sovereigngrace
Well-Known Member
- Dec 9, 2019
- 9,042
- 3,450
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
The Millennial age is said, by us Premills, to still have mortal, sin-infected inhabitants on the earth, just as today. But we also say that Satan is removed, allowing the world to enjoy a measure of peace and fulfillment. So no--it is not a ruthless, wicked world as we have today!
Satan is released for only a brief moment at the end of the Millennium, and quickly his fire is exterminated. Rather, he is thrown into the fire!
Although I do respect the fact that Amil was basically the eschatology of the Church for 2 millennia, it remains true that, AFAIK, the Church started out with Premil convictions. The central reason for giving up on Premil was the failure of Israel to realize the promise of inheriting God's Kingdom, and the Church then became the focus in the NT age.
But as we near the end of this age, I'm supposing, Israel has come back into the news, and Premil suddenly looks very viable. So I don't get hostile towards Amil, but I do have my own convictions on the matter. I now have the opportunity to find God true to His word, with respect to Israel's place in His Kingdom.
Inasmuch as Israel, in the present age, is not interested, as a majority, in Christianity, it seems necessary to have a literal Millennium following the return of Christ. I'm not Dispensational, but I do agree with that school that Israel has a place, as a nation, in future prophecy.
What you say about the Kingdom being present is true in some respects. Jesus said he would take the Kingdom from Israel and give it to another nation, which I assume to be the Roman nation. That means the Kingdom was already present in the OT era, when Israel possessed the Kingdom, and will continue to be present in the NT era, since Christian nations now possess it.
But the Kingdom, as much as it may be present, remains not yet *here.* Jesus said his Kingdom is "near" in the present age, and not yet *here.* Certainly there is a future Kingdom, beyond what we don't yet have at present, because Jesus prayed, "Thy Kingdom come."
An elementary study of the early Church fathers’ teachings over the first 100 years after the cross shows that they generally saw the second coming of Jesus Christ as “the end” or “the end of the world.” They believed all the righteous would be rescued to inherit a new perfected earth. The wicked would be destroyed with this current corrupt earth. This is standard Amillennial teaching! There is a notable silence from the early writers, apart from Papias. Nowhere does he quote any of the early Church fathers (apart from Papias) mention, or describe conditions on a future millennial earth or articulate any of the main tenets of the Premillennial belief. All we have is complete silence.
There is complete silence on a millennial existence in the first 100 years after the cross apart from Papias. Remember, Revelation was a later manuscript that was not believed to have gained wide influence outside of Asia Minor for quite a while. So, the absence of these early writers exegeting it is not strange.
Contrary to what many modern Dispensationalist apologists argue, the early church writers were not mainly Premillennialist. In fact, the doctrine, which seems to have had its origin in Asia Minor, was mainly limited to that area for many yrs.
Last edited:
Upvote
0