by Brad Sherman
6
Four Millennial Views
The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbor comes and examines him. — Proverbs 18:17 (NKJV)
I am regularly amused, though not surprised, to find long-time Christians who are completely unaware that differing millennial views exist, thus the need for this chapter. Since one of our goals should be to understand the future as a guide for the present, the more accurately we understand the future, the more effective we can be now in our work of preparation. Hopefully the previous chapter has been sufficiently convincing of at least two points: 1) the future can be known, and 2) we should seek to know it. Therefore I have inserted this chapter at this point of the book for a reason, to lay a basic foundational understanding of the differing views that exist regarding the future and the order of events leading to the appearing of Jesus Christ.
As we look at these differing views and sees the similarities, one has to wonder, "Why all the fuss? Is it just a matter of the exact order of things?" But the real issue is not so much what we believe about the timing of these things, though God certainly has a pattern of times and seasons, but certain doctrines, attitudes, and practices that can spring from, or traditionally go along with the different views. Again, all action (or the lack thereof) is the result of corresponding thoughts or beliefs.
Admittedly, this chapter will only provide a shallow overview. This is a huge topic which can easily move from conversation to controversy. The point should also be made that the none of these views disqualifies a person from being a Christian. There are very credible people who have done extensive research in all of these camps and I have gained valuable insights from studying their different perspectives.
These issues should not be allowed to create divisiveness or disunity in the body of Christ. We should remember that this is an area where brothers can disagree agreeably and continue to seek clearer insight. We see through a glass dimly. Therefore, let us humbly seek God’s guidance.
But having said that, I do not pretend to be neutral. I have particular view that I believe is most biblical and will seek to explain why.
Four General Views
For the sake of simplicity, I have broken the different views down into four general groups or "camps." These are:
1. The Amillennial (Amil) View
2. The Postmillennial (Postmil) View
3. The Rapture Premillennial (Escape) View
4. The Historic Premillennial (Historical) View
The issue of millennial views revolves around different understandings of the thousand-year period (the millennium) spoken of in Revelation Chapter Twenty, and when the return of Christ will take place in relation to it. By definition of terms, these four views can be divided into two general categories:
1) Premillennialists believe that the millennium is a literal period of 1000 years that begins with the return of Jesus Christ, during which Satan will be bound and Jesus will establish His kingdom and rule the earth. At the end of this period, there will be a final judgment, a new heaven and a new earth.
2) Amillennialists and Postmillennialists spiritualize the 1000-year period and thus view it as a symbolic reference to an indefinite period of time, which started at Christ's first coming, is taking place now and ends with His second coming. This view therefore expects the return of Jesus after the millennial period. First we will briefly look at the Amil and the Postmil views.
Amillennial View
As stated above, in this view there is no literal millennium on earth, thus the prefix "a" in the word Amillennial. The Amillennialist understands the millennium in an allegorical sense and believes it is taking place right now in the heavenly or spiritual realm. The saints who have preceded us are understood to be enjoying the Kingdom of God in heaven. They also understand the Kingdom of God to be on earth now within us, but just needs to be realized by the church. Some in this camp prefer the term "realized millennium" instead of Amillennial. The end of this age is generally expected to be characterized by the gospel being preached to the ends of the earth, increased tribulation, and the rise of the Antichrist before Christ returns. Christ will return at the end of this spiritualized millennium and then there will be the resurrection of both the just and the unjust being raised at the same time, the judgment, and a new heaven and a new earth.
The idea of having to "realize" that the kingdom is with us now, in my opinion, makes this view a likely place for "kingdom now" theology which has received severe criticism from mainstream Christianity. I disagree with "kingdom now" theology, as I understand it. However, I find that there is no consistent definition. Those who criticize it often use general and sweeping terms that could apply to virtually anyone who disagrees with them. I find that there is an element of truth to the point that the kingdom of God exists now, but it is only a taste of the powers of the age to come as referred to in Hebrews 6:5. The full manifestation of the Kingdom of God can only come to pass when Jesus is bodily present.
