Double posting today only because I thought this short article was worth receiving more press. Below is a small portion from this article linked above that discusses Christian liberty and the tolerance of different eschatological views withing the church.
“In this context the parallel of protology (the doctrine of creation) and eschatology (the doctrine of the last things) is potentially important. In the Reformed community we have learned to accept considerable eschatological diversity within certain limits (what does this suggest about Williamson’s view of perspicuity?). Historic Premillennialism, Amillenialism, and Postmillennialism all seem to be more or less accepted in the NAPARC churches. Premillennialism is acceptable as long as it doesn’t lapse into Dispensationalism, and Postmillennialism is acceptable as long as it doesn’t veer into hyperpreterism. A similar point can be made with regard to protology and its history of interpretation, and the reasons for this are not difficult to discern. As is often pointed out, when the biblical writers describe realities further and further removed from their audience’s experience, their language becomes of necessity more and more figurative and metaphorical. Thus it is not surprising in the least that the biblical language of protology and eschatology would be particularly challenging to the interpreter, and that interpretive leeway is thus needful especially in these areas.”