Full Bible Timeline
THE BIBLE TEACHERS CHOICE
Eschatological studies:
-
Pre-millennialism
-
Amillennialism
-
Rabbinical
Provides Three Outlines of End-Times Eschatology
The Full Bible Timeline
End Times Views
Dear Bible Teachers: Eschatology should be communicated clearly and concisely to your students.
After sitting in bible school myself, you can imagine my shock to find teachers standing before thousands of students who doubted the veracity of genealogies found in scripture, who questioned if you could lose your salvation after being in heaven, and who shared the following 8 Core Values on eschatology. I just had to write a response.
Introduction: The rise of Amillennialism once again and a response from a pre-millennialist.
As church leaders, our core values should express what we stand for, not merely what we reject. When a ministry describes its beliefs only in terms of what it “will not” embrace, little clarity is offered to those sincerely seeking to understand what is actually affirmed. If a reader visits a church or school hoping to learn its eschatological position, a list of negations will not provide the insight they need.
I am deeply familiar with the eight core values in question—what I call “the eight I-will-nots.” As a former student and graduate of this school, I find it disappointing that such an important doctrinal category is represented only in the negative. This is especially surprising given the school’s statement that “our view of the end times can be a deciding factor in how we live our lives.” On that point, I wholeheartedly agree.
Let me also say, from the outset, that my time at this school remains one of the greatest spiritual experiences of my life. The leadership I worked with had a level of love, humility, and genuine care I have rarely encountered elsewhere. Their sincerity, passion, and devotion to Christ left a lasting impact on me.
However, because of that respect, I feel compelled to offer a thoughtful, biblical, and historically informed critique of the eight statements presented as core eschatological values. When core beliefs are framed as what we reject rather than what we believe, the effect is often more divisive than clarifying. It can unintentionally belittle or marginalize faithful believers who hold different viewpoints—especially when humor or caricature is used to describe them (“hiding in caves,” “not caring for the planet,” etc.). While such comments may elicit laughter, they do not foster an environment for mature theological discourse.
Those who do believe in the literal Second Coming of Christ, or who hold to a premillennial perspective, are left feeling that their views have been misrepresented or dismissed. It becomes difficult for students to feel safe enough to explore what Scripture actually teaches on the subject.
Therefore, in the following pages, I respond to each of the eight amillennial eschatological statements—point by point. My goal is not to attack, nor to shame, but to bring clarity, Scripture, historical context, and reasoned theological thought to the conversation.
These responses are offered with respect, conviction, and a sincere desire for the body of Christ to pursue truth together—without fear, without caricature, and without the pressure to conform to one particular viewpoint.
Here are the eight "Core Beliefs" from one of the most prominent Bible Schools in California.
See if you can determine what they 'do' believe based on their stated 'values'.
Core Value #1
“I will not embrace an end-time worldview that re-empowers a disempowered devil.”
Core Value #2
“I will not accept an eschatology that takes away my children’s future, and creates mindsets that undermine the mentality of leaving a legacy.”
Core Value #3
“I will not tolerate any theology that sabotages the clear command of Jesus to make disciples of all nations and the Lord’s Prayer that earth would be like heaven.”
Core Value #4
“I will not allow any interpretation of the Scriptures that destroys hope for the nations and undermines our command to restore ruined cities.”
Core Value #5
Core Value #6
“I refuse to embrace any mindset that celebrates bad news as a sign of the times and a necessary requirement for the return of Jesus.”
Core Value #7
“I am opposed to any doctrinal position that pushes the promises of God into a time zone that can’t be obtained in my generation and therefore takes away any responsibility I have to believe God for them in my lifetime.”
Core Value #8
“I don’t believe that the last days are a time of judgment, nor do I believe God gave the church the right to call for wrath for sinful cities. There is a day of judgment in which GOD will judge man, not us.”
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #1
"I will not embrace an end-time worldview
that re-empowers a disempowered devil."
