The Riddleblog

I have long been interested in the doctrine of Antichrist, a fascinating subplot in redemptive history (see my book The Man of Sin ). If you know anything about me and the Riddleblog, you know that it is my contention that much of the Antichrist speculation of late strays very far afield from the biblical text. The reason for much of this speculative over-reaching is due to a preoccupation with geo-political events in the Middle East (especially the goings on in Israel and its neighbors) or fears about the potential destructive power of AI, should it fall into the hands of a maniacal end-times figure.

This Letter on Life and Times of the Antichrist was likely written in the mid–10th century (c. 950–954) by a Benedictine monk, Adso of Montier-en-Der, who was Abbot of the monastery of Montier-en-Der, in France. His work—a treatise written to Gerberga, the Saxon Queen of West Francia—is one of the most influential medieval treatments of apocalyptic expectation. Written in the style of the lives of the saints then popular (only in reverse since Antichrist is an “anti-saint”), Adso’s work was hugely popular, given the fact the critical edition of his treatise was based upon 171 manuscripts—demonstrating a wide distribution of copies. It did much to establish the future course of addressing the subject [1].

Adso lived during a time of increased eschatological speculation. The years he was active were those immediately prior to the end of the first millennium (1,000 CE)—a date which provoked all sorts of worries and apprehensions just as Y2K did in our own recent past.

Furthermore, the Roman church was struggling with corruption and bad-behavior among the highest ranks of the Papal court. The Holy Roman Empire was on its heels as well. Islam had pushed back the expanse of the Eastern part of the empire into fortified Byzantium. Regions which had long been “Christian” (e.g., Egypt, North Africa, the Levant, Asia Minor, and even most of Spain) had fallen to Islamic armies. There were also legions of war-like pagans beyond the Danube yet to be evangelized.

In the minds of those like Adso, these things were very likely harbingers of the return of Christ and the final judgment.

To see the main points from Adso’s “On the Life and Times of Antichrist” follow the link below

The Binding of Satan (Revised and Updated)

The Binding of Satan — Background and Introduction to the Controversy

In Revelation 20:1-3, John is given a remarkable vision:

“Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. 2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, 3 and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.” In verse 7, John adds, “and when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison.”

The binding of Satan as depicted in this passage raises several obvious questions, especially in light of the on-going debate between amillennarians and premillennarians about the nature and timing of the millennial age. This is the only biblical text which specifically mentions a thousand year period of time in which Satan’s power and activity are curtailed during a millennial age (whether present, or future). Satan is said to be “bound” for the duration. The two most obvious questions raised by John’s vision are, “what does it mean for Satan to be bound in such a manner?” and “are the thousand years a present or a future period of time?” Amillennarians and premillennarians take quite different approaches to this passage and offer conflicting answers to these questions.

Amillennarians believe that the binding of Satan is but another way of speaking of Jesus’s victory over the devil during our Lord’s messianic mission. The thousand years are not a literal period of time, but refer to the entire age between Christ’s first and second coming (the inter-advental period). If true, the binding of Satan begins with our Lord’s death and resurrection, continues throughout the present age, and ends with the release of Satan from the abyss (abussos—the place of the dead, cf. Romans 10:7) shortly before Jesus returns at the end of the age when Antichrist is revealed during a time of final apostasy (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12). This brief apostasy is followed by the final consummation when Jesus returns (the second Advent). His return includes three concomitant events: 1). The general resurrection (1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11; 1 Corinthians 15:50-57), 2). The final judgment (Matthew 25:31-46; Revelation 20:4-6, 11-15), and 3). The ushering in of a new heavens and earth (2 Peter 3:4).

Premillennarians, however, contend that the thousand years are a literal period of time commencing after Christ’s second advent, who then establishes his physical rule over the earth in a millennial kingdom (Revelation 20:1-7). During this time, Satan is bound. The thousand years end with Satan’s release from his imprisonment so as to lead the nations in a final revolt against Jesus’s rule, immediately before the final judgment at the end of the millennial age (Revelation 20:7-10).

