Social Network Links
Search the Riddleblog
"Amillennialism 101" -- Audio and On-Line Resources

Ask A Question About Eschatology

If you would like to ask a question about Reformed amillennialism, ask it here.

If the question is relevant to readers of the Riddleblog, or has not already been answered, I'll get to it when I can.  I try to answer one of these a week, so, obviously, I cannot get to all of them.

Please be sure to read through previously answered questions first.  I may have already tackled it!

Questions and answers are archived in the "Answers to Questions About Eschatology" section.

Dr. Riddlebarger, do you have any decisive or otherwise binding evidence pertaining to the truth of Reformed Calvinism, because my pastor just doesent understand it? I know that God, according to his divine free will and good pleasure will reveal all things in due time as he so chooses, but I and several others have discussed it with him and he doesent understand. I have argued Gods sovereignty as a case for double predestination (French Confession of Faith: 1559, art. 12), and also the fact that God reveals to man as he so chooses. He doesent reveal theology and doctrine to all men at the same time and rate. He does as he pleases. With Covenant Theology I have shown how Israel did not keep the law and were thereby cursed. Yet when Christ shows up he does what Adam and Israel could not do. He cast the snake out of the heavenly garden. The entire book of Galations is about Christs superiority over the law. We are justified because we are not under the law (Rom. 8:1-3). Christ does what we cannot do. He keeps the law for us and lives a perfect life, which he imparts to us. And he takes our life and our filthy righteousness and bears it on the cross and we are now justified by his death (Rom. 8:33). Satan is bound by the power of the gospel and now those decided nations believe (Acts 1:8). He quoted 2 Peter 3:9, but who is Peter writing to? The elect! Context is essential to understanding.

Perhaps we can only trust that spiritual things are spiritually discerned (2 Cor. 2:14, Gal. 1:12, John 14:26), knowing that God will reveal in due time and as he pleases.
April 2, 2014 | Unregistered CommenterJohn
Dr. Riddlebarger,

I've listened to part of your Amillennialism 101 course, which I have thoroughly enjoyed and gained a tremendous amount of insight from.

While I probably have quite a few questions, I'll simply ask one. In the amillennial view, the binding of Satan, which I know you have said is the big problem of the view, occurred at the first advent. So, in essence, the Kingdom of God and the proclamation of the gospel restrain Satan until the end. I think many of the texts you use to reinforce that position do the job rather well. My question is, if Satan is bound now and has been for roughly the past 2,000 years, what did the havoc of Satan's "freedom" look like prior to the inauguration of the Kingdom when Jesus stepped onto the scene.

I hope my question makes sense and that it isn't one that you've already answered elsewhere. I've looked around your blog a little bit, and figured I'd simply ask.

Thanks for your ministry as well, brother.
March 13, 2014 | Unregistered CommenterJames A
I recently came across John MacArthur saying a person who takes the Mark of the Beast can still be redeemed. I will appreciate Dr. Riddlebarger's comments about this. Here are the links.

JOHN MACARTHUR: “IT’S OK IF YOU TAKE THE MARK OF THE BEAST.”
http://watch.pair.com/macarthur-mob.mp4

http://www.gty.org/resources/print/sermons/1301-I
March 9, 2014 | Unregistered CommenterJan Holland
Hi - I am trying to explain the Amill view to my sister in law (we live in the UK), and being a new Christian myself, find it difficult, but I know it certainly makes sense to me! Can you tell me please if there are any video clips of Dr Riddlebarger explaining the end times, as she keeps asking about them, she is a new Christian too, and has been watching some TV programmes which are mainly of the pre mill view, and they aren't sound programmes either, so we are trying to discourage her from watching them.
February 13, 2014 | Unregistered CommenterClare
Hello