A response to the claim that acknowledging end-times conflict somehow re-empowers Satan rather than affirming Christ’s victory.
1. Affirmation
Every believer agrees that Satan was decisively defeated at the Cross and stripped of his authority over those who belong to Christ. His power over the redeemed is broken, and this truth remains foundational to the believer's identity in Christ.
2. Clarification
However, the statement as written implies that Satan is completely disempowered in all realms, not merely in the life of the believer. Scripture does not support this conclusion. The New Testament clearly teaches that while Satan's ultimate defeat is certain, he remains active in the world until Christ returns.
3. Correction
A biblical premillennial view holds both truths in tension:
-
Satan has no authority over the believer.
-
Satan remains active in the world because humanity continues to submit to him.
The Cross disarmed him; unbelieving humanity empowers him. These truths are not contradictory-they are complementary.
4. Evidence from Scripture and History
Jesus called Satan "the ruler of this world" (John 12:31). Paul described him as "the god of this age" who blinds the minds of unbelievers (2 Corinthians 4:4). Peter warned that the adversary "prowls around like a roaring lion" (1 Peter 5:8). All of these statements were written after the Cross and Resurrection.
History affirms this ongoing influence. Whether in the brutality of the Roman Empire, the oppression of Nazi Germany, the terrors of Stalinism, or present-day authoritarian regimes, humanity continually validates the biblical teaching that evil spiritual forces still operate through willing human vessels.
To someone living in Germany in 1939, the notion that the devil was "disempowered" would have sounded tragically naive. The same would be true for Christians suffering under Nero, Domitian, or Diocletian; for the underground Church in China; or for persecuted believers across the Middle East today.
5. Application
A sound end-times theology must make sense not only in the comfort of the Western world but in every generation and culture-past, present, and future. If a theology collapses when applied to Christians living under tyranny, genocide, famine, or persecution, then it is a theology with cultural blinders-not a universal message.
Premillennialism can be placed in any century:
-
AD 70
-
AD 325
-
AD 1000
-
AD 1944
and it still fits. It does not require ideal circumstances to remain coherent.
In contrast, the eight statements under review depend heavily on peace, prosperity, and Western stability-conditions that have not existed for the majority of believers throughout history.
6. Additional Considerations
If one denies the devil's activity in the present age, then the plain reading of many prophetic events-including the rebirth of Israel in 1948-loses its significance. Jesus said, "This generation shall not pass away until all these things have come to pass" (Matthew 24:34). A preterist or partial-preterist interpretation cannot apply this verse to our time because they assign its fulfillment solely to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.
But the modern return of Israel stands as a unique prophetic marker-one that cannot be dismissed or spiritualized away.
7. Conclusion
The goal is not to elevate the devil, nor to fear him, but to acknowledge what Scripture teaches: Satan is defeated in authority, active in influence, and awaiting final judgment at Christ's return. Recognizing this does not "re-empower" the devil -it simply affirms the biblical worldview that has sustained believers through every age of suffering.
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #2
"I will not accept an eschatology that takes away my children's future, and creates mindsets that undermine the mentality of leaving a legacy.”
A response to the assertion that certain eschatological views diminish a child’s future or undermine legacy, stewardship, and generational hope.
1. Affirmation
Every Christian parent wants their children to flourish, to walk in purpose, and to steward well what God has given them. Legacy, stewardship, and hope for the next generation are central biblical themes. On these points, we are in full agreement.
2. Clarification
However, the statement assumes that certain eschatological views deprive children of a future or discourage legacy-building. This is not only unclear but implies the existence of a major doctrinal position that teaches believers to neglect their responsibilities-yet no such position exists in historic Christian theology.
3. Correction
A sound eschatology does not diminish our children's future; it informs it. Scripture teaches that we are in the world but not of it (John 17:16). We are to steward what we have on earth while understanding that our ultimate citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20). These truths do not conflict-they complement each other.
