





 | |
| HISTORY OF MILLENNIALISM
|
| by Lonnie Kent York |
| INTRODUCTION |
| Time and history have a way of either obscuring or encumbering
the facts which have affected current political, moral, social or
religious opinions and practices. Often one generation will
experience the upheaval of radical changes, then the next generation
accepts, without reserve, those changes which have occurred through
violent storms of protest. The voices of protest soon dim to faint
cries against the wind, while the masses accept the change as the
evidence of progress. Another generation grows to maturity imbibing
the new as if it were the old, being unaware of the nature or scope
of what they have so easily accepted as embedded truth. To them such
opinions and practices have existed from the beginning. If they are
challenged, their champions will arise to defend their practice.
Such a defense will assume that the basis for their belief has
always existed, therefore all should accept it without challenge.
True historical facts fade into obscurity under such a defense. The
error inherent in these new doctrines is thus embedded deeper into
the consciousness of those who are unaware of the historical nature
of their belief. Truth, then, remains only in the hearts of faithful
seekers. |
| This premise applies to the various doctrines of millennialism.
During our own generation the doctrine of Dispensational
Premillennialism has become the norm for many charismatic religious
groups and many major fundamental denominational churches. The more
vocal and popular preachers of these groups have popularized their
doctrine to the point that it seems as if every religious body that
believes in Christ accepts a form of millennialism. Those who do
not, are considered to be in the minority. Yet, historically, this
has not been the situation. Actually, the present day millennial
doctrines have their origin dating back less than two hundred years.
The basis for such beliefs can be traced back to the time before
Christ, and that to heathen religions. An examination of the history
and development of millennialism will reveal that its roots spring
forth from man, not God. |
| History alone should not be the sole method used to prove
premillennialism to be in error. Historical facts and scripture,
according to William Cox should be our method: "... let me
hasten to say that we do not rest our case on the fact that these
beliefs have been held by any man or group of men. The all important
question is 'What saith the scriptures?'"1 This statement was
made with respect to amillennial views. We must, then, determine the
scriptural status of millennial doctrines upon the evidence found
within God's word. Geerhardus Vos expands upon the impetus of this
concept: "The question is, of course, a question of evidence,
to be considered and settled on the basis of Scriptural testimony
and of calm, sober, dogmatically-unprejudiced exegesis."2 Yet,
we cannot ignore the historical nature of these doctrines. Together,
scripture and history will prove that such doctrines have their
origin with man, not God. |
| WHAT IS MILLENNIALISM |
| Today, whenever the word millennialism is used, it
usually refers to the various doctrines of premillennialism, and
more specifically to Dispensational Premillennialism. This thousand
years, or chiliad, is then applied to the period of time mentioned
in Rev. 20:1-7. Specifically it is used by premillennialist to refer
to the millennial reign of Christ upon the earth after the Rapture
of the saints. The word millennial does not appear in the
scriptures, it is of Latin origin. The word found in Rev. 20:1-7 is
from "chilioi," which means "a thousand." The
concept of millennialism was originally known as Chiliasm, and when
you search historical records, you will find the ancients speaking
of the "chiliad" or the time mentioned in Rev. 20:1-7. The
word for thousand appears in these verses six times, and from these
verses whole systems of doctrines have arisen, which are known as
Millennialism. |
| Pre-Christian Influences |
| Chiliasm is not unique with the Christian
religion. Its roots can be found in most religions throughout the
world. A key element which exists in most religions is that there
will be a time when evil will be destroyed by the powers of good
followed by a long period of peace. Historically, then, the word
Chiliasm has taken on the added meaning of a time of universal
peace. |
| According to Schaff, the belief of a period of a
thousand years of peace from evil powers had its origin with the
religion of Zoroastrianism. This religion began prior to the
Babylonian captivity and was in vogue during the time of the
captivity. Zoroastrians believe that they were the ones who first
taught the concept of one all powerful god, and the coming of a
redeemer to save the world from the evil powers that pervade upon
the earth. |
| The Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament are
filled with speculations of a time of universal peace, which would
be ruled by the people of God. Only in these books do we find the
doctrine of Chiliasm among God's people. The Old Testament
scriptures do not teach such a doctrine. If we consider the period
in which these books were written, and the uninspired nature of
these books, then this doctrine can be put into its proper place. It
was a period of religious turmoil and persecutions by the enemies of
God's people. The influence of Zoroastrian chiliasm was evident,
thus the climate was ripe for the hope that God would intervene,
destroying the enemy, and ushering in a period of universal peace.