Postmillennial View
In the Postmillennial view, much like the Amillennial vew, the thousand-year period is also seen as an indefinite period of time taking place now. The difference, though still similar, is that instead of realizing that the kingdom is now, postmillennialists believes the kingdom must be gradually ushered in as Christians preach the gospel. In the postmillennial view, the authority Christians have been given to make disciples of the nations will result in increasing influence until all the nations and their civil governments are "christianized," ushering in a golden age operating under strict biblical law. In this golden age (millennium) sin, poverty, social problems and evil, in general, are not totally abolished, but held to very negligible levels while the whole world is ruled by Christian principles. Once the Church has established this dominion over the earth, the return of Christ is expected. The resurrection of the just and the unjust (at the same time) will occur; then the judgment, followed by a new heaven and a new earth.
In my opinion, this view becomes a likely place for what has been called dominion theology. Dominionism, a view I also disagree with, has been sharply criticized by many. This is why it was important to carefully define Christian Biblical Dominion in Chapter Four. While there are exceptions, the Postmillennialist tends to lean more toward an intellectual approach with an emphasis on civil government, while the Amillennial view tends to lean more toward the spiritual with an emphasis on the mystical or supernatural. While dominion theology seems to be defined more consistently, some critics seem to describe "kingdom now" and "dominion" theology in a way that essentially lumps them into one.
Premillennial View in General
Now we look to Premillennialism, which views the millennium as a literal period of 1000 years during which Christ will rule on this earth. It also recognizes two resurrections: a resurrection of the just at the beginning of the millennium and a resurrection of the unjust at the end of the millennium according to Revelation Chapter 20. The thousand-year period is seen as the period of restoration of all things (see Acts 3:21) where immortal saints will rule the earth with Christ in His Kingdom. Not all people are expected to be Christian during the millennium, but Satan will be bound, unable to deceive the nations. Jesus Christ will rule the earth with a rod of iron, resulting in an age of great peace (see Rev 19:15). Battles to subdue the nations at the beginning of this period are expected as part of Christ's judgment.
Now lets look at the main two views within the premillennialism: 1) The Escape Rapture View and 2) the Historic View. Both versions of premillennialism believe that the thousand-year millennium is a literal period of time that begins at Jesus' second coming or shortly thereafter. But the implications of a church that is leaving the planet to escape a tribulation period just prior to Christ's second coming, versus a church that is sticking around, are far reaching and have a very significant part to play in establishing the Kingdom Paradigm.
Escape Rapture Premillennial View
The Escape View is relatively new to Christianity and probably wasn't taught until the 1800's. Some of the history of its beginnings will be shared later. The escape rapture view is part of a broader theology known as dispensationalism. Because the escape rapture is perhaps the most dominate theme in dispensational theology, I will simply refer to it as the Escape View.
Dispensationalists usually make a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church as two different peoples and expect a "two-stage" second coming of Christ. In the first stage, Christians are expected to be rescued from the earth in the rapture before a period of intense tribulation. During this tribulation, when the Holy Spirit is supposedly removed from the earth, the nation of Israel is to be saved. Christ is then expected to return to earth with all the saints who were raptured or had previously died, to destroy the Antichrist and set up His Kingdom on earth for a thousand years. After this literal thousand-year period, the second resurrection and a new heaven and a new earth is expected.
Historic Premillennial View
The Historic Premillennial view (also known as the classic view) agrees with the view that Christ will return at the beginning of the thousand-year period (millennium). This period is seen as a literal period when Christ will rule the world as a literal King. However, there is a very important difference. In the Historic view the second coming of Christ happens in one stage, not two, and the Church does not leave the planet at Christ's coming. Those who see the great tribulation as a central issue often refer to the historic view as the "post-tribulation pre-mill" view. This is the view that was held by the most respected early church fathers and is the view that I believe to be the most accurate. The remainder of this chapter is devoted to making this point.
