Poll: What Evangelical Leaders Believe about the End Times (Most are Premillenialists)

Christian Post ^ | 03/09/2011 | Audrey Barrick

[David]

Well, that is surely an admirable amount of creative eisegesis, all along I thought John 5:43 was refering to the same thing the famed rabbi Gamaliel saw:

Problem with that is that Theudas is in the wrong order unless Gamaliel is referring to a crackpot with 400 supporters who turned up in 45 AD and in his case, there is no evidence that he was accepted as the Messiah by anyone--certainly not the Pharisees or the Jewish establishment.

How anyone can interpret this as our LORD speaking to a reprobated generation several thousand years later is probably something that goes beyond rational explanation.

Well that's a little excessive. The interpretation is founded on the premises that it must speak to the future because there isn't any evidence that the then current edition of the Pharisees accepted someone else as the Messiah. So I guess I would like to present the possibility that analysis is at least rational.

And by way of general argument, the fundamental proposition is that taking the Scriptural eschatology at face, at least so far, no one has been able to come up with an analysis that fits facts to the obvious literal prophecies.

That is what is wrong with all the Anti-Future Fulfillment arguments. There are clear factual gaps in all of the argued historical fulfillment positions.

[The Theophilus]

That is what is wrong with all the Anti-Future Fulfillment arguments. There are clear factual gaps in all of the argued historical fulfillment positions.

I completely agree, and since there are no more Pharisees, it seems highly unlikely that the Futurists can claim it as yet to happen. This leaves out the Biblical view of eschatology that is neither Preterist or Futurist, but Amillennial - and that, my friend, does accomplish a fulfillment.

I still do thank you for your earlier explanation of the particulars of the expected Man of Sin. I have been working on a Amillennialist's version of "Left Behind", a Tom Clancy meets Speculative Theology treatment, where I footnote the Scripture and the teachings that are the premise for the book's plot-line. Your explanation filled in a needed gap.