Premillennialists historically have not abandoned stewardship, education, morality, or preparation for the next generation. They have simply emphasized that earthly legacy is important-but eternal legacy is ultimate.
4. Evidence from Scripture and History
Our Children's Future
The Bible teaches us to train our children in righteousness, not to anchor their hope in the world's systems. A focus on heaven does
not negate responsibility; it purifies it (1 John 3:3). Christians throughout history-during persecution, famine, or hardship-taught their children to hold tightly to the hope of Christ's return. Far from hindering legacy, this strengthened it.
Transpositional Test
A good theology should "transpose" into any generation and still hold true. Would this statement have encouraged the early Christians under Domitian? The persecuted underground Church in China? Believers in war-torn regions today? Parents who watched their children martyred during the Middle Ages or the Reformation?
To them, the idea that "eschatology should guarantee my children's earthly future"
would have been not only foreign-but impossible.
Yet they still raised their children in hope.
5. Stewardship and Legacy
Stewardship permeates Scripture:
-
Caring for the earth (Genesis 2:15)
-
Raising families in righteousness (Deuteronomy 6:6-7)
-
Managing finances, gifts, talents (Matthew 25)
-
Building generational blessing (Psalm 145:4)
Nothing in premillennialism discourages this. The notion that a prophetic worldview undermines responsibility is a misunderstanding.
In fact, many of history's greatest hospitals, schools, rescue missions, orphanages, seminaries, and translations of Scripture were birthed by premillennial believers who thought Christ could return at any time.
6. Historical Example-Noah
-
He believed judgment was coming.
-
He believed life would change forever.
-
He did not believe that preparing for the future was pointless.
-
He spent 100 years preparing his family to build a new world.
His children's future was not taken away-it was redirected toward a divine purpose.
Likewise, the disciples' future was not diminished by the Cross-it was unveiled.
Eschatology does not destroy legacy; it defines it.
7. Application
The idea that expecting Christ's return discourages planning, building, or legacy simply does not align with history, Scripture, or lived Christian experience.
Every believer can:
-
Plan wisely
-
Steward faithfully
-
Build generational blessing
-
Train children in righteousness
-while also longing for His appearing (2 Timothy 4:8).
8. Conclusion
Believers of all eschatological positions desire the flourishing of future generations. The issue is not about denying our children a future, but ensuring their hope is grounded beyond the shifting sands of this world. A biblical end-times view- especially premillennialism-does not undermine legacy; it frames it in light of eternity.
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #3
“I will not tolerate any theology that sabotages the clear command of Jesus to make disciples of all nations and the Lord’s Prayer that earth would be like heaven.”
A response to the concern that end-time theology weakens the Great Commission or conflicts with Christ’s command to disciple the nations.
1. Affirmation
Every believer agrees that the Great Commission is non-negotiable. Making disciples of all nations is the heartbeat of Christ's mission. Likewise, we affirm the beauty and power of the Lord’s Prayer—“Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” These truths unite Christians across all eschatological viewpoints.
2. Clarification
However, this statement implies that certain end-times views undermine evangelism or diminish the mandate to disciple nations. This is simply not true. No recognized eschatological position—premillennial, postmillennial, amillennial, preterist, historicist—teaches believers to neglect evangelism.
To imply otherwise creates a false dichotomy and risks misleading students into thinking that those who disagree hold a deficient or unfaithful view of Christian mission.
3. Correction
History, Scripture, and lived Christian experience reveal that passionate evangelism has flourished under every legitimate eschatological position. The issue is not whether a theology encourages making disciples, but whether it interprets the timing and shape of the kingdom in different ways.
Premillennialists, far from being passive, have launched:
-
missions movements
-
evangelistic crusades
-
orphanages
-
Bible translation societies
-
gospel literature and broadcast ministries
Looking for the blessed hope (Titus 2:13) has historically accelerated, not sabotaged, missionary zeal.
4. Evidence and Examples
The Apostolic Church
The early Church lived with an expectation of Christ’s imminent return—yet turned the world upside down through evangelism (Acts 17:6). Their eschatology energized discipleship; it did not diminish it.