Why Premillennial Objections to the Amillennial View of the Binding of Satan Actually Backfire‍ ‍

The premillennial objection to the amillennial view is a simple and obvious one. How can there be evil on the earth if Satan is bound? This objection is plausible if two very untenable assumptions are in place. The first untenable assumption is that supposedly there are people on the earth in natural bodies during a future millennial age (after Jesus returns), who comprise the nations mentioned in Revelation 20:8. On premillennial assumptions, these are the people who revolt against Christ once unbound, and who are destroyed at the end of the millennial age at the time of final judgment. But the false assumption here is how can there be people on the earth after Jesus returns to raise the dead, judge the world, and usher in a new heaven and earth as made clear in the passages above? Who makes it through the final judgment and goes on to repopulate the earth, only to be deceived by Satan after the Second Advent? This is a biblical impossibility, especially in light of our Lord’s words in Luke 24:34-36. “And Jesus said to them, `The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.’” There can be no people in unresurrected bodes on the earth to revolt against Christ! Nor is Satan still around to be released and deceive them—his end (the Lake of Fire) has already come at the Lord’s return (Romans 16:20; Revelation 20:10).

The second untenable assumption is that evil remains on the earth even after our Lord’s return when the consummation of all things takes place (see the texts cited above) and time (this present evil age) gives way to eternity (the age to come). It makes far more sense that Revelation 20—speaking of martyrdom as it does, and ending in an apostasy and a revolt against Jesus while he rules the nations—is much more likely to be a description of the end of this present evil age, and not a depiction of some sort of a “second Fall” of redeemed and unredeemed people supposedly on this present earth after Christ’s return, post resurrection, post-judgment, and post cosmic renewal. This is highly problematic and does great injustice to the flow and progress of redemptive history.

I address the serious problems with the premillennial understanding of redemptive history and a future millennial age in some detail here: Evil in the Millennial Age? A Huge Problem for Premillennarians and in the Blessed Hope Podcast here: “This Age and the Age to Come: The Implausibility of Premillennialism.”

To summarize, amillennarians understand the binding of Satan to be a present reality, while premillennarians see this scene as an entirely future event. In what follows, I will consider and evaluate the biblical background to John’s vision and then respond to the premillennial challenge, “when and how is Satan is bound?” And “why is there so much evil in the world if he is?” These are two important questions which merit response.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Amillennialism, eschatology, Biblical TheologyKim RiddlebargerApril 10, 2026the binding of Satan, Revelation 20:1-3Comment

The Gog and Magog Prophecy of Ezekiel 38–39

In light of yet another war raging in the Middle East–this time between the United States and Israel against Iran and its Revolutionary Islamic Government, appeal is made by dispensational prophecy pundits to the prophecy of Gog and Magog found in Ezekiel 38-39. Ezekiel supposedly predicted the war in Iran–as Greg Laurie claims in but one of a scad of recent YouTube pundits making the same claim.

In a time of fear and uncertainty brought about by war, it may be comforting to think that biblical prophecy is being fulfilled through these events—which can only mean that the rapture must be soon at hand. It is also a way to attract followers, get clicks, and sell books. People are worried and want answers. If pundits can claim this is the fulfillment of biblical prophecy, what can be more reassuring than that?

But this repeated use of Ezekiel 38-39 to explain the wars and rumors of wars in the Middle East has a number of serious interpretive weaknesses. What are these weaknesses? How has this prophecy been understood by dispensationalists in the past? And if the dispensational reading of the passage is not the correct one, how then should we understand the passage?

An Interesting History of Interpretation

Since the mysterious Gog and Magog are associated with a persecuting empire depicted in Ezekiel’s prophecy as being destroyed at the time of the end—the same holds true in the Book of Revelation (Rev. 20:8)—Gog and Magog have often been tied to the political powers which arise in conjunction with speculation about the future appearance of Antichrist.[1] Martin Luther once referred to the Ottoman Turks, then at the gates of Vienna, as Gog’s forces soon to come under the judgment of God.[2]

Dispensationalists of a previous generation equated the names that appear in this passage (Gog, Magog, Rosh, Meshech, Tubal, and Gomer, Ezek. 38:2–6 NASB) with nations of modern Europe in some sort of alliance with the Soviet Union (now the nations of the former Soviet Union). According to Hal Lindsey, Gog and Magog are supposedly tied to Russia (Rosh supposedly equals “Russia”) while Meshech is identified as “Moscow” and Gomer as “Germany,” all of whom will form an alliance with Ethiopia (Cush) and Libya (Put) and invade the modern nation of Israel, now back in the land, sometime toward the end of the seven-year tribulation.[3] But historian-archeologist Edwin Yamauchi thoroughly refuted the claim that Ezekiel is referring to the modern nation of Russia and the city of Moscow when the prophet uses these names.[4] His work was simply ignored by advocates of the “Russian Invasion” theory. “Hey Yamauchi, I’m trying to sell books here, don’t scare people off with the facts.”