|
| Vos does not agree that the entire scope of
Judaism eschatology should rest upon the roots of paganism. He says
that "so far back as the period of canonical prophetism we find
the twofold representation, on the one hand that the final order of
things will be called into being by the appearance of a Messianic
King, and on the other hand that it will come through the appearance
and interposition of God Himself, so that the two conceptions of a
Messianic Kingdom and a Kingdom of God appear at this early stage
side by side without any attempt at harmonizing, then it would seem,
that in this ancient prophetic diversity, we have a fully adequate
explanation of the origin of the two successive kingdoms, without
having to go to Babylonia and Persia, or deriving the whole from
Apocalyptic dissatisfaction with the world."3 Vos does provide
sufficient evidence of the pagan doctrines and their counterparts in
the Apocryphal books. We cannot deny that some of these pagan
influences did not find their way into uninspired writings. |
| Our Lord had to contend with these views. The Jews
pressed the Lord for information regarding the Kingdom, which they
believed would be a materialistic Kingdom. Even the disciples
believed that the Lord would be victorious over His enemies and
establish a physical kingdom. At the time of His ascension the
apostles asked: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the
kingdom of Israel?" (Acts 1:6). It would not be until the day
of Pentecost that they would fully understand that the kingdom was
spiritual, not carnal. Peter declared on that day that Christ was at
God's right hand and that He was the Messiah. The kingdom prophecies
had been fulfilled in Christ's resurrection and ascension. "Therefore
being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him,
that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would
raise up Christ to sit on his throne; he seeing this before spake of
the resurrection of Christ ..." (Acts 2:30-31). |
| Four Major Philosophies |
| There are essentially four major philosophies
based upon Rev. 20:1-7: Historical Premillennialism, Dispensational
Premillennialism, Post-millennialism, and A-millennialism. A
historical examination of each philosophy regarding the "Chiliad"
in Rev. 20, and the impetus behind the philosophy will put the whole
issue into proper perspective. |
| Historical Premillennialism |
| Books written by Hal Lindsey, John Walvoord, J.
Dwight Pentecost, and other Premillennialist, assume that their
philosophy about the return of Christ has always been the doctrine
of the historical Church. Walvoord makes the following statement
regarding the historical nature of premillennialism: "The
testimony of history unites in one river of evidence that the
theology of the Old and New Testament and the theology of the early
church was not only premillennial, but that its premillennialism was
practically undisputed except by heretics and skeptics until the
time of Augustine. The coming of Christ as the prelude for the
establishment of a kingdom of righteousness on earth in fulfillment
of the Old Testament kingdom prophecies was the almost uniform
expectation both of the Jews at the time of the incarnation and of
the early church. This is essential premillennialism however it may
differ in its details from its modern counterpart."4 |
| Walvoord's statement about the differences between
historical premillennialism and its modern counterparts is the key
which will unveil the true concept of the early church's views on
the return of Christ. History reveals that the views of the early
church on the second coming of the Lord differ vastly from the views
of modern Dispensational Premillennialism. Vos indicates that the
point of departure lies in the "parousia" (the presence or
second return of Christ). "The substance of the matter is that
Chiliasm divides the eschatological future following upon the
parousia into two distinct stages, the one of a temporary
provisional, the other of an eternal, absolute character. The old
traditional view of orthodox theology, and the current
interpretation of Paul know of no such dualism in the eschatological
prospect; they make the eternal state, strictly so called, begin
with the return of the Lord."5 In effect, Vos is stating that
the early church viewed the chiliad as a time that would begin with
the coming of Christ, which would usher in the eternal state of man,
not a kingdom upon the earth. |
| The early church endured great persecutions, and
the book of Revelation was written to comfort those early saints.