The Underground Church
Christians in China, Iran, Afghanistan, and North Korea—many of whom hold futurist or premillennial views—evangelize tirelessly despite persecution. Their eschatology strengthens perseverance; it does not sabotage it.
The Lord’s Prayer
“Your kingdom come” is a prayer of longing, not presumption. It does not promise that the Church will establish the fullness of heaven on earth apart from Christ’s physical return. Rather, it expresses:
-
surrender
-
desire for God’s will
-
commitment to righteousness
-
longing for the coming King
A premillennialist can fully and joyfully pray this prayer without distortion.
5. The Interpretive Tension
Your observation is correct: preterism often spiritualizes end-times prophecy while simultaneously insisting that “earth as it is in heaven” must be interpreted literally and fulfilled now.
We can affirm:
-
God’s goodness
-
the transformative impact of the gospel
-
the Church’s mandate to disciple nations
—but the full realization of heaven on earth cannot occur apart from the literal reign of Christ. The last 1,900+ years demonstrate that human leadership—even redeemed human leadership—cannot bring the world under perfect submission to God’s will.
Examples such as Calvin’s Geneva illustrate this well. While Calvin contributed greatly to theology, his attempt to establish a “City of God” on earth resulted in suppression, exile, and executions, demonstrating the dangers of combining:
-
postmillennial/preterist expectations with
-
earthly authority
When human beings try to achieve by force what only Christ can accomplish at His coming, the result is never heaven on earth.
6. Application
A sound eschatology supports, rather than undermines, the Great Commission. It acknowledges:
-
the Church’s responsibility in this present age
-
the Spirit’s empowering
-
the transformative power of the gospel
-
the certainty of Christ’s future rule
It does not claim that the Church will, unaided by Christ’s physical return, bring about the fullness of God's kingdom.
7. Conclusion
We all share the desire to disciple nations and to see God’s will done on earth. The disagreement lies not in the mission, but in its timing and fulfillment. Premillennialism does not sabotage the Great Commission; it clarifies its urgency. It reminds us that the gospel must be proclaimed to all nations before the King returns to establish His kingdom in its fullness.
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #4
“I will not allow any interpretation of the Scriptures that destroys hope for the nations and undermines our command to restore ruined cities.”
A response to the belief that prophetic interpretations erode hope for nations or discourage the restoration of cities and societies.
1. Affirmation
Hope is central to the Christian life. We agree wholeheartedly that the gospel restores individuals, families, cities, and nations. Scripture calls believers to repair what is broken, seek the welfare of the places where they live, and serve as Christ’s ambassadors in every generation (Jeremiah 29:7; 2 Corinthians 5:20).
This mandate for restoration is not unique to any one eschatological view. It is the shared calling of the entire body of Christ.
2. Clarification
However, the statement implies that certain interpretations of Scripture diminish hope or encourage passivity regarding cultural restoration. This is inaccurate. No historic Christian eschatology promotes apathy toward cities, nations, or human suffering. Premillennialists, amillennialists, and postmillennialists alike believe in:
-
the Church’s mission
-
the believer’s responsibility
-
the value of human life
-
the call to righteousness and justice
A disagreement about the timeline of restoration is not the same as undermining the call to restoration.
3. Correction
The phrasing “I will not allow” implies a closed posture toward theological dialogue. While it may be intended to express passion for truth, it can unintentionally signal that alternative viewpoints are unwelcome—even when those viewpoints are rooted in Scripture, Church history, and centuries of faithful scholarship.
A healthy approach invites discussion rather than foreclosing it.
Premillennialism fully affirms:
-
hope for the nations
-
restoration under Christ’s authority
-
the Church’s mandate to minister, serve, heal, and build
-
the ultimate renewal of creation
The difference lies in the belief that full and lasting restoration comes only under the literal reign of Christ, not before it.