The Millennium: Allegorical vs Literal
As we begin to sort out these views, lets first consider the two general positions: The post/amillennial (allegorical) versus the premillennial (literal). These two views became an issue as early as the 2nd century, if not sooner. Paul's warning to Timothy regarding Hymenaeus and Philetus, who taught that the resurrection had already taken place, may have been related to this issue.
And
their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of
this sort, 18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the
resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.
— 2 Timothy 2:17-18 (NKJV)
To teach that the resurrection had already taken place must have been a reference to the first resurrection since the final judgment had obviously not taken place. It seems plausible then, that Hymenaeus and Philetus had spiritualized the first resurrection as having taken place, possibly during water baptism. It would therefore follow that the kingdom of God would also be spiritualized.
The literal view of the Kingdom of God on earth is an extension of Israelite thought. The early Christians were all Hebrew/Jewish and did not see themselves as starting a new religion. They saw themselves as fulfilling the scriptures just as Moses and the prophets had taught and continuing on with God's plan. They had a very literal view of things and understood that the kingdom would be restored to Israel and Jesus would rule the world from Jerusalem (see Acts 1:6; Luke 19:11).
As a result they continued celebrating the annual Hebrew feasts and taught that the Kingdom of God would be established on earth as a literal government at the second coming of the Messiah. Apart from Jesus being the Messiah, the apostles and early church held the same general views as the orthodox Jews. This included the idea of a literal kingdom being restored to Israel by the Messiah as shown by a conversation Justin the Martyr (100 AD-165 AD) had with a Jewish Rabi named Trypho. Trypho asked Justin:
"...do you
really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you
expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ
and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the men of our nation, and
other proselytes who joined them before your Christ
came?" — Dialogue With Trypho, Chapter LXXX
Justin's replied clearly established his position and a belief that there would be a literal 1000 year reign of Christ in a rebuilt Jerusalem at the resurrection:
"I admitted to
you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe]
that such will take place...But I and others, who are right-minded
Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection
of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be
built, adorned, and enlarged, the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and
others declare.... And further, there was a certain man with us, whose
name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a
revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ
would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the
general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all
men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, —
Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter LXXX, LXXXI
So, where did the idea of a spiritualized millennium come from? Though it may have been an issue earlier, it was openly promoted by the 3rd Century Theologian Origen (185AD-254AD), who grew up in Alexandria and was heavily influenced by the Greek method of allegorical interpretation. He viewed the Kingdom of God as being in heaven and not on earth.
Another who promoted the idea of a spiritualized millennium was the Roman historian Eusebius (263AD-339AD), the bishop of Caesarea. Like Origen, Eusebius was a strong opponent to the idea of a literal messianic kingdom on this earth. He also embraced the heresy promoted by Aruis of Alexandria. The Arian heresy that “...God has not always been a Father, and the there was a time when the Son was not.”
Eusebius was a contemporary of and enjoyed the favor of the Roman Emperor Constantine, who had proclaimed Christianity to be the state religion of Rome after his conversion to Christianity. Though Constantine and Eusebius disagreed on the Arian issue, they seemed to be in agreement on the idea of a spiritualized or allegorical millennium. After all, why would an emperor, who wanted to rule the world from Rome promote the idea and prepare for a different king to rule the world from Jerusalem? This reveals the background motive for why the new state religion of Rome was not compatible with the idea of a literal kingdom of God coming to earth. Constantine’s conversion apparently had less to do with genuine submission to Jesus Christ, the King of Kings, and more to do with gaining control over Christianity which had continued to grow, regardless of how much Rome had persecuted it.
This also sheds light on why Constantine, Eusebius, and others had such a hatred for the Jews and why they sought to strip the church of anything that appeared Jewish, which included rejecting the feasts of the Lord, setting up new Christian holidays, and changing the times and seasons for these holidays. They promoted Christianity as a new religion completely separate from the teachings of Judaism. In a letter to the churches, regarding establishing a uniform time to celebrate Easter discussed at the Nicean Counsel, Constantine wrote:
“... it seemed
to everyone a most unworthy thing that we should not follow the custom
of the Jews in the celebration of this most holy solemnity, who,
polluted wretches! having stained their hands... It is fit, therefore,
that, rejecting the practice of this people, we should perpetuate to
all future ages the celebration of this rite, [Easter] in a more
legitimate order, ... Let us have nothing in common the most hostile
rabble of the Jews. We have received another method from the Saviour. A
more lawful and proper course is open to our most holy religion.”
