An Open Invitation / Challenge to An Amillennial Representative
The Theme of Preterist Pilgrim Weekend, July 2016 (Lord willing) will be an examination and refutation of the Amillennial view of eschatology. This year’s PPW was on Dispensationalism: Dangerous or Divine? and it was great! In 2017, we hope to do our PPW on the errors of Postmillennialism.
This post serves as an invitation/ challenge for a representative of the Amillennial view to meet me in a two day formal public debate during our Preteriist Pilgrim Weekend. Here are the criteria:
1. The representative can be of the Reformed Amillennial or the non-Reformed Amillennial camp. The main requirement is that they be Amillennial in their eschatology.
2. A potential opponent must be Representative, Reputable and Respectful.
By Representative, I mean that they must be seen, within the circle of their fellowship, to represent the generally held Amillennial views.
By Reputable, I mean that they must be recognized and respected as a well read, well spoken, person that can formally present and defend the Amillennial paradigm.
By Respectful, I mean that the potential candidate must have a reputation for being — and pledge and promise to conduct himself as a Christian gentleman- and to present their message with decorum, without rancor, caustic language, bitterness or name calling.
I propose that the subject of the discussion will be:
Resolved: The Bible teaches that the resurrection of the dead, as foretold in 1 Corinthians 15 (and parallel, corollary texts), the resurrection to overcome the death introduced by Adam, occurred at the time of the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70
I will be happy to affirm this proposition.
A potential opponent will affirm:
Resolved: The Bible teaches that the resurrection of the dead, as foretold in 1 Corinthians 15 (and parallel, corollary texts), the resurrection to overcome the death introduced by Adam, is yet future, and will occur at the end of the current Christian age.
The precise wording of the propositions is, naturally, open to negotiations, so that each man feels fully comfortable in their respective proposition.
Any potential opponent should also be willing to pledge and promise that a follow up, second debate, will be held within one year, at their “home venue” — at their home congregation.
There are lots of other logistical details that can be negotiated, and I am more than happy to work with any candidate that meets these criteria given above.
If you meet these criteria, and are willing to defend Amillennialism in formal public debate, please contact me asap so that we can begin serious negotiations about the “finer points.” Here is a great opportunity for the “right man” to come to “our house” and present your case.
Anyone reading this, who thinks that their Amillennial preacher would be the right man for this invitation, please have them contact me.
I have some Amillennial representatives in mind, but, the ones I have in mind have rejected my invitations in the past, but, we will see. I am truly hoping that a good, scholarly man will step forward.