View 1 – Historic Premillennialism

This article highlights the first view or perspective on the Millennial Kingdom – Historic Premillennialism (HP). I aim to highlight these views, examining them from both a historical and Biblical basis and addressing HP’s main takes on the more interesting eschatological matters. The focal point of our discussion is Revelation 20:4-6, which states,

“Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.” (Revelation 20:4-6, ESV)

A Historical Basis. Today, most people are unlikely to be familiar with the Historical Premillennial (HP) perspective. As Bryan Chapell writes in his recent book, “Those who hold the historic view are the forgotten siblings of the premillennial family. But that was not always the case.”[1] Indeed, the family of Premillennialism might be better known for its attachment to the more well-known view of Dispensational Premillennialism (DP). However, these two positions are not one and the same, and we tackle the latter in the next article. In reality, there is a much earlier historical basis for premillennialism. Schaff brings to the surface the historicity of this position when he writes,

“The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age (A.D. 100-325)  is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, that is the belief of a visible reign of Christ in glory on earth with the risen saints for a thousand years, before the general resurrection and judgment. It was indeed not the doctrine of the church embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius.”[2]

Indeed, the early church predominantly held a pre-millennial view of Christ’s return and reign on earth, giving this view the head start on all other views. The quote above from Philip Schaff highlights a linguistic nuance of that era where the terms “chiliasm” and “millenarianism” were used interchangeably. The term chiliasm is the Greek word for a thousand that John the apostle uses in Revelation a total of six times (χίλιοι chilioi). Today, this term is not used widely. Rather, the term millennium is consistently used when referring to the thousand-year reign of Christ that John refers to in the book of Revelation. The literal meaning of the word “Millennium” that we use today comes from the compound of two Latin terms Mille, meaning thousand, and Annus, which translates as year. We simply call it the thousand-year reign of Christ or the Millennial reign of Christ. It would not have been called “Historic Premillennialism” by the church fathers for the obvious fact that in their time it wasn’t yet “historic.” Premillennialism was the main view as the early church actively sought Christ’s return and a literal reign with Him on earth.

Perhaps of great note are the men mentioned above by Schaff and their view on the millennial kingdom.  In particular, one name that could be noted is Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis (A.D. 60-130). Papias, alongside men like Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna (A.D. 65-156), was closely associated with the apostle John (the author of Revelation). Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon (A.D. 120-203) writes of Papias concerning his ties to the apostle John, “These things are attested by Papias, who was John’s hearer and the associate of Polycarp, an ancient writer, who mentions them in the fourth book of his works.”[3] Irenaeus points out Papias’s nearness to the apostle John himself, which would have undoubtedly evinced John’s eschatology for Papias and his take on the millennial kingdom. And it is Eusebius (Father of Church History) who likely notes what his view was when he writes, “He says that there will be a period of about a thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, when the kingdom of Christ will be established on this earth in material form.”[4] Irenaeus himself is also another early proponent of HP, and this too came from Papias and others. Freedman states that Irenaeus elaborated in his own works his “Millenarian theory, which he inherited through Papias and Justin.”[5] Suffice it to say, historically, the view of Historic Premillennialism is not without significant witness.

A potential weakness that might be presented with these cases for HP is that today, we only have fragments of Papias’ works, and even in those fragments, it seems that what is available are purely second-hand accounts of Papias’ official position. This fact could be a potential problem for HP. Another potential issue is the almost virtual disappearance of the HP position in church history at the turn of the fifth century. Chung, Mathewson, and Blomberg all point out reasons why its popularity waned in the late fourth century. One reason is “After Constantine I endorsed Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, the relationship between the church and the state changed from that of enmity to that of friendship.”[6] That significant change apparently shifted the church’s thinking to a more positive outlook on eschatological matters as persecution waned as well. However, even with that in mind, it does not change the defense of the HP position – i.e., the early church predominantly held to a premillennial view of Christ’s return and rule.

A Biblical Basis. The question arises whether the Bible attests to a Premillennial view of Christ’s return and reign. At the end of the day, any of the four positions presented must be constructed from Scripture. Is there a Biblical basis for Historic Premillennialism? I will briefly state one of HP’s many arguments for Premillennialism below and then state HP’s main takes on the more important eschatological matters.