If Christ Jesus is reigning on Earth, why pray the Lord's prayer, "Thy Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven?"
October 30, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterM. Carisma
Dear Sir,
I wonder could you recommend any material refuting the dispensational view that a 3rd Temple will be built in Jerusalem at a future date? Thank you
October 29, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMP
Hello, My name is Adam. I am a young Pastor of a small Pentecostal Church in Kokomo, IN. I rejected the idea of a pre-trib rapture long ago and have held to a post-trib, historic pre-millennial view. I have read some of the views on amillennialism and am very impressed and challenged by the material. My question is, while I do believe there is an over emphasis on Israel "the Nation" by some of the dispensationalist, I do see the regathering of Jewish people to the land as significant. It seems as though amillennialists kinda dabble into replacement theology??? Do you have believe in replacement theology?? And if not, what role do you see the jewish people playing in the Last Days?? Just looking for a better understanding of the subject, thank you for your time!
October 19, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterAdam
Dear Pastor Riddlebarger,
I am in posession of a fine book, just recently expanded and published by BakerBooks.
To clarify my understanding , the spirit of antichrist is where an individual or organization take on the prerogatives of God and enforce their view using their power and authority. This has happened from the days of Babalon, through the roman period, through the Pope (as stated in WCF) and right down to today, such as the case of the photographer case in New Mexico. Eventually the climax will be the appearance of the individual Antichrist. and then the final judgement.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/22/us-usa-marriage-newmexico-idUSBRE97L18J20130822

have I got it right?

many thanks
September 12, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterRyan
Hi Dr. Riddlebarger
I have a strange question dealing with how we are to view the two kingdoms in view of eschatology. I have many postmil friends who act like I cant have a view to the gospel transforming a society because I am not postmil and any attempt at me doing this is inconsistent. I do believe that the gospel in some ways transforms a society in that when people are born again they turn from sin, have the Spirit living in them and walk in a different way. When that happens to a majority of people in a society in part that society changes, even if only for a while (Nineveh comes to mind who became wicked again, i think 100 years or so after Jonah?) However, as Christ doesn't return to a saved world this age will never become perfect utopia. We don't strive to change society in any other way but by the gospel of Jesus Christ in the hopes it will regenerate men and restrain sin. Is this view one that you would say IS inconstant with a reformed view of amillennialism

If not, do you have any comments that would help me in dealing with my postmil friends?

If so, can you point to me where I go wrong in the view of two kingdom theology and reformed amillennialism? (im thinking the way Calvin so masterfully described it). They would say that two kingdom theology is part of the reason we are in such a mess (where I would say its the heart of man who unregenerate hates Gods laws and forms laws in opposition to God such as abortion)

Thank you.
August 2, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterBurton
Kim
If the thousand years is the church age then why does the church age end and satan released for a little while?
Does this mean that people cannot be saved for the brief time when satan is released since it is the end of the church age?
Also revelation states that satan used to Deceive the nations. If the church has been in Existence from the beginning of time why has satan not been bound forever and not just in the interadvental period?
One more...you stated that believers rule with Christ till he returns but this cannot be since the thousand years ends for a brief time.
Are the ruling saints just limited to the martyred?
These questions were brought to me by a premillennialism friend
April 9, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterMichael
Hello Dr.Riddlebarger, I've been studying in Joel(as well as Hosea and Amos) and towards the end of the book God says that he will judge the nations and restore the fortunes of Israel. I'm wondering in a very general sense what the A-mil interpretation of these verses would be, as well as some of the passages in Hosea and Amos concerning the "day of the Lord". I would assume, maybe incorrectly that Pre-Mil dispensation types would make much of the say Joel 3:20 "But Judah shall be inhabited forever and Jerusalem to all generations". thats just one example that stuck out to me. I know the intent of the the minor prophets is not to spell out an eschatological timeline but assumed that some would latch on to the rather descriptive passages about the "future" of Israel. Thanks for your time and thought!

Andrew Staff

Andrew Staff
October 16, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterAndrew Staff
When Jesus talked to his disciples on the Mount of Olives, he said that the temple would be torn down, and that he did not speak of it being rebuilt again at some later time, yet he mentioned the abomination of desolation. Does the abomination of desolation of Matthew 24:15, and the sitting in the temple of God of II Thessalonians 2:4, necessitate a rebuilding of the Jewish temple? Jesus fulfilled all the law and types of the temple, and when he was crucified the veil was rent in twain, and within a generation the Jewish temple was thrown down.

