There are many perspectives when it comes to the end times. We try to remain open to discussion on this topic. The Lord has currently led us to the post-tribulation perspective. We feel that is what the bible teaches as far as the rapture of the church is concerned. We realize that they are some good points made by Amillennialism on certain points.

 Millennial View

"We must now address the question of which millennial view to adopt. The issues are large and complex, but on close analysis can be reduced to a comparative few. We have noted in the course of this treatise that theology, like other disciplines, is often unable to find one view that is conclusively supported by all of the data. What must be done in such situations is to find the view that has fewer difficulties than do the alternatives.
The postmillennial view has much less support at the present time than it did in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This should not in itself persuade us to reject the position. We must, however, seek the reasons for the decline in postmillennialism, for they may be determinative of our conclusions. Here we should note that the optimism of postmillennialism regarding gospel proclamation seems somewhat unjustified. There has been a decline in evangelistic and missionary success. In parts of the world the percentage of the population actually practicing the Christian faith is very small. Further many Muslim countries are closed to Christian missionary endeavor of a conventional type. On the other hand, we must not be oblivious to the fact that in parts of the world, notably Africa and South America, Christianity is thriving, and is beginning to approach majority status. Even many formerly communist countries are now open to missionaries. Who can tell what reversals of fortune lie in store for the preaching of the gospel?
There are also strong biblical grounds for rejecting postmillennialism. Jesus’ teaching regarding great wickedness and a cooling off of the faith of many before his return seems to conflict quite sharply with postmillennial optimism. The absence in Scripture of a clear depiction of an earthly reign of Christ without his physical presence seems to be another major weakness of this position.

This leaves us with a choice between amillennialism and premillennialism. The issue comes down to the biblical references to the millennium—are they sufficient grounds for adopting the more complicated premillennial view rather than the simpler amillennial conception? It is sometimes contended that the whole premillennial conception rests on a single passage of Scripture, and that no doctrine should be based on a single passage. But if one view can account for a specific reference better than can another, and both views explain the rest of Scripture about equally well, then the former view must certainly be judged more adequate than the latter.

We note here that there are no biblical passages with which premillennialism cannot cope, or which it cannot adequately explain. We have seen, on the other hand, that the reference to two resurrections (Rev. 20) gives amillennialists difficulty. Their explanations that we have here two different types of resurrection or two spiritual resurrections strain the usual principles of hermeneutics. The premillennialist case appears stronger at this point.
Nor is the premillennialist interpretation based on only one passage in the Bible. Intimations of it are found in a number of places. For example, Paul writes, “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power” (1 Cor. 15:22–24). Paul uses the adverbs ἔπειτα (epeita—v. 23) and εἶτα (eita—v. 24), which indicate temporal sequence. He could have used the adverb τότε (tote) to indicate concurrent events, but he did not do so.23 It appears that just as the first coming and resurrection of Christ were distinct events separated by time, so will there be an interval between the second coming and the end.24 We should also observe that while the two resurrections are spoken of explicitly only in Revelation 20, there are other passages that hint at either a resurrection of a select group (Luke 14:14; 20:35; 1 Cor. 15:23; Phil. 3:11; 1 Thess. 4:16) or a resurrection in two stages (Dan. 12:2; John 5:29). In Philippians 3:11, for example, Paul speaks of his hope of attaining “the resurrection from the dead.” Literally, the phrase reads “the out-resurrection out from among the dead ones” (τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν—tēn exanastasin tēn ek nekrōn). Note in particular the prefixed preposition and the plural. These texts fit well with the concept of two resurrections. Accordingly, we judge the premillennial view to be more adequate than amillennialism."

Erickson, M. J. (1998). Christian theology. (2nd ed., pp. 1222–1224). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.


"When all considerations are evaluated, there are several reasons why the posttribulational position emerges as the more probable:

1. The pretribulational position involves several distinctions that seem rather artificial and lacking in biblical support. The division of the second coming into two stages, the postulation of three resurrections, and the sharp separation of national Israel and the church are difficult to sustain on biblical grounds. The pretribulational view that the prophecies concerning national Israel will be fulfilled apart from the church and that, accordingly, the millennium will have a decidedly Jewish character cannot be easily reconciled with the biblical depictions of the fundamental changes that have taken place with the introduction of the new covenant.

2. Several specifically eschatological passages are better interpreted on posttribulational grounds. These passages include the indications that elect individuals will be present during the tribulation (Matt. 24:29–31) but will be protected from its severity (Rev. 3:10), descriptions of the phenomena that will accompany the appearing of Christ, and the reference to the meeting in the air (1 Thess. 4:17).

3. The general tenor of biblical teaching fits better the posttribulational view. For example, the Bible is replete with warnings about trials and testings believers will undergo. It does not promise removal from these adversities, but ability to endure and overcome them.

This is not to say that there are no difficulties with the posttribulational position. For example, there is in posttribulationism relatively little theological rationale for the millennium. It seems to be somewhat superfluous.43 But all in all, the balance of evidence favors posttribulationism."

Erickson, M. J. (1998). Christian theology. (2nd ed., pp. 1230–1231). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.