This is a direct rejection of the Word of God and reflects the exact opposite of the Apostle Paul’s heart toward the Jews:
I tell the truth in Christ, I am
not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, 2
that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. 3 For I could
wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my
countrymen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom
pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law,
the service of God, and the promises; 5 of whom are the fathers and
from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the
eternally blessed God. Amen. — Romans 9:1-5 (NKJV)
It was not the Jews in general who killed Jesus, but a few reprobate religious leaders in Israel who had departed from the teachings of Moses. We know that the Law, is a shadow of things to come. By nature, the shadow moves with the object and bears its resemblance. Therefore, to deny the shadow is to deny the object. And, to deny the shadow, those things that teach about the Messiah, is to deny the Messiah. This is what was taking root through the antisemitic teachings of many of the third and fourth century church, including the council of Nice, which established a uniform date for Easter and denied the biblical pattern for Passover, Unleavened Bread, and First Fruits. This is not to say that Christians today who celebrate Easter and know little of the feasts of the Lord have denied Christ. But there is much to learn from about Christ by watching His shadow.
As stated earlier, I embrace the Historic Premillennial view as the most accurate view. Whether you have been convinced of this or not, please take a moment to assume it is and let’s ask the question: “Why would the enemy of God, Satan, try to mislead God’s people and deny the idea of Jesus ruling over a literal kingdom of God on earth?” Simple: if we don’t believe in a literal kingdom of God on earth, we won’t work to prepare the way for it. Satan doesn’t want the Kingdom to appear because he knows that the literal Kingdom of God on earth spells the end for him. He wants to hinder the preparation for the coming kingdom which God’s people are part of.
Seven Issues Associated with Certain Views/Doctrines
As we look at some of these doctrines and views, please remember that issues addressed below are general and are not exclusive to the views to which they are assigned. Some also describe the extreme and are not necessarily held by those who hold to the corresponding millennial views.
Issue # 1: Escapism
The escape rapture doctrine is a central theme for many Evangelicals today when they think about end times. Many who hold to this teaching, some who are very good friends of mine, are responsible stewards of what God has entrusted to them and work tirelessly to be salt and light in our culture. But the feeling that everything is supposed to fall apart and the idea that we are leaving anyway causes many who hold this view to disengage from the culture. They fail to engage in the idea of influencing the culture or the civil government because, as one rapture preacher put it, "Why polish brass on a sinking ship?"
There are many scriptures that cast doubt on the escape view. The chapter: Redefining the Rapture, goes into more detail, but a few key points are provided here. Consider these passages.
For the
upright will dwell in the land, And the blameless will remain in it;
But the wicked will be cut off from the earth, And the unfaithful will
be uprooted from it. — Proverbs 2:21-22 (NKJV)
The righteous will never be removed, But the wicked will not inhabit the earth. — Prov 10:30 (NKJV)
I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. Once again, we have a biblical teaching that the wicked are removed from the earth, not the saints. — John 17:14-15 (NKJV)
Besides disengaging from the culture, another danger of the escape view its inherent failure to prepare people to endure hardship, which is a warning given multiple times to New Testament Christians. For these reasons, and many more scriptural reasons that we will not go into here, the escapist doctrine deserves scrutiny. At the very least, those who hold this view should realize that there are many Christians who do not and have a substantial scriptural footing to stand on.
Issue #2: Lack of Human Responsibility
This issue naturally follows Issue #1. Failure to take responsibility in this life is a danger any time an over spiritualization of the Kingdom of God makes it seem detached or removed from this present age. Human responsibility will also be addressed in the chapter: Cognitive Prophetic Cooperation, but when people feel that God has sovereignly predestined every little thing, the idea of human responsibility and action seems irrelevant. Of course, the issue of human responsibility revives the classic debate between Calvinism (predestination) and Arminianism (man has a free will).The result of this can be a sit, wait, and do nothing attitude. The issue of too much human responsibility can also be a problem and will be addressed later.
