EFCA defends removing 'premillennial' from statement of faith: not an 'essential' doctrine
The Evangelical Free Church of America recently defended the denominationâ€™s decision to remove the word â€śpremillennialâ€ť from their statement of faith, arguing that it was not an â€śessentialâ€ť teaching.
In June, delegates at the EFCA Conference voted overwhelmingly to amend their Statement of Faith to remove the word â€śpremillennial.â€ť
Premillennialism is the belief that the Second Coming will bring forth a millennium-long reign by Jesus Christ on earth, as described in the Book of Revelation.
In an interview with National Association of Evangelicals President Leith Anderson on Sunday, EFCA President Kevin Kompelien explained an important part of the process of changing the Statement of Faith was to â€śclarify whatâ€™s not changing.â€ť...
1517 wrote: Premillennialism is a rather new â€śdoctrineâ€ť.
One of the many quotes from the article
"RIGHT-MINDED CHRISTIANS...ARE ASSURED THAT THERE WILL BE A RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD, AND A THOUSAND YEARS IN JERUSALEM, WHICH WILL THEN BE BUILT ADORNED, AND ENLARGED, AS THE PROPHETS EZEKIEL AND ISAIAH AND OTHERS DECLARE." -- JUSTIN MARTYR (100-165 A.D.)
Philip Schaff, the dean of American church historians and himself a postrnillennialist, provided the following summary of the early church's view of the millennium: "The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, that is the belief of a visible reign of Christ in glory on earth with the risen saints for a thousand years, before the general resurrection and judgment. It was indeed not the doctrine of the church embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius."
Even the Monergism website references, why the early church fathers finally rejected Premillennialism.
So to say that it is a relatively new position is not accurate.
Youth in Asia wrote: I feel this doctrine is important if you do verse by verse preaching, you will eventually come to a passage where you have to explain your eschatology.
Good point. I wouldn't sweat your middle of the night brain storm. It looks like your just trying to talk it out which is not a bad thing.
The difficult part in whichever prevailing eschatological position one takes is navigating through the rest of the bible with it without hitting the snags each appear to have. All of them can't be right, but all of them could be wrong.
I don't think saying because a new doctrine is new that therefore it's definetely wrong and unbiblical is a good argument, considering that throughout church history baptism = salvation was the norm, and then came early anabaptist theology which was considered new theology.
Much of Reformed doctrine, especially in relation to predestination, original sin, the bondage of the will, and efficacious grace, has been attributed to the work of Augustine.
We also have better education, science, history, new manuscripts, Luther never had the country of Israel, no dead sea scrolls, how could he ever know what Israel is as it was just a desert.
It's more like recovering lost theology, than making up a new one. Just like the trinity. It was always there, but was never systematized until much later.
The EFCA are also a welcoming yet ( not affirming gay marriage). I say yet, as historical reform based( mainline ), churches continue to reform themselves more to the culture around themselves, rather than a biblical based doctrine. The second awakening brought revival yet they also brought about experimental religious affiliations that were non biblical. That problem still persists today.
AMEN 1517!! I dropped Premillennialism about a decade ago which I had grown up with as a Southern Baptist (dropped the SBC, too). Amillennial (realized) eschatology has been intensely studied since then and is where I've landed.
1517 wrote: Premillennialism is a rather new â€śdoctrineâ€ť. There is scant reference, at best, to it historically. The fundamental problem should be conspicuous; how can sinners remain if an unveiled, glorified Christ is on earth?
Premillennialism is a rather new â€śdoctrineâ€ť. There is scant reference, at best, to it historically. The fundamental problem should be conspicuous; how can sinners remain if an unveiled, glorified Christ is on earth?
I feel this doctrine is important if you do verse by verse preaching, you will eventually come to a passage where you have to explain your eschatology. I recently had a man tell me he wants to be part of the 144,000 of Revelation. I told him that the bad news he can't be one them because he is not Jewish, but he can be a child of God... Well their teacher interjected and told me he don't interpret things literary in his church. And we had a schism. These things matter, denominations matter, thorough statements of faith matter, or else confusion will come.
I have news for the EFCA, premillennialism is important to dogma and theology
Dr. Gerald Stanton wrote: â€˘ Consistent literal interpretation â€˘ Unconditional nature of the covenants (Abrahamic) â€˘ The Abrahamic Covenant â€˘ The Old Testament teaches a literal earthly kingdom â€˘ The kingdom is carried unchanged into the New Testament â€˘ Christ also supports and earth kingdom â€˘ There are multiple resurrections in Scripture â€˘ Revelation 20 teaches premillennialism â€˘ The early church was premillennial â€˘ The failure of amillennialism and postmillennialism â€˘ Premillennialism harmonizes the entire Bible â€˘ Only premillennialism provides a satisfactory conclusion to history
from, Ice, Thomas D., "The Unscriptural Theologies of Amillennialism and Postmillennialism" (2009). Article Archives. Paper 54. http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/pretrib_arch/54