4. Evidence from History and Lived Reality
The Church has always sought to restore broken places—under every eschatological banner.
Consider:
-
The underground Church in China, serving and praying for their persecutors.
-
Believers in the Middle East interceding for cities where they are not granted religious freedom.
-
Christian communities in Africa rebuilding after civil wars.
-
Missionaries bringing healing, education, and relief where governments have collapsed.
These believers embody restoration—even in cities that do not outwardly resemble “heaven on earth.” To claim that some Christians “undermine our command to restore cities” implies a widespread problem that does not, in reality, exist. Across the world, Christians everywhere are: feeding the poor rescuing the oppressed building schools and hospitals planting churches praying for their leaders renewing communities Restoration is the universal heartbeat of the redeemed.
5. The Real Issue
If this core belief is aimed at a small fringe group that the minister personally encountered, it should not be elevated as a universal doctrinal warning. The real underlying issue is not restoration—it is an opposition to premillennial or futurist interpretations, which are mistakenly perceived as pessimistic.
In reality:
-
Premillennialists minister with hope.
-
They rebuild cities.
-
They love the lost.
-
They invest in the future.
-
They pray for nations.
-
They are often the first to respond in crises.
6. Theological Perspective
Hope for the nations does not stem from the belief that the world will progressively perfect itself before Christ returns. It comes from the certainty that Christ will reign, that justice will be established, and that the renewal of creation is a divine promise rooted in His sovereignty.
Restoration now is temporary and partial.
Restoration then will be complete and eternal.
Both truths matter.
7. Conclusion
Every Christian seeks the restoration of cities and the hope of nations. The disagreement lies not in the mission, but in how Scripture describes its fulfillment. Premillennial believers do not undermine restoration—they pursue it while trusting that its fullness awaits the return of the true King.
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #5 & #6
“I will not embrace an eschatology
that changes the nature of a good God.”
“I refuse to embrace any mindset that celebrates
bad news as a sign of the times and a necessary
requirement for the return of Jesus.”
A response to the claim that biblical eschatology alters the nature of a good God or encourages believers to celebrate suffering and bad news.
1. Affirmation
We can all agree that God is good. His nature is unchanging, His mercy endures forever, and His dealings with humanity flow from love, justice, and holiness. Likewise, no believer should “celebrate” human suffering or rejoice in calamity. Compassion and intercession—not gloating—are the marks of true discipleship.
2. Clarification
However, these two statements imply that certain end-times views:
-
distort God’s nature, or
-
delight in bad news
This is simply not true of any historic, orthodox eschatology. No premillennial, postmillennial, or amillennial theologian teaches believers to rejoice in tragedy or to view suffering as something to celebrate.
What is true is that Scripture describes certain signs preceding Christ’s return. Recognizing them is not the same as celebrating them. It is simply acknowledging biblical reality while responding with compassion and urgency.
3. Correction
Premillennial theology does not alter God’s goodness. It simply recognizes:
-
the world is fallen
-
humanity is sinful
-
Satan still influences unbelieving societies
-
suffering exists because the world is not yet redeemed
-
Christ will ultimately make all things new
The character of God remains intact throughout. His mercy, justice, patience, and love are displayed from Genesis to Revelation—including in His judgments, which are consistently framed as redemptive opportunities rather than vindictive destruction.
4. Evidence from Scripture and History
The Ongoing Reality of Suffering
Throughout history—biblical and modern—suffering has occurred not because God is “bad,” but because:
-
humanity sins
-
nations rebel
-
rulers commit atrocities
-
the earth is under the curse
-
creation groans (Romans 8:22)
The question “How could a good God allow this?” is answered not by dismissing prophecy, but by understanding the Fall, human responsibility, and the spiritual battle still underway.
The Cross Did Not Erase Human Choice
You make a key point: the Cross secured victory, but humanity continues to reap what it sows. Environmental devastation, disease, poor stewardship, idolatry, greed, and violence are human contributions—not indictments against God’s goodness.
