Eschatology: A Legitimate Line in the Sand?

I want to talk about the end times-- Huge yawn from all who know me. The horse is dead, buried, and bushes have already begun to grow on its grave, yet there you go, still beating it. Why? Before you dismiss me with the click of the mouse, just hear me out. If I don’t convince you to stick with the series after this first post, then just take a break and come back when I’ve finished.

My concern is this: I’m seeing a number of very positive things happening in American Evangelicalism. Every day it seems I come upon some new pastor or new church in my area that holds the scriptures in extremely high regard, that conducts worship in biblical maturity, that upholds the doctrines of grace and proclaims the pure gospel without apology. Many of these individuals and churches come from different denominational and traditional backgrounds, but despite their differences, they are finding that they have much in common; sometimes they have more in common than they do with churches of their own denominations. To me, this is very encouraging. But many times, it turns out, these same individuals and churches who have so much else in common, are prevented from working together as they otherwise might because of differing doctrinal stances on end times events.

Not too long ago, I heard a story from someone whose church is known for its interest in planting new churches. The church is part of a denomination whose statement of faith includes the doctrine of the pretribulational premillennial rapture of the church. I don't remember the precise context, but apparently someone from the church had inquired as to whether it would be permissible to plant a church with a minister who had eschatological views that differed from those of the denomination. The response was, yes, the church could use such a minister, but it would have to do so without the financial assistance of the denomination.

Faced with the choice between planting a church through the ministry of a man with a different view of the end times, and planting no church at all, the leadership of this denomination found that the latter would be the better option. To me this seems slightly out of proportion. I admit, I understand it, because I used to agree. Surely, anyone who does not believe in the pretribulational premillennial rapture of the church can simply not be taking the Bible seriously. Certainly, these doctrines are taught so clearly in the scriptures that any minister who holds otherwise is not qualified for the office. Certainly, any church that holds otherwise is not worthy of our fellowship.

Well, I have since come to a different opinion. My intent in this series is not necessarily to convince readers of my particular eschatological position. My primary goal is to demonstrate that someone can really, truly, sincerely believe the Bible to be the inspired, authoritative word of God and still come to a view that differs from the pretribulational premillennial position. My hope is that, if you are one who believes this doctrine to be a reasonable biblical criterion for qualification of a minister or fellowship between churches, you would give my arguments a fair examination. There are already, to be sure, plenty of causes of division in Christ’s church; many are legitimate, some are not. All I’m asking is that after reading, you consider whether the doctrine of the pretribulational premillennial rapture of the church really ought to occupy such an important place, as it seems to do, in the test of true fellowship.