To read the rest, follow the link below

Amillennialism, Biblical Theology, Current Events, eschatologyKim RiddlebargerMarch 13, 2026Ezekiel 38-39, Gog and MagogComment

Paul on Christian Hope in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-14 (updated)

Note: This essay was originally posted on the Riddleblog on December 6, 2023. It is edited for republication here. In light of my friend Ben Sasse’s terminal cancer diagnosis and his wonderful testimony to God’s faithfulness (here and here), I thought Paul’s discussion of the Christian’s hope in facing the reality of death well worth consideration.

The Question Put to Paul by the Thessalonians

In light of the broad background of the New Testament’s teaching regarding the second advent of our Lord, we consider Paul’s teaching regarding Christian hope in verses 13-14 of 1 Thessalonians 4. Paul is addressing the question brought to him from the Thessalonians by Timothy regarding the fate of those who die before Christ returns. Since Paul had been gone from Thessalonica for but a short period of time, many have wondered about how it is that this question would arise, since it is not likely that many people in the congregation would have died during the short time span between Paul’s departure and Timothy’s return trip to the city. It is possible that some were martyred due to persecution, but this is improbable. Although many proposals have been put forth as an explanation, Gene Green wisely cautions us,

The reconstruction of greatest merit argues that at the moment of confronting the reality of death, the Thessalonians did not allow their confession to inform their reaction to this human tragedy. Alternately, they may simply have not understood fully the reality of the resurrection from the dead, especially in light of the general Gentile consensus that such things simply do not happen.[1]

Those Who Are Asleep

In verse 13, Paul tells the Thessalonians, “we do not want you to uninformed, brothers.” In the prior section of this chapter, Paul speaks of the Thessalonians as knowing certain details (i.e., 1 Thessalonians 4:1-2; 6, 9) but since he speaks here of the need to inform them of what follows, it is likely that this matter was not fully dealt with when he had been among them previously.[2] Paul had been forced to leave after a mere three sabbaths due to rioting because of his preaching of Christ crucified. What Paul says in his response to the question is important. Specifically, Paul does not want the Thessalonians to be ignorant about “those who are asleep,” i.e., those who have died before the Lord’s return. As Greco-Roman pagans and new converts to Christianity, the very idea of the resurrection of the dead was difficult for the Thessalonians to grasp. It was common in the first century Roman world to believe in the immortality of the soul–often seen as an underworld journey, such as crossing the river Styx. But the very idea of the dead coming back to life in redeemed/resurrected bodies was completely foreign.[3] To a pagan, death was liberation from the limits of the body. For a Christian death is the consequence of Adam’s fall.

Meredith Kline on Common Grace and Millennial Views -- Pre and Post

Danny Olinger’s new volume on Meredith Kline’s views on the book of Revelation is turning out to be an exegetical gold mine—as expected.

When considering Kline’s debate with J. Ramsey Michaels in the Westminster Theological Journal in the Fall of 1996—Michaels defended a premillennial reading of Revelation 20:1-10—Olinger raises an important point about the way Kline’s understanding of common grace impacted his evaluation of millennial views.

Kline expressed concern that the millennial question was too often debated apart from the larger context of the Reformed system of doctrine. Olinger points out that “of special interest” in Kline’s thinking, “is the way the doctrine of common grace fares in different millennial reconstructions, for the doctrine is a cornerstone of the Reformed view of history.”[1] Kline opposed the premillennial view of the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6,[2] as well as for another reason raised by Olinger—Kline’s view that premillennialism was in conflict with the Reformed understanding of common grace.

