Dear EFC Subscribers:

In this month’s newsletter, we will continue with our series of essays which will be appearing in the very near future when volume IV of my series on Church History The Christian Story is completed.  This article is on the question of millenialism in the history of Christianity. I ask which is the correct doctrine?  See below for the answer!

New materials:

I have now completed a 12-part class on the history of Christianity for the West Coast School of Ministry.  All the materials are available here:  Church History for WCSM  In addition, Robert Carrillo and I have completed an eight-part class on the Book of Hebrews for the Los Angeles teaching ministry.  Only six of the classes are included, plus the notes and power point.  Here it is:  Hebrews   I also did a series of apologetics classes for the Houston Church of Christ. It includes material about progressive theology as well as on the inspiration of the Bible.  Houston apologetics lessons.  Also, I have a lot of new class and sermon material that has been delivered for the brand new Merced Christian Church, including a class on One Another passages, lessons on being In Christ, sermons from Hebrews and much more.  Sermons and classes in Merced.

I will be traveling to Tampa the first week of December to do some classes for the church there. I am also planning on traveling to West Africa in February. Please consider praying for this upcoming trip.  If you want to support this ministry (and support for the trip to West Africa is definitely needed!), please consider supporting our work financially.  We really could use your help.  Support EFC

Please consider praying for our very young church in Merced, and perhaps even consider moving to Merced to bring to gospel to the city here and to students at the two local universities.  We would love to have you.  Article on millennialism is below.

Love,

John Oakes

Which is the correct Millennial Doctrine?

Much of Christian history revolves around belief about the Millennium. Our chief purpose in this series is to relate who believed what about end-times, and to propose why they reached this conclusion. But it is worthwhile for us to step aside and ask two questions. First, we will ask if is this an essential or even an important aspect of Christian belief. Second, we will consider which is the correct biblical interpretation of the nature of the end-time, and, more specifically of the Millennium.

The study of the nature of the end-time and the final disposition of humanity is called eschatology. How important is one’s view of the end-time and the eternal state of humans? The answer is that this is a very important theological question. Who will be saved, what will heaven be like? Are the new heaven and the new earth the same thing, or are they two different “places?” Will those who are not saved be punished in hell, or will they simply be annihilated? These questions relate to the nature of God and his justice. Therefore, they are very important to Christian faith. Actually though, the question to be addressed in this essay is more narrow than the entirety of eschatology. It is about the Millennium. Although Christian groups have argued over this doctrine and separated from one another over their teaching about the Millennium, it is hard to prove that this is an essential doctrine. In fact, one could make an argument that it is not even an important, never mind an essential doctrine. What quality of God is affected by whether one is a pre- a post- or an amillennial?

First of all, there is scant material on the Millennium in the Scripture. Given all the drama over this teaching, and given that there are Christian groups who focus on the second coming of Jesus over seemingly all other teaching, it is surprising to realize that there is only one passage in the whole of the Bible which actually mentions the Millennium! It is Revelation 20:1-10. Let us look at excerpts from this passage:

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended…. When the thousand hears are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. (Revelation 20:1-2, 7-8).

It is worth remembering that this passage is part of the Book of Revelation, and is of the apocalyptic genre. Apocalyptic literature is full of dramatic visions which ought to be understood in a largely or even entirely symbolic manner. Broadly, we have Satan being “bound,” whatever that means, and we have him being bound for one thousand years. Given the way that numbers are used in Revelation, we ought to assume that it is very unlikely that the thousand years are a literal amount of time, but symbolic of an extended but limited period of time over which Satan will be “bound.” Then, at the end of this “Millennium,” Satan will be released from his relatively bound state and wreak havoc on humans for a limited and presumably much shorter time. After this time of trial, Judgment Day, as recorded in Revelation 20:11-15, will come.

At the risk of greatly oversimplifying, there are three principal interpretations which have been held at various times throughout Christian history. These are postmillennialism, premillennialism and a third alternative, which is somewhat inappropriately called amillennialism. The dominant premillennial view in evangelical circles today is dispensational premillennialism.

The postmillennialist believes that sometime in the future, there will be a Millennium (whether the thousand years is literal or not), during which there will be a resurgence of Christianity in which the Church will experience great victories, after which Jesus will come back, ushering in final judgment and the final disposition of all humanity. Postmillennialism is a very optimistic view of Christianity.

The premillennialist believes that, at some point in the near future, Jesus will come back to the earth to usher in and to rule over a millennial kingdom. Dispensational premillennialists generally have Jesus actually ruling from Jerusalem over a revived kingdom of God for a literal thousand years. At the end of this Millennium will come Judgment Day and the final disposition of humans in heaven or hell. Premillennialism is a rather pessimistic view of end-times and the near future.

As already stated, amillennialism is a bit of a misnomer. The reason it is a dubious name is that amillennialists generally do not deny the reality of the Millennium. However, they teach that the Millennium began during the time of the Roman empire, as exemplified by the persecution of Rome under Domitian, Galerius, Diocletian and other Roman emperors. Amillennialists do not assume that the duration of the “Millennium” will be a literal thousand years. In fact, most of them believe that even now, Satan remains bound. As pre- and postmillennialists do, amillennialists generally believe that at the end of the Millennium final judgment will ensue. The amillennial view is neither particularly optimistic nor pessimistic about the nature of end times.

So, which is the correct view? One thing we can say is that both pre- and postmillennialists have predicted again and again that the Millennium was just about to happen. This was certainly true of the optimistic postmillennialists in the nineteenth century, as we will see below. Given the number of times they have been wrong on this count might lend one to question the truth of their millennial view. But, the final arbiter for most of us will be the Scripture. Notwithstanding the use of Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah and other prophetic works by various millennialists, clearly it is one’s interpretation of Revelation which ought to hold sway.

So, what was John told about his visions in the Book of Revelation? He was told that the visions concerned events which must “soon take place.” This is stated both at the beginning of Revelation, and at its end. (Revelation 1:1, 22:6) Add to that, John is told by the angel that the visions he was to record concerned things about which “the time is near.” Again, this declaration is found both at the beginning and at the end of Revelation. (Revelation 1:3, 22:10) The fact that the prophecy in Revelation both begins and ends with this double statement of soonness and nearness ought not to be ignored.

The most reasonable interpretation, then, of the Millennium is this. When John received the Revelation, the Millennium was “at hand” and that the time was near. Does that mean the Millennium started within a year, a decade or one hundred years of John receiving his apocalypse on Patmos? Let us say that we are not sure. But one thing we can conclude with a good deal of confidence is that it was not going to be ushered in more than two thousand years later—at a date which is still in the future.

It has already been said here that the doctrine of the Millennium is not an essential one. Whether it is important or simply not even an important aspect of Christianity is debatable, as some false ideas of the Kingdom of God tend to be associated with millennial views. Yet, it has played a large role for many Christian groups throughout the centuries. The conclusion here is that almost certainly, both the pre- and the postmillennial view, which hold that the Millennium has not yet started, are simply not correct. As we look at the large role the Millennium has played in Christianity in the last two hundred years of church history, it will be helpful to bear this in mind.