In the old testament, there was the temple/tabernacle with the presence of the LORD above the mercy seat in the most holy place. Then in the new testament, first there is the presence of the LORD, in the tabernacle of flesh, i.e. the incarnation of the Son of God. Then after he ascended into heaven, there is now the presence of the LORD in the body of Christ, the church, in the person of the Holy Ghost – collectively in the body of Christ, and individually indwelling each born again believer in Christ. This is the presence of the LORD, in this current temple, until that particular ministry of the Holy Ghost ends as dramatically as it started, when he brings the body of Christ, resurrected, up to meet her bridegroom, the LORD Jesus Christ, in the blessed hope.

I Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

I Corinthians 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

II Corinthians 6:16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

The different times Paul mentions the temple to the Corinthians, that he always uses 2nd person plural, ye & your, implying that the temple of God is made up the believers, plural. Yes the Holy Ghost indwells the individual believer, but there is a collective indwelling of the Third Person of the Trinity in the church. The word temple is singular in all three places, and body is singular when it is used also. He did not say, “Thou art the temple of the God” - nor did he say, “ye are the temples of God” - nor did he say, “your bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost”.

Is there any way possible that there will be an abomination of desolation taking place in the church age temple, rather than in an old testament temple rebuilt? Could there be one, who will, like the son of perdition, Judas, also be called the son of perdition, and betray Jesus, so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God – somehow possibly in the body of Christ, rather than in a rebuilt old testament temple on Mount Moriah? Is there any possible way for something like this to occur?
July 5, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterGino LaPointe
Why would someone make this statement ?

"Scripture interprets scripture and there is only one truth, and Amill's tend to spiritualize Revelation which they shouldn't do."
July 5, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterElmarie Swart
I've always wondered about the rest of Daniel -- after chapter 9 -- in relation to Amillenialism. Namely the vision which speaks of the kings of the South and the North in chapter 11 and 12. How do we go about interpreting this, since it also speaks specifically of peace treaties, wars, times and days, removing the sacrifices, and setting up the abomination of desolation?

In the context of chapters 11 and 12 the vision seems to be referencing the destruction of Jerusalem and beyond...so then what do we make of the passage and its conclusion that speaks of 1,290 and 1335 days (a difference of 45 days).

Still a mystery and very speculative...

Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
April 7, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterChris
Dr. Riddlebarger,

I understand how the overall context of Daniel Chapter 9 is very covenantal and how Christ is the main subject of the 70 Weeks prophecy, but I am still having trouble with a few of the details.

First of all, in verse 25, many Bible translations (NKJV, NIV, NASB, etc.) seem to group the first 7 weeks and the next 62 weeks together (for 69 weeks total), and then indicate that an anointed one will come after those 69 weeks. However, the ESV translation seems to indicate that the anointed one would come after the first 7 weeks. So, a couple of questions: (1) if the ESV is accurate in its translation, then how could the anointed one referred to in verse 25 possibly be referring to Christ? And, (2) in your opinion, which translation gives the most accurate rendering of the 70 Weeks prophecy?

The second issues deals with the much discussed “he” of verse 27. Again, variations among translations are significant. The NIV and NLT seem to clearly indicate that the “he” who makes the covenant is the same “he” who makes the abomination of desolation (which would be an anti-Christ type figure). However, other versions such as the ESV, NKJV, and NASB seem to indicate a distinction between the “he” who makes the covenant and the one who makes the abomination. So, my questions are these: (1) is there any grammatical support in the original Hebrew for concluding that the “he” who makes the covenant is indeed the Messiah and thus separate from the one who makes the abomination? And, (2) is there any grammatical support for concluding that the “he” who makes the covenant is the same one who makes the abomination?

Any insight you can provide will be greatly appreciated! -Josh
July 21, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJosh
Dr. Riddlebarger, I've been stuck in a rut. I am not a Dispensationalist but I do believe in a distinct future for Israel. What is your advice on the subject?
July 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJohn Biglin
Dr. Riddlebarger,

How should one understand "growth of the kingdom" OT texts from an Amillennial perspective? These texts are often appealed to by Postmillennialists. In particular such texts as the following: Ps. 72:8, Isa. 9:7, Hab. 2:14 and similar texts. When and in what way should we understand these texts as being fulfilled?