Many of the world’s tragedies come not from heaven but from:
-
corruption
-
war
-
injustice
-
exploitation
-
neglect
-
hatred
-
unbelief
Suffering does not reflect God’s nature; it reflects ours.
Prophetic Warnings are not Celebrations
In Acts 11, Agabus prophesied a coming famine. This was not cause for celebration—it was cause for preparation. The Church responded with generosity, not mockery.
If the early Church had followed the logic of Core Belief #6, they may have dismissed Agabus’ prophecy as “too negative” or “contrary to a good God.”
Instead, they understood:
-
warning ≠ celebration
-
prophecy ≠ pessimism
-
preparation ≠ unbelief
5. Historical Reflection
Mary and Joseph
Would Mary and Joseph have been accused of “celebrating bad news” because they recognized the signs of Messiah’s birth? Bethlehem was under Roman oppression. Herod was preparing his massacre. The times were perilous, but prophecy was being fulfilled.
They didn’t rejoice in tragedy.
They rejoiced in purpose.
The Early Church
Under Rome’s brutality, early believers didn’t deny reality; they endured it with faith, hope, and perseverance. They saw persecution as a sign—not of God’s cruelty, but of Christ’s nearness.
Israel in Captivity
When Israel suffered in Babylon, the elders didn’t accuse God of changing His nature. They recognized:
“We have sinned.”
“We have not obeyed the voice of the Lord.”
(Daniel 9)
The Talmud (Sanhedrin 97) expresses that the Messiah’s delay was due to Israel’s sins—not God’s lack of goodness.
Judgment served to bring repentance, not to deny God’s character.
6. The Real Underlying Question
The minister’s statements assume:
-
a good God = no judgment
-
prophetic signs = negativity
-
end-time warnings = bad theology
But Scripture presents a different picture:
-
God is good and God judges.
-
God is merciful and God disciplines.
-
God is loving and God corrects.
The Cross did not eliminate these truths; it revealed them.
7. Application
Premillennialists do not celebrate tragedy; they mourn it. But they also recognize that Jesus Himself said certain events would precede His coming (Matthew 24). Our response is:
-
compassion
-
prayer
-
intercession
-
evangelism
-
readiness
—not celebration.
A worldview that denies biblical warnings leaves believers unprepared when difficulties arise. Worse, it leaves no coherent explanation when the world experiences war, persecution, famine, or hostility.
8. Conclusion
Acknowledging biblical prophecy does not change the nature of God, nor does it celebrate evil. It honors His truthfulness. God remains good, unchanging, and merciful—regardless of our eschatological view. Believers should neither fear prophecy nor mock it but discern it with humility and hope.
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #7
“I am opposed to any doctrinal position that pushes the promises of God into a time zone that can’t be obtained in my generation and therefore takes away any responsibility I have to believe God for them in my lifetime.”
A response to the idea that promises not fulfilled within a single lifetime remove personal responsibility or diminish present-day faith.
1. Affirmation
Every believer should approach God’s promises with faith, expectancy, and obedience. Scripture repeatedly calls us to believe God in our generation, to walk in His purposes, and to steward what He places in our hands. Trust in God’s promises is central to the Christian life.
2. Clarification
However, this statement implies that unless a prophecy is fulfilled within my lifetime, it somehow diminishes personal responsibility or faith. This is neither biblical nor historically consistent. Much of Scripture involves promises given to individuals or generations that were not fulfilled within their lifetime—and yet their faith was no less genuine.
3. Correction
This core belief reflects a misunderstanding of biblical prophecy, confusing: personal promises with prophetic timelines for the entire world
Not all promises are generationally immediate. Some are corporate, long-term, and eschatological in nature. To insist that every promise must be fulfilled “in my generation” is to force Scripture into an artificial framework that Scripture itself never proposes.
4. Evidence from Scripture and History
Biblical Examples
-
Abraham received a promise of countless descendants (Genesis 15:5).
-
He saw only a handful before dying—yet he “died in faith” (Hebrews 11:13).