Addressing the text in question, Revelation 20, the most natural reading and interpretation seems to favor a Premillennial position. George Eldon Ladd (1911-1982), who is perhaps single-handedly responsible for re-popularizing HP in the twentieth century, highlights the necessity of a literal reading when the Scripture mandates it. He writes, “Unless there is some reason intrinsic within the text itself that requires a symbolical interpretation, or unless there are other Scriptures which interpret a parallel prophecy in a symbolic sense, we are required to employ a natural, literal interpretation.”[7] Stanley Grenz notes, “Revelation 19-22 forms the explicit foundation for the position articulated by contemporary premillennialists. These scholars see in the closing chapters of the Apocalypse a vision of the events of the eschaton arranged in chronological order.”[8] In particular, the sequential order of Revelation 19-21:1-8 seems to propel all premillennial perspectives forward. There seems to be no interruption here for the HP as the text of Revelation 19-22 seems most naturally arranged chronologically. If this is true, then the native structure of the text would demand all students take a Premillennial interpretative journey. Here is a brief and basic example of how HP would see the sequence of those future events: (Note: The HP sees the future tribulation preceding chapters 19, particularly in chapters 6-19 = Tribulation.)

1. Christ’s 2nd coming & Rapture of church – Revelation 19:11-16
2. The Battle of Armageddon – Rev. 19:17-21
3. The binding of Satan for 1,000 years – Rev. 20:1-3
4. The Millennial Reign of Christ (The resurrected saints reign with Christ.) – Rev. 20:4-6
5. Satan is released to rebel and is finally defeated (The Great White Throne judgment follows.) – Rev. 20:7-15
6. New Heavens and New Earth (Eternity) – Rev. 21:1-8

Grenz notes that this sequence is “the explicit foundation” for all Premillennialists. Another essential key for all contemporary Premillennialists is the interpretation of the apparent 1st and 2nd physical resurrections presented in Revelation 20:4-6. Because the topic of physical resurrections, as presented in Revelation 20, is a key to all Premillennialists, I will cover that in the upcoming article on Dispensational Premillennialism (DP).

Until then, here are the main takes on the more debated eschatological matters. The question here is, what does HP believe about the following:

Tribulation & Rapture

HP teaches that the church will go through future tribulation (not the same as experiencing God’s wrath). According to HP, tribulation comes with the territory of being a follower of Christ, no matter the time or age – including the time we are in right now. For the HP, it is almost an insult to say that we are promised no current or pending tribulation at all when there have been many followers of Christ over the last two millennia who have faced significant seasons of tribulation, persecution, and even martyrdom. The HP will point out the many texts of Scripture that highlight the necessity of going through tribulation. (c.f. Acts 14:22; Romans 8:35-37; Matthew 24:9-13; Philippians 1:29.) This is where the Historic Premillennialist separates from the more modern Dispensational Premillennialist who hold to a Pre-tribulation Rapture. Because the church is promised tribulation, the HP sees no problem with a Post-Tribulation Rapture (See sequence above.) Furthermore, some Historic Premillennialists believe that the tribulation does not necessarily have to be a literal seven years. Whereas other HPs would believe that the coming tribulation would be a literal seven-year timeframe in the future.

Hermeneutic (Interpretive Approach to the Scriptures)

HP approaches the New Testament (NT) with a fuller explanation method of interpretation largely because it is how the NT authors approached the OT. When the NT authors bring to light an interpretation of Old Testament (OT) texts, they do not depart from or twist what the OT authors meant but rather provide a fuller explanation of what the Holy Spirit intended the entire time. Bryan Chapell clarifies, “Historic Premillennialists believe that the New Testament writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit to interpret Old Testament prophecies in ways that more fully explain God’s intention for the original texts than the original human writers or readers may have understood.”[9] Chapell also provides an example that George E. Ladd gives in his book. Ladd’s example is from Matthew 2:15, where Scripture states that Jesus must come from Egypt. Ladd writes, “This, however, is not what the prophecy means in the Old Testament. Hosea says, ‘When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.’ In Hosea, this is not a prophecy at all but a historical affirmation that God had called Israel out of Egypt in the Exodus. However, Matthew recognizes Jesus to be God’s greater Son… The Old Testament is reinterpreted in light of the Christ event.”[10] This interpretive approach should not mistake the HP for practicing a non-literal interpretation across the board in Scripture. As mentioned above, the HP does interpret the NT literally when the text demands it. What this means for the HP is (1) The Scripture is one unified message from beginning to end. (2) The NT authors, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, were interpreting the OT from a Christo-centric Hermeneutic (Meaning everything in the Bible was and is about Jesus Christ – much like Christ mentioned in Luke 24:27).

