Dr. Mohler addressed two aspects of our discussion on his radio program Wednesday. Initially he addressed a question regarding replacement theology, which came up in the comments on Wednesday. It seems that Dr. Mohler doesn't hold to a sharp distinction between Israel and the church, but does see some future for national Israel. I think that John Piper would share a similar view. Piper and Mohler would both fall under the system that we are discussing, i.e. Historic Premillennialsim. Start listening at 11:15 - 16:11 to hear Dr. Mohler address this issue.
The second issue he addressed was regarding interpreting the Old Testament in light of the New Testament. This also came up in the comments Wednesday and I actually called in to get Dr. Mohler's opinion on this. Start listening at 30:22-33:50 to hear him weigh in on the interpretive issue.
Both of these issues wind up playing a key role in how we determine our eschatology. While just like Martyr and Irenaeus, Mohler isn't inerrant or authoritative, it is still nice to hear his view on the issues we are discussing. There are few, if any, in the church today who can match his intellect and I think I can say with confidence there is no one who is more well read. I am glad that he is on our team (or as CJ Mahaney said, I'm glad we are on his team).
I hope to post part 2 on the history of the Historic Premillennial position sometime tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Great stuff. Very helpful. Looking forward to your next post...
Grreg, I posted a comment on your previous post which was an answer to the question you asked Vinnie. Here it is again:
Greg,
To respond to your last question to Vinnie (and he may have a better example), Macarthur's study bible says that the temple described in Ezekiel will be a literal temple erected in the millennium in order to resume the sacrificial system; I believe this is the standard classic dispy view. If we let the book of Hebrews, and other NT texts help us understand the “future temple” (future from Ezekiel’s perspective) then we come to a far different interpretation of Ezekiel 36-48(?) than if we say (as Macarthur does) that the “plan reading of the text” of that passage leads us to the same interpretation that the Jews of Ezekiel’s day may have had.
jAsOn
Thanks for this
Post a Comment