|
In spite of all the books written, the sermons preached, and even the many songs sung about the millennium, there is only one passage in the Bible that speaks of such a period—Revelation 20:1-7. Most of the spectacular (and often lurid) details associated with this period are not in the only passage devoted to it. There is no mention of an antichrist, a tribulation period, a secret (or public) rapture of the church, a restored nation of Israel, a restored temple worship, the mark of the beast, and many other details many consider integral to this doctrine. Christians today find themselves divided into four serious schools of understanding.
Postmillennialism says the world will become Christianized and be peaceful and righteous for 1000 years, and then Jesus will return. This school is not so popular since the World Wars and the many other wars following them in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. G.C. Berkouwer summarizes this view as that which “emphasizes the pervasive power of Christ’s rule and the proclamation of the gospel. This rule will not come via a sudden, transcendent divine intervention, but via a gradual, evolutionary process of peace.”
Historic Premillennialism is the oldest form of millennialism. It cannot be traced to the Apostles, but after the close of the first century, when various heresies began to arise in the church, this was among them. Its present form has been characterized thus by Berkhof, “The coming advent of Christ to the world is near, and will be visible, personal, and glorious. It will be preceded, however, by certain events, such as the evangelization of the nations, the conversion of Israel, the great apostasy and the great tribulation, and the revelation of the man of sin . . . . The second coming will be a great, single, outstanding and glorious event . . . .” A prominent advocate of this theory further writes, “Such facts as this are what compel some Bible students, including the present writer, to speak of the church as the New Israel, the true Israel, the spiritual Israel.”
Dispensational Premillennialism, the most vocal of the various schools, is relatively new. According to R. Bradley Jones, Dispensationalism , is that scheme of prophetic interpretation adopted by Edward R. Irving, founder of the Apostolic Catholic Church, and passed on to J.N. Darby, founder of the Plymouth Brethren Church in the early 1800s. Their prophetic conferences began about 1826 or 1827 and the results of these studies were incorporated into Scofield’s Reference Bible as study notes. Jones gives an excellent summary of 7 basic tenets of this teaching.
Amillennialism, to those of us who hold this position, is the wrong name. It comes from two Latin words, the prefix a-, “no” and the root milli, which means 1000. So the term means “no millennium.” If we believe all the Bible, and we do, we must believe that the 1000 years of Revelation 20 mean something. This issue of Truth Matters will deal with the one passage relative to such a period of time, as well as to some of the peripheral issues often associated with it, but not mentioned in that text.
Jones’s conclusion sounds reasonable, “If the historic creeds of the church are allowed to testify, they either ignore or condemn the thought of a millennium. Savonarola, Huss, Luther, and other leading Reformers were utterly hostile to the premillennial views of the early church.”
Bavinck aptly observed, “We now face the question, therefore, whether according to Jesus and the apostles there still awaits the church a period of power and glory that precedes the general resurrection of the dead and event of world judgment. If this were so, we would expect clear mention of it in the eschatological discourse that Jesus gave His disciples in the final days of His life (Matt. 24; Mark 13; Luke 21). But in this discourse not a word is said, not even allusion is made, about such a kingdom.” In other words, if this were the all-important topic so many make it, why did Jesus and the apostles never mention a 1000-year earthly kingdom? Search the gospels and the epistles—they are strangely silent.
Since sincere Christians have held—and continue to hold—to each of these views, it is unbecoming for us to be dismissive, derisive, or rude when dealing with the subject. Let us allow the Word of God to speak clearly; let us teach it without and let us do it in genuine love. This issue will address some of the chief topics, mainly using contemporary writers, but also several great writers of our history.
1. G. C. Berkouwer, The Return of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972) 346-347 2. Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969) 709 3. George Eldon Ladd, The Last Things (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978) 23 4. R. Bradley Jones, What, Where, and When is the Millennium? (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House 1975) 13-16 5. What, Where, and When is the Millennium? 17 6. Herman Bavinck, tr. By John Vriend, The Last Things (Grand Rapids: Pater Noster division of Baker Books, 1996) 108
|
|
A . . . successful tack was taken by [Jesuit priest] Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) of Salamanca, Spain. He was the founder of the “futurist” system of prophetic interpretation. Instead of placing antichrist way in the past as did [Jesuit priest] Alcazar, Ribera argued that antichrist would appear way in the future. About 1590 Ribera published a 500 page commentary on the Apocalypse, denying the Protestant application of antichrist to the Church of Rome. The gist of his futurist system was as follows: a. While the first few chapters of the Revelation were assigned to ancient Rome in the time of John, the great part . . . were assigned to the distant future, to events immediately preceding the second coming of Jesus Christ. b. Antichrist would be a single individual who would abolish the Christian religion, rebuild the temple at Jerusalem and be received by the Jews. c. Antichrist’s blasphemous work would continue for a literal 3 and ½ years. d. The locale of the conflict with Antichrist would be the Middle East—i.e., Palestine. Robert D. Brinsmead in Present Truth, September 1974, 25-26 |