I have been procrastinating starting a really good eschatological study for a while, and am enjoying your series so far. I would like to discuss a few parts of your discussion, if you don't mind.



Amillennialists...do not believe in a literal earthly physical/political kingdom. They believe the kingdom is spiritual, and the millennium is now.

Most that I have discussed this with would say that it is literal and physical in the Church's presence here, the tip of the iceburg of His kingdom's fullness.


They anticipate the end of this age to include a period of increased apostasy and (possibly) the appearance of the antichrist

for example with a readily identifiable defeat of the antichrist and binding of Satan, and a distinct difference between before and after.

Can you provide some well-known amil theologans that teach taht the antichrist was not rome/nero/something else in the first century. Again, this is pure curiosity.


In many ways an amillennialist is a sort of pessimistic postmillennialist who views the millennium as having started when Satan was defeated on the cross and ending with the Second Coming.

Again, most PP inaugurists I've talked to say that Satan was bound before the cruxifiction, at least in Christ's earthly righn. They site scriptures like Matt 12.



Sola Gratia,
Mike Graham | 09.10.03 - 1:09 pm | #

I would lieke to apologize for not proofreading that.
Mike Graham | 09.10.03 - 1:09 pm | #

I was being sloppy as regards to precisely when amills say Satan was bound.

An example of an amill theologian who looks for a personal antichrist at the end of the millennium: Anthony Hoekema. You can check his book The Bible and the Future.
David Heddle | Homepage | 09.10.03 - 4:27 pm | #

Thank you, I might just do that.
Mike Graham | 09.10.03 - 6:00 pm | #