A good friend and I are having a discussion on Amillennialism and Postmillennialism.
As long as I have known him, he like myself has called himself an A-millennialist.
Until very recently, because now he believes the term Amillennialism is dumb.
He is a huge reader in theology and has read many authors on Eschatology. He tells me and quoted many ardent Amils, such as Venema, Berkouwer, Riddlebarger, and a few others all agree that the term Amillennialism is dumb.
He goes on to show me this.
G.C. Berkouwer (The Return of Christ, 1972)
“The term amillennialism is infelicitous, for it seems to suggest that nothing at all is expected with respect to the millennium. But what is meant is that the millennium is not a future earthly reign but the present reign of Christ with His saints.”
Cornelis Venema (The Promise of the Future, 2000)
The designation ‘amillennialism’ is unfortunate, since it seems to suggest that amillennialists deny any kind of millennium. A more accurate description would be ‘realized millennialism,’ since we believe the millennium of Revelation 20 is being fulfilled in the present age.”
I told him, I have no trouble still calling myself an Amillennialist, like those authors, as long as we understand what the term means.
He now says he prefers to call himself a Postmillennialist; mainly because there is very little difference between the two eschatological beliefs.
He also added that the term Amillennialism is only about 100 years old.
It is not that he disagrees with Amillennialism, but will no longer use the term.
Thought?
Tom