In his book, The Bible and the Future, Anthony Hokema (who holds the Amillennial view) critiques the Historic Premillennial view saying: "Why should believers, who have been enjoying heavenly glory during the intermediate state, be raised from the dead in order to return to an earth where sin and death still exist?"
One reason is simply because Jesus taught us to pray for the kingdom of heaven to come on earth (Matt 6:10). Hokema's statement, besides demonstrating a focus on going to heaven instead of bringing heaven here, shows the man-centered nature of that focus. God has a deeper purpose for His people than just eternal pleasure. This question reflects a lack of understanding concerning an important aspect of God's purpose in Christ, which is peace on earth.
In response, I would simply say, "People will leave heavenly glory for the same general reason Christ left the glory of heaven and came to earth the first time, to accomplish God's purpose. God has a plan. It is an honor to come back and rule and reign with Christ in His Kingdom." Consider this passage:
Let the high praises of God be in
their mouth, and a twoedged sword in their hand; To execute vengeance
upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people; To bind their
kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; To
execute upon them the judgment written: this honour have all his
saints. Praise ye the Lord. — Psalm 149:6-9 (KJV)
Issue # 3: One Dimensional Thinking
Hokema also referred to a millennium where Christ reigns in His Kingdom but where there can still be sin and death as an anomaly, being neither part of the present age nor part of the age to come. This reveals the one-dimensional human thinking that struggles to reason beyond the limits of time and space. This is prevalent in the Amillennial view as well as in the Postmillennial and Escape views. I would respond by asking, "Was Christ an anomaly when he said, I am the resurrection' and then raised Lazarus from the dead?" Lazarus' sister, Martha, revealed her one-dimensional thinking when she said, "I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day" (John 11:24). But Jesus had authority to exercise the powers of the age to come in this present age and so do we to a certain extent (see Heb 6:5)!
In his book, The Gospel of the Kingdom, George E. Ladd does an excellent job of explaining the Historic view and how the present age and the age to come overlap. This overlap of the present age into the age to come is not an anomaly; it is a biblical concept seen where the writer of Hebrews talks about those who have tasted the powers of the age to come (see Heb 6:5).
Issue #4: The Order of Peace
In the Postmillennial view, Christian influence is expected to increase in a manner that results in a "golden age" where peace covers the earth. The return of Christ is expected after this "golden age" of peace is achieved. One problem with this is that it does not go along with the birthing analogy presented in Scripture which describes this world's deliverance from the corruption of sin as the birthing of the age to come. In the birthing process, pain begins as birth draws near and is actually most intense just before the birth happens. Paul described this, saying that creation will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God, and that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now (see Rom 8:21 22).
Even if The Great Tribulation of which Jesus spoke is a past event pertaining only to Israel and the surrounding area (a view held by some), persecution and tribulation still exist. Paul wrote to Timothy that all who desire to live godly lives in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution (see 2 Tim 3:12). Jesus said, "The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you" (John 15:20). Though we should expect to be a victorious church, we can also expect continued resistance until Jesus returns and establishes His Kingdom.
Issue #5: Satan is Bound Now?
Postmillennialism and Amillennialism both hold the view that the millennium is happening now. Since Revelation Chapter Twenty makes it clear that Satan is bound by a great chain and sealed in a bottomless pit during the millennium, this implies Satan is bound now. Proponents of this belief admit that Satan seems to be on the loose, but only because we are not taking our authority over him as we should. I would agree that we often do not use the authority that is available to us. However, there are many Scriptures that indicate that Satan is not currently bound in the bottomless pit.
Jesus referred to Satan's dwelling place being near Pergamos, not the bottomless pit (see Rev 2:12-13). It should also be pointed out that Jesus said this in this present age after His resurrection, after His ascension, and after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, which is clearly part of the present age in which we now live.