According to Kline, premillennialism fails to grasp the significance of the Noahic covenant in Genesis 8:15-9:17, which reveals that God rules the earth while extending a measure of earthly blessings (common grace) to believers and unbelievers alike. But premillennarians, who contend that Jesus returns to establish a millennial kingdom of a thousand years’ duration, necessarily hold “to a theocracy on earth before the consummation, a universal kingdom of Christ in which those blessings hitherto received in common by all men and often in greater measure by the unjust than the just are no longer apportioned according to the principle of common grace but according to a policy of special favor to the people of God.”[3] Olinger points out the difficult problem this raises for premillennarians. “The redeemed in premillennialism are already in possession of glorified natures and experience their public vindication over against the wicked, a contradiction of God’s covenantal guarantee in Genesis 8-9.”[4] The presence of redeemed saints in a millennial age established by our Lord at his return leads to other serious unintended consequences—such as the presence of evil in the millennium—as I have pointed out here.

Kline’s appeal to the Reformed view of common grace also poses a serious challenge to certain forms of postmillennialism.

To read the rest, follow the link below

New Meredith Kline Volume on the Book of Revelation

In a recent post, I mentioned that there were three important new books soon to be published. I was not aware of this book at the time, but soon after learned of it through a good friend (Dr. Andrew Compton). I followed up by listening to a Reformed Forum podcast episode (October 31, 2025) which discussed this gem in great detail.

I cannot say enough good things about this volume. Meredith Kline had written much on the Book of Revelation, but it was widely scattered among a number of publications, many of which can be found here (including mp3s). However there was much work on Revelation by Kline which had not been published until now. It is great to find it all in one place in a book with a quality binding and nice print. Reformed Forum did a great job with the project.

Kline’s books and essays are often tough going, with the common quip (which is often said of Geerhardus Vos as well), that his writings need to be translated into English. But his sermons (published in part two of the volume) are simple biblical expositions of texts from Revelation, and provide a nice primer to Kline’s academic work. The sermons are Christ and gospel centered and demonstrate his ability to explain the apocalypse with such great clarity that you’ll find yourself want to read it again, this time through the new eyes Kline provides. It has been a long time since I read gospel sermons on difficult texts from the Book of Revelation which are as clear, profound, and moving as these—his Easter, Christmas, and Lord’s Supper sermons especially.

To read the rest, follow the link below

The Staying Power of Dispensationalism -- Some Observations

In a recent tweet, Aaron Renn (November 5, 2025) opined that “the death of dispensationalism is greatly exaggerated. It seems to me that the vast bulk of evangelicals are still dispensationalist . . . I don't think most evangelicals have ever even heard the term dispensationalism, or have thought much about it. They just think they attend a church that preaches the Bible.”

I am of the opinion that Daniel Hummel’s recent book, The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism, makes a compelling case that dispensationalism (at least that academic form which Hummel identifies as “scholastic dispensationalism”) is clearly on the wane in those circles where it once held dominance (seminaries and evangelical publishing). The perfume is long gone, although a faint scent remains in the empty bottle. But I do think Renn is correct to point out that the majority of rank and file evangelicals are still largely dispensational in their eschatology and overall understanding of the purpose of the church in the end times—which they believe are upon us. Here are some observations as to why I think this is the case.

Effective Dispensational Catechesis:

The current generation of evangelicals and the bulk of those who now attend evangelical churches grew up on Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’s Left Behind novels, or else attended churches which offered a steady diet of dispensational teaching. Despite whatever doctrinal ills someone like me may find in dispensationalism, the Bible is open in these churches and taught simply and as true. In many cases, the gospel is present (though often watered down and not always clearly presented). Jesus is proclaimed to be the only savior and it is taught that good works do not save. The litmus test in many of these circles is a born again conversion experience. People who attend such churches are likely well satisfied with what they hear from the pulpit and assume what they are hearing is correct. These folks are not likely to investigate other views, nor are they going to rush out and buy A Case for Amillennialism.

To read the rest, follow the link below

I Was a Recent Guest on “Issues, Etc.” Discussing Peter Thiel, AI, and the Antichrist

I was interviewed by Todd Wilken and we discussed Peter Thiel’s view of the Antichrist and AI.

The interview was based upon an essay I had written several weeks ago which can be found here: AI and Recent Antichrist Speculation

Amillennialism, End Times Nuttiness, eschatologyKim RiddlebargerOctober 30, 2025Antichrist speculation, Antichrist and AIComment

I Was a Recent Guest on the “Theology for the Church” Podcast

Amillennialism with Kim Riddlebarger and host, Caleb Lenard

This is part two of a three part series on the Theology of the Church Podcast. Dr. Jim Hamilton presents historical premillennialism and Dr. Josh Howard presents postmillennialism.

