passion with which this host often criticizes her brothers and sisters in Christ who don’t subscribe to this particular eschatological system (a system that has no history in the Church predating the 19th Century).

Piper writes:

This is the most important: among those who calculate about the time and sequence of the coming events and who try to give detailed descriptions of how it will be, there is, I think, a fundamentally wrong focus, a dislocation of our “blessed hope.” Throughout the New Testament the all-important focus of our hope is personal fellowship with God and our Lord Jesus Christ…

… But for the calculator of the end times this all-important personal focus of our hope gets blurred in a mass of secondary (often speculative) details.

Amen! This is my chief concern with so many Christian ministries wandering into various aberrant teachings. Dispensational end-times speculation, fixations on mystical experience and supernatural charismata, the Prosperity Gospel, the Megachurch self-improvement progams, and a myriad of other modern errors all have this in common: They are all a giant distraction from the main thing - Jesus Christ and His Gospel.

—————-
Now playing: Radiohead - All I Need
via FoxyTunes

Flirting With Amillennialism

Sam Storms, the charismatic Calvinist, recently defined himself theologically. While I disagree with Storms’ charismatic views of prophecy and continued Apostolic ministry, I have read quite a bit of the material he has made available on his site and have learned a great deal from this ministry.

Storms is an Amillennialist. I have read several of his articles on eschatology and have found them very reasonable, persuasive and biblical. Storms briefly sketches his Amillennialism:

I am an Amillennialist. This is a huge topic on which I am currently writing a book. So I’ll limit myself here to only a few specifics.

a. One of the primary reasons I am not a Premillennialist (neither Historic nor Dispensational) is because of what I read in the NT concerning the Second Coming of Christ.

To be a Premillennialist of any sort, you must believe that physical death and the curse on the natural creation will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s return. You must believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ. You must believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return. To be a Premillennialist, you must believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to Christ’s return and that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to Christ’s return.

But my reading of what happens at the Second Coming of Christ indicates that then, and not 1,000 years later, physical death is swallowed up in the victory of Christ, never again to exert its power; the natural creation is delivered fully and finally from its bondage to sin; the New Heavens and New Earth are inaugurated; all opportunity for salvation of the lost comes to an end; and both the final resurrection and final judgment of all mankind occur.

b. I find no biblical support for a pre-tribulation rapture, Christian Zionism, a distinction between Israel and the Church, or a future seven year period known as the Great Tribulation.

c. I believe Matthew 24:1-35; Mark 13:1-31; and Luke 21:5-33 (otherwise known as the Olivet Discourse) refer to events that transpired in the first century, beginning with the exaltation of Christ and consummating with the destruction in 70 a.d. of both the city of Jerusalem and its Temple.

As I said, I hope to finish a book on eschatology sometime in 2008, but in the meantime you may read several articles in defense of these beliefs, available on my website under Theological Studies, Eschatology.

To be honest, I find all of these arguments quite convincing. I was raised as a default Dispensational Premillennialist, believing in a literal 7-year Great Tribulation preceded by the rapture of God’s saints. I have since (before encountering Storms or Amillennialism) been convinced that scripture nowhere describes the world-shattering event of a pre-tribulational rapture. I just cannot find two Second Comings in scripture.

I also struggle with the idea of the world continuing on in sin and death after Christ’s return. I can’t even wrap my mind around how that would work. And what about the final unleashing of Satan after this literal 1,000 year period? Does Christ defeat Satan/Antichrist twice? I don’t know. It all just seems very confusing.

I have also become disabused of the notion that the Church and Israel are two distinct entities in the economy of God. The more I read scripture (particularly the Pauline epistles), the more I see the Church being grafted onto the tree that is Israel - one tree. God has one people. He has always had one people. I am a child of Abraham. My unbelieving Jewish neighbors are not. I think this insistence on distinguishing Israel and the Church drives much Premillennial thought (particularly the Dispensational variety).

(I know I run the risk of being labeled as an adherent of “Replacement Theology” with the above paragraph, but… well, that’s just how I see it right now. I’m willing to be persuaded otherwise.)

I don’t yet call myself an Amillennialist. Because I am thoroughly convinced that Christ will be returning for His Bride only once, I waffle between Historic Premillennialism (post-tribulational) and Amillennialism. I know Amillennialism is loathed by many Christians, so here’s your chance! Convince me Storms is wrong and rescue me from this eschatological heresy!

—————-
Now playing: Grits - Make Room
via FoxyTunes