Peter did, however, refer to the angels who sinned (a possible reference to Satan) being cast down to hell and chained to await judgment (see 2 Pet 2:4). But a quick study of the word chain(s) in the New Testament reveals that being chained does not necessarily prevent one from operating. For example, Paul was in chains but continued to preach the gospel.
Satan's imprisonment, spoken of in Revelation Chapter Twenty, is more comprehensive than simply being chained. He was not bound with just any chain, but a great chain. The word great means larger or largest. He was not just thrown in a pit, but a bottomless pit, again implying a more complete imprisonment. Satan was not only thrown into the pit, he was shut up in the pit, and the pit was sealed. Chapter Twenty also describes an imprisonment so complete that Satan cannot deceive the nations. Satan may be chained or have limitations, but he is not currently bound with a great chain and sealed in the bottomless pit, unable to deceive nations.
Peter referred to Satan as walking about. He wrote, "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour" (1 Pet 5:8). This reference describes "a devil on the loose." Satan is indeed defeated and we have been given authority over him, but according to these verses, he is not bound and sealed in the bottomless pit unable to deceive the nations and therefore, we are not living in the millennium.
Issue #6: The First Resurrection Past?
In those views which interpret the 1000 year millennium as a symbolic indefinite period of time which is taking place now (usually the Postmillennial and Amillennial views), the first resurrection is necessarily interpreted as a past event for the believer, having spiritually taken place in the believer at his or her salvation/water baptism. The classic baptism verse (Romans 6:4) is used as the basis for such a view because it says, “... just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” But Paul wrote to Timothy regarding some who were teaching that the resurrection was already past.
And their word will eat as doth a
canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who
concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past
already; and overthrow the faith of some. — 2
Timothy 2:17-18 (KJV)
The interpretation of 2 Timothy 2:18 by Postmillennialists and Amillennialists would describe this verse as a reference to the resurrection at the end of the millennium, but it doesn't say that for sure. Either way, the fact remains that there are two resurrections. Even if the first one is spiritualized, it is presented as having already taken place by those who say we are in the millennium now.
How could this overthrow the faith of some? For one thing it could lead to the deception of believing that, as resurrected beings, we can transcend the rules of this world while in it. History is full of people who feel they have attained to a state of spiritual supremacy and begin to dominate and oppress those who are “less spiritual.” Rather than actually being more perfect, this usually leads to a justification of sinful behavior. I have know of people who connected this concept of the resurrection having already taken place with the scripture where Jesus said, “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels...” (Matt 22:30). They then reasoned that marriage no longer applied to them and they could have sex with whomever they wanted , as long as it was “done from a pure heart in Christian love.” This is an extreme example, but you see the point.
Also, when Revelation Chapter Twenty refers to the first resurrection, the phrase "came to life" is used. This is a reference to those who had been beheaded, or in other words, lost their physical lives. It says they came to life and reigned with Christ for one thousand years (see Rev 20:4 5). If the first resurrection was a spiritual event having already taken place, then this reference to the first resurrection would not have referred to those who had physically died and there would have been no need for the passage to speak of "coming to life" to reign with Christ.
Therefore, the first resurrection is a reference to the physical resurrection of the body and the return of Christ to the earth, not a reference to the believer's spiritual resurrection that takes place when a person becomes a Christian.
Issue #7: Too Much Human Responsibility
Though the concept of preparation is a key theme in this book which emphasizes the need for modern Christians to take more responsibility, the Postmillennial view places too much responsibility on man. Not all Postmillennial people believe in what I would term a domination theology where entire nations or even the whole world is supposed to come under the control of an ecclesiastical hierarchy before the return of Christ. But the view is at least a fertile field for such a belief. Such views have resulted in some of the most domineering and oppressive government systems the world has ever known. The reason for this is that power corrupts. A golden age where men would obviously wield such tremendous power is more than mortal man is intended to handle. Over and over, unbroken success without suffering has proven intoxicating and destructive to man.
