While going through the ordination process, my preparation included being able to expound my eschatological position. Rather than regurgitating views and positions, I like to read everything I can find on a subject, digest it and come to my own conclusions. I followed this same process with my studies of Christian Eschatology.
As I read scripture and compared church history (a passion second only to theology) I saw similarities. I could find places where many observers of history might see apocalyptic events. I didn’t want to find something new that I could put my name on, but simply wanted the truth. Novelty is seldom a good quality for doctrine, especially when seeking the faith and practice of the apostles. I believed that if my conclusions were accurate I should find confirmation of it in the writing of others.
As I became more familiar with the subject I discovered that I had been misled by my well-meaning teachers pastors. I was taught that the Pretribulation Rapture (Dispensational Premillennialism) was the only interpretation of Revelation and that other views were heretical accretions. I discovered instead that this position was no older than the 1830’s—something that makes it unlikely as apostolic faith.
Around 1999, I discovered Praeterism as an interpretation that involved history. Unfortunately, it went too far and made everything revolve around one historical event—the destruction of Jerusalem. Not bad if true, but when I looked at other eras of history I saw more.
Shortly after this I discovered Historicism. I learned that this was the view held by the reformers and that two of the other views Futurism (Revelation tied to a final seven year tribulation) and Praeterism (Revelation tied to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus) were created in response to the Historicist view. I didn’t know it at the time, but I had become a back door Historicist, if you will, and entered into an interesting time with the subject.
I have titled this post An Unwilling Participant because eschatology and the fights that go with it are something that I have never liked. Don’t get me wrong, I love to fight—just ask my wife. But if you want a fight I can think of a thousand things better and more important. I am not saying the return of Christ is not important, but regardless of what we conclude about timelines, schools of interpretation and hermeneutic the return of Christ is something that will happen right on time whether we are all right, all wrong, hugging each other or battling to the death. If you want to go to your grave over a doctrine please don’t let it be this one. If you insist on a death match over Eschatology fight with someone else.
Regardless of my reluctance, I ended up being active in the subject through an interesting turn of events. In 2004 or so, I learned that a house church group on the east coast had been rocked by rabid Praeterists resulting in a few split churches and many hurt feelings. Their people saw problems with Futurism and Praeterism but had no other direction to look. I encouraged them to look into Historicism. Of course they were reluctant, with good cause, to bring in another ‘ism’ that might do more harm than good. It is a safe bet that if you have problems in your local church problem’s name ends with ‘ism.’
In 2007 I had the blessing of teaching a seminar to these people and the response was so good that I began writing a book. Since this is a subject that I never liked teaching on and my position is unlike the average American’s my book involved more stop than start.
Lately people have asked me question after question on my position and it is so unlike anything they’ve heard that bite size bits are not very informative. To remedy this I have launched this website and hope it is of help to my fellow searchers after truth.
Tags: historicism, history, ordination, scholarship, study
i found you on tie-in from the Directory Listing Penmanship from Ash.. Nice to understand your blog ^.^