Wednesday, September 02, 2009

What's the Point?

The short answer to the title question is, “No. 2012 will not bring the end of the world.”
What's the point? Well, if he doesn't believe that these events do bring the end of the world, then why write this paragraph?
So what will the 2012 disasters accomplish? I believe that God will use these and other End Times judgments to begin putting the Earth back into the condition it was when He gave it to Adam. Remember, Jesus called the Millennium the time of restoration of all things (Matt. 19:28) and Paul said the whole creation has been groaning in anticipation of being liberated from the bondage it was subjected to. (Romans 8:20-21). And at the beginning of the Millennium God will proclaim, “I am making everything new.” (Rev. 21:5)
Here Kelley admits that he believes these events will accomplish putting the Earth back to its original condition. He even calls these events "End Times judgments". He also writes this paragraph following a prophecy from Isaiah 13. So Kelley has switched from a skeptic just looking at dubious pagan myths to one who believes that God is using these so-called scientific events.

Now here is a major difference between Dispensationalists and Amillenarians. Dispensationalism was formed during an era of date setting in the 1800s. Its history is replete with failed end times speculations with the Millerite movement right on down to the present with Hal Lindsy. Now I must say that simply because one is Dispensational does not mean one is a date setter, nor does it mean Amillenarians are immune from date setting. It is just that one need not look very hard to see the link between date setting and Dispensationalism.

For an example of Kelley's hermeneutic he states,
Remember, Jesus called the Millennium the time of restoration of all things (Matt. 19:28)
He has also stated in another place that he believes in the literal, grammatical and historical approach to interpreting the Bible. Yet could anyone please tell me where in the verse cited above that Jesus says anything about the Millenium?

This is simply not the case. In Jesus' eschatology, there are only two ages. The one in which we currently live and the one to come. Jesus never speaks of an intermediate age of a thousand years. Kelley is doing what so many Dispensationalists do. He is assuming an interpretation of Revelation 20 and Daniel 9, and then forcing that assumption back into Jesus' words.

Allow me to offer some examples of Jesus' teaching on the "two-age model".

In Luke 20,
Jesus replied, "The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection.
There is the age of marriage and the age of the resurrection. Nothing is in between nor is there an overlapping age (unless we look at the now and not yet aspects of the Kingdom).

Jesus explains his parable of the weeds with a two-age model approach.
He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels. "As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age.
Notice that during this age, the sower sows seed. It is at the end of this age when the harvest happens and the weeds are permanently pulled out. Nothing in Jesus' words shows any temporary intermediate Millenium.

Because Jesus' teaching on end times is so often misunderstood, many have been looking at Scripture from an improper perspective. In my next post, we will look at Jesus' teaching of the signs of the end of the age from Matthew 24.


Cory said...

And how can anyone reading Revelation 21 "literally" think that it is anything other than the final consummation? Silly. Just silly.

Paul said...

Just listened to the audio from Boyce college. Interesting hearing Schriners thoughts since he was an Amill and now is a Premill.

Howard Fisher said...

Odd. I used to be Historic Premill until I heard the case for Amill from a baptist.

Howard Fisher said...

I listened to it this morning and will (Lord willing) make some comments on as time allows.