Optimism and Pessimism as Suitable Eschatological Categories Revisited

The term “optimistic” amillennialism is widely used these days, but I remain hesitant that it is of much value. I discussed the use of “optimism” and “pessimism” as proper adjectives along with the development of the “optimistic amillennial” moniker vis a vis the two main varieties of postmillennialism (Evangelical and Theonomic) on a previous episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast.

I make my case here: Eschatology by Ethos: Why Optimism and Pessimism Do Not Work As Eschatological Categories

Tucker Carlson and Ted Cruz Debate Israel

Needless to say, there is far more heat than light here. Both Cruz and Carlson claim to be Christians, but their debate reveals scant understanding of what the Bible actually says about the future of Israel.

I weigh in on the biblical teaching regarding the future of Israel in an episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast. What Does the Future Hold for Israel? A Look at Romans 9-11

This episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast (part of a larger series entitled “The Future,”) was posted about ten days before the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas upon Israel, so I make no reference to recent events. I address the October 7 attack here.

What I do in this episode of the Blessed Hope Podcast is address Paul’s understanding of the future role of Israel in redemptive history in Romans 9-11 where Paul specifically discusses the matter in great detail. I don’t think God is finished with national Israel, but I reject the dispensational teaching about what this entails and how it will work out.

I Was a Recent Guest on Cápsulas de Teología Discussing my Book, A Case for Amillennialism

Here’s the link: A Case for Amillennialism (English and Spanish)

The AI generated glamour photo makes me look thinner and younger. I’m not sure what to think of it!

Amillennialism, Biblical TheologyKim RiddlebargerJune 13, 2025Discussion of A Case for AmillenniaismComment

I Was a Recent Guest on Eschatology Matters -- How Should We Read and Understand the Book of Revelation?

I was recently interviewed by Dr. Josh Howard of Eschatology Matters, for a series about the main approaches to reading and understanding the Book of Revelation.

A subscription to Eschatology Matters is no longer required to watch.

To watch the interview, follow the link below

Amillennialism, eschatologyKim RiddlebargerOctober 18, 2024How to Read RevelationComment

I Was a Recent Guest on the “Lets Ask a Theologian” Podcast

To watch/listen to the podcast (YouTube), follow the link below

1 Thessalonians 1:10, Dispensationalism, and the “Wrath of God”

The following is from my forthcoming exposition of Paul’s Thessalonian Letters, “When the Lord Jesus Is Revealed from Heaven” which will be made available as a free download for those who complete season two of the Blessed Hope Podcast.

Paul’s contention in 1 Thessalonians 1:10 that the day of God’s wrath (and the final judgment) occurs when Jesus returns on the last day, raises insurmountable difficulties for all forms of premillennialism. Premillennarians contend that Jesus returns to establish a millennial kingdom on the earth, usually thought to be structured upon the theocratic nation of Israel, with Jesus physically ruling over the earth from David’s throne in Jerusalem. At the end of the millennial age, supposedly, Satan is released from the Abyss and organizes the nations who collectively revolt against Christ and his church (Revelation 20:7-10). In response to this last outbreak of evil, when God casts Satan and his minions into the lake of fire, only then does the final judgment take place, fully one thousand years after Jesus Christ returns to deliver his people from the coming wrath of God.

In light of the premillennial misinterpretation of the scene in Revelation 20:1-10–supposedly occurring after our Lord’s return, instead of seeing John as referring to the interadvental period and its consummation when Jesus returns–premillenarians (including dispensationalists) must assert that God’s eschatological wrath is not manifest until the thousand year millennial age comes to an end. Both camps affirm they hold this view based upon what they claim to be a literal reading of an apocalyptic text. But the impossibility of the premillennial view becomes all-too clear when Paul, in an epistle written to answer specific questions about the Lord’s return, informs the Thessalonians that God’s eschatological wrath occurs when Christ returns to deliver them (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10), not one thousand years later. This leaves no room for a millennial age after our Lord’s return. None at all.

To read the rest, follow the link below

I Was a Recent Guest on the Guilt Grace Gratitude Podcast

Here’s the link: Discussing Eschatology With Peter Bell and Nick Fullwiler

Amillennialism, eschatology, Reformed ResourcesKim RiddlebargerNovember 22, 2023eschatology and amillennialismComment

My Take on the Hamas Attack on Israel -- 10/7 2023

A number of friends, church folk, and Riddleblog readers have asked about my take on Israel’s 911 (10/7). So, here you go.

