I just finished a paper over the weekend for a class. The purpose of the paper was to look the various views of the Millennium and Tribulation in Evangelical churches. I must admit the content was interesting. I learned a lot about views that I do not personally hold, which helps me better understand what I believe and why.
What I found particularly fascinating was the weaknesses of each of the views. Postmillennial, Amillennial, and Premillennial viewpoints have areas that they are obviously weak when looking at particular passages. Premillennials are weak in the various arguments concerning the rapture, while "Pre" and "A" are weak concerning the resurrections mentioned in Revelation 20:4-5.
Which brings me to my point. As fascinating as the study was, it felt like some of the authors spent a lot of time on points that just don't seem very clear in Scripture. However, they seemed so certain that their viewpoint was true, that they had the audacity to rip others who hold different views. There are some items in Scripture that are not clearly delineated and outlined. We should think on those issues, but we must have the humility to understand that we don't know the final answer to some of these issues. From this position of humbleness, we must display grace to those who hold differing viewpoints (even if they are wrong!)
As followers of Christ, we must remember those things that are most important (attributes of God, incarnation of Christ, sinless life of Christ, substitutionary work of Jesus on the cross, the resurrection, evangelism, missions, etc. to name a few) and focus on those. The areas in which there is less importance or not as clear (like eschatology), we can discuss, but we should not rip apart one another on these issues. We should be confident in our beliefs, but humble and gracious in speaking with others about them.