Its message was that through Christ victory would come, even if
Satan won a few battles. Their hope, then, was focused upon the
victorious return of Christ and His victory over their present
enemies. They believed that His coming, the parousia, would initiate
the beginning of a new age of peace. The writings of the early
saints during the first three centuries was towards this hope: the
promised return of the victorious Christ. Some have interpreted
these writings to imply a millennial period upon the earth, yet the
majority of these writing are not specific on this point. |
| The impetus of this theology can be found in the
hope for a better world. Their view of Revelation was that Christ
would intervene, at the right moment, and bring about a change in
world events. "... the essential apocalyptic message remained
as the book taught the living hope of the immediate direct
intervention of God to reverse history and to overcome evil with
good. Such an outlook brought great comfort to believers who
suffered from persecution by the forces of Imperial Rome. Expressed
in a form that has been called historic premillennialism, this hope
seems to have been the prevailing eschatology during the first three
centuries of the Christian era, and is found in the works of Papias,
Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Methodius,
Commodianus, and Lactanitus."6 |
| Walvoord and other writers for premillennial views
refer to statements made by Justin Martyr as proof that the early
church believed in a millennial reign of Christ upon the earth. "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, as 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 there after the general and,
in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would
likewise take place."7 Terry shows that this statement is
contrary to the scriptures: "The old Chiliastic ideas of a
restoration of all Israel at Jerusalem, and of Christ and his
glorified saints literally sitting on thrones and reigning in
visible material glory on the earth, are without warrant in this
Scripture (Rev. 20:1-7, lky). Nothing is here said about Jerusalem,
or the Jews, or the Gentiles."8 |
| There were opponents to this doctrine. From the
pen of Paul until Augustine there were those who resisted the false
doctrine of Chiliasm. It was not until a radical change in external
circumstances and attitudes occurred that the doctrine of Chiliasm
was finally consider a full heresy. This change occurred when Rome
accepted Christianity. McClintock and Strong have an extensive
statement regarding this change of attitude. |
| Notwithstanding the extensive spreading of the
millenarian tenet, it would be a rash inference to assume that it
was universal, or accepted as the creed of the Church. On this point
Neander has good observations (Ch. Hist., Torrey's transl., i. 651).
The first decided opponent of whom we have a knowledge was Caius,
the Roman presbyter, about the year 200. The crass from in which
Chiliasm entered into the heresy of Montanism contributed materially
to the strengthening of the antagonism to millenarian views. The
Alexandrian school opposed them with energy, particularly Origen,
with whose peculiar opinions it was inconsistent. ... It was still
common, however, in the time of Jerome, who himself was one of its
opponents. But gradually the tenet which has so widely prevailed
became obnoxious and proscribed. One great reason of this remarkable
change of sentiments is to be found in the altered condition and
prospects of the Church. Christians at first yearned for the
reappearance of the Lord. Moreover, it was impossible for them to
raise their faith and hopes so high as to expect the conquest of the
Roman empire by the moral power of the cross, independently of the
personal and supernatural interposition of Christ. But as the Gospel
make progress, the possibility and probability of a peaceful victory
of the Christian cause over all its adversaries, by the might of
truth and of the Spirit, gained a lodgment in the convictions of
good men."9 |
| Dispensational
Premillennialism |
| From the time of Augustine the prevailing view on
the return of Christ was amillennial. There were, at times of severe
persecutions, those who would arise with a renewed interest in
Chiliasm. This was their hope under trying times, however those who
usually promoted such doctrines were very radical, thus few adhered
to these views. It was not until the early nineteenth century that a
new and more forceful advocate of Chiliasm would arise in John N.
Darby. |
| John N. Darby is considered the father of
Dispensational Premillennialism. His view on the second advent of
Christ is what we know, today, as premillennialism. He divides the
scheme of God's redemption into various dispensations, or periods of
time during which God tests man in respect to his obedience to some
specific revelation from God. Darby believes that each dispensation
has its own determinate system of salvation, which allows his future
dispensations to possess a different scheme of redemption. His
system of premillennialism consist of seven dispensations:
innocency, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and
the kingdom. |
| The distinctly prophetic aspects Darby's
Dispensational teaching may be summarized briefly as follows: |
- The millennium is the future period of human history during
which Christ will reign personally and visibly with His saints
on and over the earth for a thousand years.