The Balance of the Historic Premillennial View
The millennium described by the Historic Premillennialist represents the best balance and fits what we read in the scriptures and in history. It is not unlike the golden age expected by the Postmillennialist, except for two important differences. In the Historic view, 1) Christ resides on the earth during the Millennium, and 2) Christians have put on immortality. In the Postmillennial view, mortal men are expected to reconstruct society according to Kingdom principles until there is peace on earth and the resurrection and the return of Christ is expected as a result of this reconstruction of society. But in the Historic Premillennial view, the return of Christ and the first resurrection is precipitated by the restoration of the Church as it becomes a mature people prepared to rule and reign with Christ. Though the Historic view has elements of reconstruction (to influence civil governments according to biblical principles), we entertain no illusion that the entire world can experience external peace without the literal appearing of the Prince of Peace. The focus is on the restoration of the Church more than on the reconstruction of society.
The Historic view also leaves room for a love and expectation for the Lord’s return. Scripture teaches that we are to look forward to and love the coming of Jesus (see 2 Tim4:8 and Titus 2:11-14). But if we fail to realize the preparation aspect and start to think that Jesus may return at any moment, we may be tempted to focus on waiting instead of working. On the other hand, if we take too much human responsibility and move out of preparation into extreme reconstruction (often called dominion theology), the Lord's return may seem so far in the future that current actions seem barely relevant. Any expectancy or desire to see His return is overwhelmed by the enormity of the task. In this extreme, people tend to focus on doctrine instead of doing. The end result of both extremes is the same: no zeal for good works.
In the Historic view there is both a restorative and reconstructive work taking place on earth through the work of preparation by the Church. Yet there is a realization that only Jesus, the Prince of Peace, can bring peace to this earth. There is both human responsibility and reliance on the sovereignty of God which promotes a healthy and balanced view of faith and works. It teaches people to be focused on bringing heaven here, not on going to heaven. It moves out of one-dimensional thinking and presents the age to come as overlapping into the present age, which has been shown to be a biblical way of thinking and creates an expectation for the supernatural power of God to be seen and used in this present age as we work to prepare the way.
That being said, holding the Historic Premillennial view is no guarantee against false doctrine or dead works. I know people from both sides of this issue who are very zealous in good works and visa versa. It is not our theology alone that creates a valid expectancy of His coming, but a living active faith. Active, because faith without works is dead. All the correct theology in the world will do nothing if we do not have faith that takes action.
Summary of the Four Views
Because of the large size of the topic, there are many eschatological nuances that were not addressed here. Generalizing always seems to misrepresent someone. Nevertheless, I will generally summarize the four general views this way:
Post Mill: Establish the Kingdom gradually through preaching the gospel then Jesus Returns. Tends toward possible political oppression.
Amill:
The Kingdom is here now spiritually; we must realize it. Tends toward
being mystically detached from the politics of this world.
Escape Premill:
The Kingdom will come to earth after I leave. Tends toward a “Why
polish brass on a sinking ship” mentality. Also tends toward being
mystically detached from the politics of this world.
Classic Premill:
The Kingdom will come to earth when Jesus returns. We need to
understand the Lord’s strategy because we are dynamically engaged with
Him in preparing the way.
The goal of this chapter has been to provide some foundational knowledge of the differing views, while at the same time promoting the Historic (Classic) view. Several issues that are paradigm builders were only touched on and will be discussed in more detail later. Therefore, I will present only one concept as a paradigm builder.
Paradigm Builder
The literal view of the Kingdom of God ruling the earth for a thousand years with its center in Jerusalem is an extension of Israelite thought. This is one reason why Satan has attempted to exterminate Jews and erase their influence from the planet.
How would you describe your position regarding this concept:
Before reading the chapter :
1- I disagreed
2- I was unaware or ambivalent
3- I already agreed
After you read the chapter/book:
1- I disagree
2- I am considering
3- I agree
Previous --- Next
Index Page
Watch for new chapters to be added soon!
Join the mailing list for notifications
(c) Copyright, 2013, Brad Sherman
Index Page
Watch for new chapters to be added soon!
Join the mailing list for notifications
(c) Copyright, 2013, Brad Sherman