Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Yeah it's an interesting position they take. It's not a dogma in the sense that we say it's definitely true, and we can have communion and agreement with churches that don't teach it, but it's considered a 'distinctive' trait of Calvary chapels and thus obligatory for affiliation with the overarching organizations.
From what understand it's emphasized largely for pastoral reasons, because teaching Christ's imminent return is valuable both for getting people to make a decision for Christ today as well as to provide hope to believers. That's the theory anyway. But in practice I see a lot of people trying to predict the timing of the rapture (and getting it wrong lol) which I think is unhealthy. I like pretty much everything else about the church and its distinctives though!
Is Christ's return less imminent if the millennium of Revelation 20 is symbolic of the present age of the Church between Christ's ascension and return? Arguably amillennialism is 7 years more imminent.
I've a larger issue with dispensationalism than the apocalyptic eschatology. The distinction between Israel and the church as two separate peoples of God rather than the Church grafted into Israel as one people of God in the new covenant.
My church is not dogmatic on this as specific beliefs in this area are not necessary for salvation, yet may present a stumbling block. Most of the other men in my men's Bible study would have an amillennial, partial preterist position.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link