Now to correct some misinformation.
The Early Church was NOT chiliast. Some were. That does not make the Church as a whole chiliast.
Pre-millenialsim was not the prevailing escatalogical view in the first few centuries at all . . the only places I know where it is generally accepted to be are among dispensationalists, who make up a
very small minority within those groups who name the name of Christ. The number of its adherents is a subject of debate, and in most circles is considered quite limited.
Chilaism (the name for pre-millenialism in the Early Church)
had its roots in pre-christian Jewish beliefs. What has been popularized among dispensationalists today is the idea that it was indeed an apostolic belief. However, we find its roots in non-christian Jewish apocryphal writing, not apostolic, such as 2 Baruch,rejected when the books of the Old Testament were cannonized in the 4th century.
According to the Jewish Encyclopedia the reign of peace, lasting a thousand years, which will precede the last judgment and the future life. This concept has achieved a special importance in the Christian church, where it has been termed Chilliasm, designating the dominion of Jesus with the glorified and risen saints, will rule for a thousand years.
Chilliasm, or the idea of the thousand years is never the less, older than the Christian church. For the belief of a thousand years, at the end of time, as a preliminary to the resurrection of the dead, was held in Phariseeism. This concept is expressed in Jewish literature in Enoch, etc. From Neander's History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. 1, Page 248
The idea of a Millennial reign proceeded from Judaism; for among the Jews the representation was current that the Messiah would reign a thousand years upon earth.
Chilaism also found itself to be at odds with the deeply and strongly cherished hope of Christians of union and fellowship with our Lord upon death. Chiliasts taught that instead we go to some holding place, hades to await the ressurection and millenial reign.
Chilaism found some support in the 2nd century
due to its postion in opposition to the gnostic belief of the evil of matter and the physical world .. it gave support to the goodness of the material world, that it would be renewed and
thus opposed the gnostic beliefs in this manner.
But it failed to support the Christian hope of union with Christ after death.
It also used the same approach used by the Jews to justify the crucifixtion. The literal approach used by the Jews to understand the Old Testament prophecies is the same used by the Chilaists . . and as the Jews used it to justify the crucifixtion,
as they did not see the literal fulfillment of prophecies such as the lion lying down with the lamb. its use by the Chilaists was seen something to be rejected.
Chilaism was not the only escatological view of the Early Church,
let alone even the prevailing view, and because of its Jewish roots and its failure to support the Christian hope of going to be with Christ,
it was seen as sub-Christian,
not fully Christian, dangerously like the non-Christian Jewish approach to scripture used to reject Jesus as the Messiah and justify the crucifixtion.
There had always existed a more fully Christian escatology from the beginning, one which fully embraced the great Christian hope of being with the Lord upon death and did not ally itself with interpretative methods used to reject Christ; one which we see in the New Testament writings themselves . .that instead of some future reign,
Jesus' present reign over all thngs from heaven is proclaimed, where the saints are with Him now, which culminates in the arrival of the fullness of the perfect kingdom of God and the replacement of the present heaven and earth, not a temporary kingdom even if for 1000 years.
I know that among dispensationalists the claim is made that chilaism was the belief of the Early Church starting with the time of the Apostle John . . .however, we have interesting documentation of those contempory with John:
Caius, who lived around the close of the 2nd century, commented on the idea that Christ would have an earthly kingdom of 1000 years. In Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, Book III, Chapter 28 fragment is preserved of his writings:
But Cerinthus, too, through revelations written, as he would have us believe, by a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things, which he pretends were shown him by angels; alleging that after the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is to be on earth, and that the flesh dwelling in Jerusalem is again to be subject to desires and pleasures. And being an enemy to the scriptures of God, wishing to deceive men, he says that there is to be space of a thousand years for marriage festivities.
One of the doctrines he taught was, that Christ would have an earthly kingdom."
Now here is what is interesting. Cerinthus was a contemporary of St. John. Irenaeus, who is a contemporary of Polycarp, disciple of John tells us (recorded in Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., III. 28) that John while in Ephesus entered a bath house to bathe, and upon seeing Cerinthus was there, refused to bathe in the same bath house, left and exhorted those wth him to do likewise saying:
"Let us flee, lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, that enemy of the truth, is within."
Cerinthus promoted that also during this millenial reign of Christ, we would enjoy almost hedonistic pleasures. However, even that aside, it is obvious that Caius held a very different view point than Cerinthus and held Cerinthus' to be heretical. We also see that St. John also held him to be heretical. Cerinthus founded a sect which combined the Chirstology of the Ebonites with Gnosticism, his teachings were heretical and he claimed angelic interpretation/revelation. What is significant here is that in the fragment we see above from Caius,
it is clear that the idea of Christ having a earthly kingdom and that this was to be for the space of 1000 years was considered one of his heresies . . in addition to the obivous heresies regarding what would occur during the 1000 years as well as many of the other heresies he embraced and promoted.
Here is more:
"Cerinthus required his followers to worship the supreme God.... He promised them a resurrection of their bodies, which would be succeeded by exquisite delights in the Millenary reign of Christ.... For Cerinthus supposed that Christ would hereafter return . . . and would reign with his followers a thousand years in Palestine." (Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., Page 50)
"Cerinthus required his followers to retain part of the Mosaical law, but to regulate their lives by the example of Christ: and taught that after the resurrection Christ would reign upon earth, with his faithful disciples, a thousand years, which would be spent in the highest sensual indulgences. This mixture of Judaism and Oriental philosophy was calculated to make many converts, and this sect soon became very numerous. They admitted a part of St. