Ten Reasons Why Amillennialism is more Biblical

In his recent work on biblical eschatology, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative,  Sam Storms offers thirty reasons why he finds “amillennialism the most cogent biblical account of the purpose of God in redemptive history.”  Below I list the first ten of these:

(1) Amillennialism best accounts for the many texts in which Israel’s OT prophetic hope is portrayed as being fulfilled in the person and work of Jesus Christ and the believing remnant, his body, the Church.

(2) Amillennialism best accounts for the way in which the OT prophets spoke of the future in terms, images, and concepts borrowed from the social and cultural world with which they and their readers were familiar.

(3) Amillennialism best accounts for the presence of typology in Scripture, according to which OT persons and events and institutions find a deeper and intensified expression and consummation in the antitype.

(4) When the OT speaks of the consummation of God’s renewal of creation it knows nothing of a 1,000-year period preceding the eternal state.  Rather its focus is on the new heavens and new earth (Isa. 65:17-22; 66:22), consistent with what we read in the NT as well (Revelation 21-22).  This, of course, is precisely what amillennialism argues for.

(5) Amillennialism provides a superior and more cogent explanation of the 70-weeks prophecy of Daniel 9, which we saw is designed to evoke theological image, namely, that in the person and work of Jesus God will act to bring about the final jubilee of redemptive history.

(6) We found amillennialism to be superior scheme for understanding redemptive history insofar as it alone is consistent with the NT testimony concerning the termination of physical death at the time of the second coming of Christ.

(7) Yet another affirmation of amillennialism is found in the fulfillment of Isaiah 25:8, where we are told that God will one day “wipe away all tears,” a prophecy that according to Revelation 21:1-4 comes to fruition when the new heavens and new earth are created.

(8) A related point is that amillennialism alone is consistent with the NT teaching that the natural creation will be delivered from the curse and experience its “redemption,” in conjunction with the “redemption” of our bodies, at the time of the second coming of Christ (Rom. 8:18-23).

(9) Amillennialism is more consistent with the NT teaching (2Pet. 3:8-13) that the new heavens and the new earth will be inaugurated at the time of Christ’s second coming, not 1,000 years thereafter.

(10) Amillennialism is superior to premillennialism insofar as the latter view requires that one 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.

I, too, am an amillennialist (see my journey back to Amillennialism here).

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Amillennialism, Eschatology, New Creation, Premillennialism, Sam Storms and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Ten Reasons Why Amillennialism is more Biblical

  1. Jon Hughes says:

    TC,

    I appreciate the strengths of Amillennialism too.

    However, would you not agree that the more you study the subject, the more you realize that it can’t be nailed as a system – especially by Protestant evangelicals employing a grammatical-historical hermeneutic? Isn’t the very fact that evangelicals equally committed to Scripture come up with three viable views concerning the question of the Millennium evidence of an inherent ambiguity in the Biblical texts?

    For example, concerning points 4 and 6, what are you going to do with Isaiah 65:20, which speaks of longevity, but death nonetheless? Point 10 is not problematic for those who hold to the possibility of post-mortem repentance (same principle as unbelievers entering into the Millennium from a Premillennial perspective). An increasing number of evangelicals do hold to the possibility of post-mortem repentance these days.

    Would you not agree that passages like Zechariah 14 lend themselves most naturally to the Premillennial perspective? And would you not agree that all proponents inevitably engage in strained exegesis in setting forth their preferred Millennial position?

    Fascinating subject!

  2. TC says:

    Jon, your objections are valid and are the ones students of prophecy continue to wrestle with. Yes, no approach is airtight. Even Storms acknowledges this.

    I’m especially interested in post-mortem repentance. On what basis? 😉

    • Jon Hughes says:

      TC,

      How about 1 Peter 3:18-20; 4:6 (cf. Ephesians 4:8-9)? Orthodox Christians recognize the import of these verses better than ‘reductionist’ evangelicals! I also view verses such as Philippians 2:10-11 with cause for optimism, as I don’t believe that the vast majority of humankind will endure eternal torment. How could it be so bleak as some brethren suggest? Perhaps it’s the romantic in me, but we’re going to have to start doing justice to passages like Psalm 22:27:

      “All the ends of the world shall remember and turn to the LORD, and all the families of the nations shall worship before You.”

      By the way, how about 1 Corinthians 3:15 as post-salvation purgatory? 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s