-
Israel in Egypt waited 400 years for the promise of deliverance (Genesis 15:13).
-
Entire generations lived and died before seeing it.
-
The Intertestamental Period lasted 400 silent years.
-
One generation saw nothing; the next witnessed the incarnation of Christ.
-
The disciples, though faithful, died without seeing:
-
the global evangelization Jesus predicted,
-
Israel’s restoration in 1948, or
-
the prophetic events yet to unfold.
Did this mean those promises “took away their responsibility” to believe?
Of course not.
The Nature of Prophecy
Prophecy is not a vending machine of instant promises. It is the revelation of God’s long-term plan—often spanning centuries or millennia.
Insisting that prophetic fulfillment must occur within my lifetime is not faith—it is impatience.
5. Theological Considerations
A. Personal responsibility is timeless.
Our job is faithfulness, not fulfillment.
Our generation is called to obedience, not to forcing prophetic outcomes.
B. Many promises are cumulative and multi-generational.
We build upon the faithfulness of past generations and prepare the way for future ones.
C. Premillennialism does not diminish responsibility.
It simply recognizes that the Bible describes certain events—Christ’s return, the millennium, the restoration of Israel, the final judgment—that will unfold according to God’s timeline, not our demands.
6. The Danger of Over-Immediate Eschatology
The statement inadvertently mirrors a modern Western mindset:
-
“If God’s promise doesn’t happen in my lifetime, I’m being cheated.”
-
“If prophecy is future, it’s irrelevant.”
-
“If I can’t have it now, it lacks value.”
This thinking conflicts with nearly all of biblical history and the faith of millions who lived for promises they would never personally see but knew God would fulfill.
7. Historical Witness
Foxe’s Book of Martyrs records generation after generation of faithful believers who:
-
loved God
-
served Him sincerely
-
died under persecution
-
and never saw the promises we now take for granted
Would they accuse God of withholding?
Would they charge Scripture with “taking away responsibility”?
Never.
They lived in hope because they trusted the Promiser—not the timing.
8. Application
Our responsibility is not to demand that prophecy bow to our lifespan.
It is to:
-
believe
-
obey
-
steward
-
prepare
-
teach
-
evangelize
-
build
—and to faithfully hand the baton to the next generation, should Christ delay.
9. Conclusion
God’s promises are sure, regardless of when they are fulfilled. We are called to believe, to steward, and to obey in our generation—but not to confine God’s prophetic timeline to our personal lifespan. A mature eschatology embraces both present responsibility and future hope.
THE TEACHERS' CORE BELIEF #8
“I don’t believe that the last days are a time of judgment, nor do I believe God gave the church the right to call for wrath for sinful cities. There is a day of judgment in which GOD will judge man, not us.”
A response to the claim that the last days do not involve divine judgment and that biblical warnings of judgment have no present relevance.
1. Affirmation
We agree wholeheartedly that the Church is not called to pronounce wrath upon cities or to take delight in destruction. Intercession—not condemnation—is the posture of New Testament believers. Abraham interceded for Sodom, Moses for Israel, Jeremiah for Jerusalem, and Jesus Himself wept over the city that would reject Him.
The Church is called to bless, pray, and preach the gospel—not to assume the role of judge.
2. Clarification
However, the statement goes beyond rejecting human judgment. It claims that the last days themselves are not a time in which divine judgment occurs. This is incompatible with the testimony of Scripture, the teachings of Jesus, and the clear pattern of biblical prophecy.
To deny that judgment occurs in the last days is to flatten the biblical narrative, remove the prophetic spine of Scripture, and disregard the very passages Jesus emphasized most.
3. Correction
The Bible presents a consistent picture:
-
God is good.
-
God is patient.
-
God desires all to be saved.
-
And God judges wickedness.
These truths do not contradict one another.
They complete one another.
God’s goodness is the foundation for His justice.
To deny divine judgment is to deny a major theme from Genesis to Revelation.