It won’t surprise you that my take on the Hamas’s vicious attack on Southern Israel is much different than Greg Laurie’s ("Fasten Your Seat Belts"). A legion of prophecy pundits and “end-times” YouTubers have popped up, many offering wild and bizarre speculation about the tragedy and its role in the end-times. This is what they do. Admittedly, I have not watched or read much of this recent prophecy speculation, but what I have seen (most of which folks have sent to me) is largely a re-hash of prophetic scenarios long-since discredited (by the embarrassing fact that they got it wrong when previously proposed) now re-packed and presented as new material, with the hope that people will forget how wrong the pundits were the last time they made such predictions.

My points for consideration:

1). As for any biblical significance to the horrors inflicted upon Israeli citizens by Hamas terrorists, this clearly falls under the category of signs given us by Jesus regarding wars and rumors of wars (Matthew 24:6-8). Jesus did not predict specific conflicts (such as this one), only what he describes as “birth pains” of the end. What happened in Southern Israel falls into the category of “wars and rumor of wars,” with no specific fulfillment of any biblical prophecy regarding Israel. What Hamas did was very much like what Vladimir Putin did in his barbaric invasion of Ukraine. He ignored all conventional rules of war and inflicted savagery upon innocents—the elderly, women and children, and unarmed civilians. Hamas has done the same in Israel. In this we see the depths of human depravity as divine image-bearers are slaughtered merely to satisfy someone’s rage and anger. Jesus told us to expect as much until he returns.

To read the rest, follow the link below

I Was a Recent Guest on the "Theology for the Church" Podcast with Caleb Lenard

Here’s the link (Amillennialism with Kim Riddlebarger).

Here’s the program summation: “We focus particularly on the amil hermeneutic as a compelling biblical theology of eschatology with a fun 15 minute round of rapid fire questions at the end!”

Amillennialism, eschatology, End Times NuttinessKim RiddlebargerSeptember 25, 2023Theology for the church, Caleb LenardComment

The Next Episode of "The Future" Is Up! "This Age and the the Age to Come: the Implausibility of Premillennialism"

Episode Synopsis:

I begin this episode with a personal testimony.

I was born and raised a dispensationalist. Our family owned a Christian bookstore. The first Christian book I picked out and read on my own was Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth. Years later, I was challenged by one of our delivery men about the books we were selling–all the dispensationalist best sellers. He said he was “Reformed.” I thought he meant that he had gone to “reform school” or was on work release from prison. The questions he put to me bounced off like BB’s against a Battleship. Dispensationalism was biblical. How could anyone doubt that?

But those BB’s actually penetrated my embarrassingly thin armor. Eventually, I became a very reluctant Calvinist and then I started re-thinking my eschatology. After university and a year at the Simon Greenleaf School of Law (which was founded by John Warwick Montgomery, the faculty included Walter Martin, and Rod Rosenbladt, and is now the Trinity Law School in Santa Ana), I was steadily moving away from my doctrinal roots (Arminian and dispensational). I found that the Reformation views on law and gospel, the five solas, and the end times, were absolutely compelling because they were thoroughly biblical. To my surprise Drs. Montgomery and Rosenbladt suggested a career change–seminary, specifically the new seminary in Escondido (90 miles to the South), Westminster Seminary California.

In the Acts and Paul class taught by Dennis Johnson, I first encountered what I came to know as the two-age model–terms I was familiar with from reading the New Testament but never thought much about–“this age” and “the age to come.” After reading Herman Ridderbos and Geerhardus Vos on Paul, I realized how serious a challenge the two-model was to my premillennial eschatology (I had pretty much given up on most of my dispensationalism by then, although I still thought like one). Driving home after Dr. Johnson’s class, I had an “ah-ha moment.” “I can’t be premillennial any more.” The two-age model makes premillennialism (in all its forms) a biblical impossibility. I dug in my heels and fought the inevitable. But here I am far down the road, presenting and defending the two-age model. If you’ve not heard this before, you are in for a real surprise. This is a game changer in terms of your view of the end times.

To read the show notes and listen to the episode, follow the link below

I Was a Guest on Eschatology Matters Discussing the Man of Sin in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12

To watch the interview, follow the link below