Dispensationalism, Post-millennialism and Amillennialism are increasingly untenable. Historic Premillennialism is what I am most persuaded by. But why?
- The “Love of Many Grows Cold”: Historic Premillennialism points to Matthew 24:12 as a literal prophecy. The argument is that the internal decay of the Church—apathy and the loss of first love—is a specific “sign” that we are approaching the end of the age, rather than a temporary hurdle.
- The Sifting Before the Return: If the Church is to be caught up after the Tribulation (Post-Trib), it must first be sifted. Fragmented conditions and institutional failure are seen as the “shaking” of things that can be shaken, leaving only a faithful remnant for Christ to gather.
- A Refutation of Post-Millennialism: The current state of the Church makes the Post-millennial “Golden Age” (where the Church Christianises the world) look increasingly untenable, DOES IT NOT? To a Historic Premillennialist, the “trajectory” is not upward toward a Christianised world, but toward a crisis that only the Second Coming can resolve. Hence the urgent need for the Church to prepare for endurance: the Church that fails to plan is the Church that plans to fail.
- The Need for a Visible Deliverer: If the Church were unified and thriving, it might not “groan” for the return of Christ. The fragmentation and apathy create the exact environment where the “Blessed Hope” becomes a desperate necessity rather than a theological footnote.
In short: the Church’s weakness isn’t a sign that God’s plan is failing, but that the stage is being set for the final act: the endurance of the saints through the “great falling away” followed by the visible return of Christ.
It will become clearer before the end.
MARANATHA?
firebrandnotes.com 