Tuesday, May 04, 2010

Jim Hamilton on Revelation 20

My buddy Jim Hamilton preaches up a storm on Revelation 20 about the millennium. If you are amillennial, only listen to it with proper protective equipment covering your groin because Hamilton will sock it to you at your most vulnerable point.


Matt Viney said...

I listened to much of it. He's a great preacher and nice bloke, I'm sure. However, I think his basic exegesis of this passage is less than a kick in the groin and more like a wild punch which misses the mark.

When speaking about the red dragon whose tail (chapter 12) swept down a third of the stars of heaven, he says:
"that's probably a symbolical depiction....maybe we're not literally to conceieve of a dragon, but...".

Call me pandora, but I suspect that he's taking many features of Revelation more literally than the genre demands.
I'm open to correction on the matter, of course.

jeff miller said...

I am thankful this message out of Revelation was preached. There is much to agree with in it...the arguments for pre-mil vs. a-mil excluded.

Did Jesus really teach that there would be two literal, bodily, resurrections separated by a millennium?

James Howard Knotek offers a reading of Revelation which is consistent with the rest of Scripture. And yes, it would be categorized as a-mil.

The key problem seems to be with recognizing that in order to provide different perspectives the visions give different descriptive details.
Jim says an emphatic "no" to two kinds of resurrection but then "yes" to two kinds of death.

jeff miller said...

Oops, the last sentence was one of many problems that stood out to me, but I meant to delete it rather than develop that here.