Israel

One might ask what the HP believes about Israel. There seems to be a general consensus that the church is the true Israel. In other words, the church is ultimately what God had in His plans the whole time as His chosen people. Israel is not necessarily taking a back seat to the church. Rather, the church is just the greater fulfillment of God’s overall unfolding drama of redemption, which includes all nations, including Israel. However, that does not mean that the church “replaces” Israel. Rather, the church is “grafted in” to God’s people by faith as explained in Romans 11:16-24 and Galatians 3:26-29. God’s people constitute all in Christ by faith. All that to say, the HP sees a plan for ethnic national Israel in the future, but it is not a separate plan in the sense they are saved apart from God’s grace and belief in Christ alone. No, for the HP, the nation of Israel will be saved in the future purely by God’s grace through faith just like any other nation (Acts 15:11). Chapell again writes, “From a Historic Premillennial perspective, all Christians are Jews by spiritual adoption. Jews aren’t discarded in favor of Gentile believers, and Israel isn’t replaced by the church (Rom. 11:28-32). Every believer in the church is a spiritual member of the family of Abraham, who was distinguished by his faith in God’s promised provision.”[11] HP believes that there will be future mass conversion of Jews in the future, but it is not a separate plan of salvation – it is by grace through faith. See Romans 9-11 for Paul’s treatment of future Israel.

The Kingdom of God

For the Historic Premillennialist, the Kingdom of God is both now and not yet. That terminology was first coined by George E. Ladd. Ladd writes, “God’s reign manifests itself both in the future and in the present and thereby creates both a future realm and a present realm in which men may experience thee blessings of His reign.”[12] For Ladd and the HP, the Kingdom of God is a current reality in part (expressed through Christ’s reign on earth through His church), and a future full reality (realized both in the coming millennial kingdom and future age to come). The church today is the visible presentation of Christ’s reign before the coming age in which Christ Himself will physically reign on earth for all eternity. For the HP, the Kingdom of God is not something that can be constructed fully until the return of Christ. Ladd further writes, “The Kingdom of God will never be fully realized apart from the personal, glorious, victorious Coming of Christ. Men cannot build the Kingdom of God; Christ will bring it.”[13] What this means for the HP is that God’s Kingdom reign is both now and not yet. The Millennial reign of Christ is thus a significant marker on the timeline of events as Christ will at that point physically return and reign with His saints for the 1,000 years, and subsequently for all eternity. The question comes up – why reign for 1,000 years? This question I will answer in the next article with DP.

Finally, I want to provide a list of those who hold to the Historic Premillennial view. It is interesting to note that all positions have well-respected and more than capable scholars in their corners. HP is no exception; here are those who hold to HP. You may be familiar with some of HP’s adherents.

Historic Premillennialists

1. Charles H. Spurgeon
2. John Piper
3. Al Mohler
4. Bryan Chapell
5. John & Charles Wesley
6. Wayne Grudem
7. John Bunyan (Most Puritans also.)
8. Millard Erickson
9. John Gill
10. D.A. Carson
11. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna (A.D. 65-156)
12. Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis (A.D. 60-130)
13. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon (A.D. 120-203)
14. Justin Martyr, Christian Apologist (A.D. 100-165)
15. George Eldon Ladd
16. Craig L. Blomberg
17. Sung Wook Chung
18. Francis Schaeffer

Thank you for reading this lengthy article. I trust that it helped you better understand the Historic Premillennial position on the return of Christ and His rule for 1,000 years. I hope that I have done some service to this position and that any mistakes are admitted on my end ahead of time. At the bare minimum, this study is essential because we know the teaching of the Millennial kingdom and the reign of Christ to be Biblical. While there are many differing views on those two items, it is important to know that these differences should not be a matter of separation between brothers. May we align with cry of the author of Revelation – John, “Even so come Lord Jesus.” (Revelation 22:20)

– R.E. Martinez, Pastor

Next article: View 2 – Dispensational Premillennialism.