- A visible coming of Christ will precede it.
- This coming will be in two stages, the rapture and the
appearing, with a considerable interval of time between them, in
which important events will take place.
- The rapture may take place at "any moment," and
will certainly precede the great tribulation.
- The rapture is the "blessed hope" of the Church.
- The Church is composed of those, and those only, who are
saved between Pentecost and the rapture.
- The Church age is a mystery period (a parenthesis
dispensation unknown to prophecy) lying between the 69th and
70th weeks of the prophecy of Daniel 9.
- Between the rapture and the appearing, the events of the last
week of the prophecy of Dan. 9, of Matt. 24, and of Rev. 4-19
are to take place.
- After the rapture a Jewish remnant will take the place of the
Church as God's agent on earth for the conversion of Israel and
the Gentiles.
|
| Allis states that the "primary features of
this movement were two in number. The one related to the Church. It
was the result of the profound dissatisfaction felt at that time by
many earnest Christians with the worldliness and temporal security
of the Church of England and of many of the dissenting communions in
the British Isles. The other had to do with prophecy; it represented
a very Marked emphasis on the coming of the Lord as a present hope
and immediate expectation."10 |
| Clarence B. Bass points out that the system of
Dispensationalism revolves around its principle of interpretation. "The
paradox of the system lies precisely at this point: one cannot
logically accept the chronology of dispensationalism without also
accepting its basic principle of interpretation - that God works
under different principles with mankind in different dispensations."11.
This system of interpretation permits one to believe that God still
favors the Jews and the promises to them under the Old Testament.
This is contrary to the teaching of Paul: "There is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor
female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's,
then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."
(Gal. 3:28-29). Bass's book is devoted to the teachings of Darby and
a history of Dispensationalism. Bass at one time was a
Dispensationalist, but through his study of the scriptures he left
that doctrine. His book reflects one of the best sources of
information regarding these doctrines. |
| The rapid growth of Dispensationalism in the
United States can be attributed to two books: Jesus Is Coming by W.
E. Blackstone, and the Scofield Reference Bible. Blackstone's book
was published in 1878. Many believe that the influence of Darby can
be seen throughout this book. However, the greatest impact comes
from Scofield's work - The Scofield Reference Bible, which was first
published in 1909 and revised in 1917. A modern revision of this
Bible was completed in 1967. Allis, referring to this Bible, says: "This
is the Bible of Dispensationalist, and has probably done as much to
popularize the prophetic teachings of Darby and the Brethren as all
other agencies put together."12 Today the books written by Hal
Lindsey and John Walvoord typify the present views of Dispensational
Premillennialism. |
| About the same time that Darby was developing his
doctrine of the dispensations, William Miller was at work in the
United States with his own view of premillennialism. Miller believed
that the year 1844 was significant in Bible prophecy. In this year
the Lord was to return and establish His Kingdom upon the earth.
This year came and went, but the Lord had not returned as Miller had
predicted. He then returned to his former beliefs, but others took
up his mantle with renewed prophetic visions. Today this group is
known as Seventh-Day Adventist. |
| Post-Millennialist |
| The post-millennialist differ significantly from
the premillennialist in that they view the millennium as a golden
age of the Church, which is sometime in the future, and it will
precede the second advent of Christ. Today there are few who
actually believe in this doctrine, however, during the early
nineteenth century this was a popular belief. The world of that day
was in a continual flux of change. The Industrial Revolution of the
late eighteenth through the mid nineteenth centuries was the impetus
for renewed hope for better things and the dawning of a new age.
Religious zeal was everywhere, and men were seeking for the
foundations of truth. Many attempted to establish Utopian societies,
but these failed because they were based on godless ideals. That
time was well suited for the post-millennial philosophy. Today, few
believe that things will gradually get better as time progresses,
and this philosophy has essentially died. |
| The early restorationist were considered
post-millennialist. The Millennial Harbinger was begun in
anticipation of this golden age. According to Wallace, Campbell
thought that the "denominations were about to abandon party
creeds and party names and that all believers in Christ would be
united upon the Bible, and the Bible alone."13 The central view
of Alexander Campbell on the millennium is as follows: "Respecting
the real millennium, we may observe the following things - 1, that
the Scriptures afford us ground to believe that the church will
arrive at a state of prosperity which it never has yet enjoyed. 2.