Also, how should one understand the usage of Ps. 110 in the NT? 1 Cor. 15:25 says that Christ must reign until all enemies are put under his feet. What does this mean from an Amillennial perspective?
June 2, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJosh Schwisow
Dr. Riddlebarger,

I understand your argument for the continuation of the covenant of Grace and I agree that it is the most consistent way to view the Bible. My only question is why did God reinitiate the covenant of works with the Israelites on Sinai if they too were under the Covenant of Grace which had been made with Abraham?
Thank you,
Zach
February 12, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterZach
A Question about "Which say there are Jews":
Dr. Riddlebarger,
What are the various interpretations (true & false) regarding who are they which say they are Jews but do lie (Reve 2:9 & 3:9)? Some have told me that it refers to the unconverted of the tribe of Judah, since they are not saved. That cannot be, because even the scriptures often uses the word Jews when speaking of unbelievers as well. Another was by a friend of mine who keeps trying to convince me that those currently in the land are Kazaars and not of Judah - that really seems wrong in light of the historical records. Others have mentioned that current JWs & Adventists come close to this. Thenthere is the "Yeshua Ha'Mashiach" crowd that are going back to the law like the Galatians, speaking as much Hebrew as they can, etc. Also how do these people worship at the feet of the Philadelphians? Is that in reference to evangelistic altar calls? They do not worship the Philadelpheans, but only worship the Lord at their feet, correct?
Thank you,
Gino
January 19, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterGino LaPointe
Hello Dr. Riddlebarger,

I have an eschatology question for you that's always bugged me.

In Jesus' telling of the sheep and goat judgment (Matthew 25:31-46) the text suggests three categories of people in His brethren, the sheep, and the goats (the latter two making up "the nations"). The meaning of the parable seems to be that, on the day of judgment, the dead will be judged - at least in part - on the basis of how they treated His brethren.

In the larger context of Matthew's gospel, it would seem that the identity of His brethren are either His disciples and/or "whoever does the will of my Father in heaven" (Matthew 12:46-50). Following this interpretation, we then have an irresistible parallel between Matthew 10:40-42 and Jesus granting the sheep access to His kingdom on the basis of how they treated His brethren.

But now I run into a problem in that I want to identify the sheep - who inherit the kingdom - as His brethren but all the scriptural evidence I can find tells me that this isn't so:

(1) A plain reading of Matthew 25:31-46 suggests that these are separate categories. If we suppose that they are really the same category then the text becomes somewhat awkward (i.e. the sheep are judged on the basis of how they treated each other [!?] and the goats are judged on the basis of how they treated the sheep).

(2) 1 Corinthians 6:2 suggests that His brethren are not before the throne in this scene, as are the sheep and the goats, but standing alongside Him in judgment.

(3) The sheep and goat judgment seems to be a picture of what will happen at the Great White Throne Judgment: the dead are judged according to what they had done [first parallel] and those not found in the book are thrown into the eternal fire [second parallel]. However, John tells us that the dead who are judged at this scene come from death, Hades, and the sea; none of which seem to be natural containers for His brethren [third parallel]. Lastly, a plain reading of Revelation 20:15 suggests that not everyone is thrown into the eternal fire at this judgment as well [fourth parallel].

(4) Lastly, according to the NIV translation (circa 2010), John 5:24-29 reads as follows (taken from BibleGateway.com):

24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. 25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.

28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned.

Which supports this idea that His brethren are resurrected to life and the dead are resurrected to judgment, but within the latter category another "cut" is made (if you will) on the basis of what they have done. It doesn't take too much effort to see that there might be three separate categories of people in this passage.

So, Dr. Riddlebarger, how would you identify the sheep in Matthew 25:31-46 and how would you reconcile that identity with everything I've mentioned in points (1)-(4).

Thank you for your time,
Dave
December 8, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterDave

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.