4. Evidence from Scripture
Old Testament Pattern
God judges nations—always with the purpose of bringing repentance, humility, or restoration.
Examples:
-
The Flood
-
Sodom and Gomorrah
-
Egypt in the Exodus
-
Israel’s exile to Babylon
-
The judgments in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Amos, and Micah
Judgment is not a divine temper tantrum; it is the severe mercy of a patient God who refuses to let wickedness destroy His purposes.
Jesus Himself Taught Last-Days Judgment
In Matthew 24–25, Jesus describes:
-
wars
-
persecution
-
deception
-
lawlessness
-
the abomination of desolation
-
cosmic signs
-
separation of sheep and goats
-
final judgment of the nations
These events are explicitly connected to the last days, not only to AD 70.
The Book of Revelation
Revelation—written decades after Jerusalem’s fall—describes future judgments that culminate in the return of Christ.
These include:
-
seals
-
trumpets
-
bowls
-
the fall of Babylon
-
Armageddon
-
the binding of Satan
-
the Great White Throne judgment
To deny judgment in the last days is to deny the relevance of Revelation itself.
New Testament Epistles
Paul writes:
-
“The Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven… in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those who do not know God.” (2 Thess. 1:7–8)
Peter writes:
-
“The heavens and the earth… are kept for the day of judgment.” (2 Peter 3:7)
Judgment is not merely a single future moment—it is a process culminating at His return.
5. The Real Issue — Misunderstanding Judgment
Many modern believers equate “judgment” with cruelty, anger, or retribution.
But biblically:
-
Judgment protects the righteous.
-
Judgment confronts wickedness.
-
Judgment restores justice.
-
Judgment reveals God’s holiness.
-
Judgment brings an end to oppression.
-
Judgment prepares the world for Christ’s reign.
God’s judgment is not the opposite of His goodness. It is the expression of it.
6. The Church and Judgment
What the Church is not called to do:
-
pronounce curses
-
call down fire
-
command destruction
-
declare doom over cities
This is clear.
What the Church is called to do:
-
intercede for the lost
-
warn of coming judgment
-
preach repentance
-
call people to salvation
-
be watchmen on the walls
Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, Jesus, Paul, and John all functioned as prophetic warners—not prophetic executioners.
To warn is to love.
To intercede is to love.
To deny judgment altogether is to withhold truth.
7. Historical Perspective
Your point is well-taken: if a believer today rejects the idea that judgment occurs in the last days, where does that leave persecuted Christians in the Middle East, North Korea, Nigeria, or China?
How should the early Church have interpreted Nero?
How would Christians in the Holocaust interpret Hitler?
How would believers in communist regimes interpret their oppressors?
Real evil requires a real Judge.
Hope is not found in denying judgment, but in trusting that judgment belongs to God alone—and that He will set all things right.
8. Jewish Insight — The Talmud
Sanhedrin 97 articulates a traditional Jewish understanding that the Messiah’s arrival was delayed due to Israel’s sins, not God’s change in nature. They saw judgment as corrective, not contradictory to God's goodness.
This aligns perfectly with the biblical narrative.
9. Application
A theology that denies divine judgment often collapses under real-world evil. When tragedy strikes, when persecution intensifies, when wickedness appears triumphant—believers need a theology robust enough to interpret suffering without redefining God.
Premillennialism provides this clarity:
-
Judgment is real.
-
Judgment is just.
-
Judgment is God’s responsibility.
-
Judgment precedes restoration.
-
Judgment ends oppression.
-
Judgment ushers in Christ’s reign.
This does not diminish God's goodness; it magnifies it.
10. Conclusion
We agree that believers should not call for wrath, nor should they rejoice in calamity. But Scripture is clear: the last days include divine judgment, culminating in the return of Christ. A faithful eschatology does not deny this—it balances it with God’s mercy, goodness, and desire that all should come to repentance.
Judgment does not compromise the nature of God.
It vindicates it.