That this will continue at least a thousand years, or a considerable
space of time, in which the work of salvation may be fully
accomplished in the utmost extent and glory of it. 3. This will be a
state of great happiness and glory. The Jews shall be converted,
genuine Christianity diffused throughout all nations, and Christ
shall reign, by his spiritual presence, in a glorious manner."14
Sometime around the turn of the century the post-millennial views
began to change. Now, those who have benefited from the restoration
movement no longer hold post-millennial views. |
| A-Millennialism |
| Most ascribe the doctrine of a-millennialism to
Augustine (AD 400). This term was unknown to Augustine, however he
is usually credited with crystallizing amillennial teachings.
Augustine in effect sounded the death knell to chiliasm. He set
forth in clear terms that the Church was the spiritual kingdom of
God upon the earth, and that the Church was presently in the
millennium. His views were in harmony with the scriptures. Paul
spoke of being translated into the kingdom (Col. 1:13-14), and John,
while writing the book of Revelation spoke of being a "brother,
and companion in tribulations, an in the kingdom and patience of
Jesus Christ," (Rev. 1:9). Many other scriptures support the
fact that the Church is the Israel of God, and that all men, if they
are to be saved, must be in this kingdom. |
| Amillennialism has been the predominate philosophy
of the church from its inception. According to Louis Berkhof, "Some
premillennialists have spoken of Amillennialism as a new view and as
one of the most recent novelties, but this is certainly not in
accord with the testimony of history. The name is indeed new, but
the view to which it is applied is as old as Christianity. It had at
least as many advocates as Chiliasm among the Church Fathers of the
second and third centuries, supposed to have been the heyday of
Chiliasm. It has ever since been the view most widely accepted, is
the only view that is either expressed or implied in the great
historical Confessions of the Church, and has always been the
prevalent view in Reformed circles" 15 |
| The amillennial view is that when Christ comes the
second time, or the second advent, that this will be the end of this
world. Christ will not set foot on this earth again, rather we shall
all be gathered together with Him in the air (II Thess. 4:13-18).
Paul states that at this time Christ will return the kingdom back to
God who gave it (I Cor. 15:20-28). |
| Conclusion |
| We have only briefly described the various
philosophies relating to the second coming of our Lord. The history
of these philosophies is interesting and could take up more space
than we have devoted thus far. The real issue at hand is "What
sayeth the Scriptures." When examined, the scriptures do not
support the premillennial philosophy. They teach that Christ is now
King of Kings and Lord of Lords and is presently ruling over His
kingdom. As Christians, we long for His coming, for in that hour we
shall receive our eternal reward. Let us be like John, "Even
so, come, Lord Jesus." (Rev. 22:20). |
| FOOTNOTES: |
- William Cox, Amillennialism Today, Presbyterian &
Reformed, 1975, p. 9
- Geerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology, Eerdmans, p. 226
- Ibid, p. 232
- John Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom, Zondervan, 1973, p.
113-114
- Geerhardus Vos, Op. cit., p. 228
- Walter A. Elwell, Editor, Evangelical Dictionary Of Theology,
Baker, p. 714).
- M. Terry, a quote from Justin's Dialogue with Trypho,
Biblical Hermeneutics, p. 484
- Ibid, p. 485
- McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia Of Biblical, Theological,
And Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol.VI, Baker, p. 265
- Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy And The Church, The Presbyterian &
Reformed Publishing Co., p. 9
- Clarence B. Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, Its
Historical Genesis and Ecclesiastical Implications, Baker, 1960,
p. 19
- Oswald T. Allis, op. cit., pp. 13-14
- Foy E. Wallace, Neal-Wallace Discussion On The Thousand Years
Reign of Christ, Gospel Advocate, 1933, p 31
- Alexander Campbell, Millennial Harbinger, Vol. 6, pp. 95-98,
1856
- Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, p. 708
|
|
|
|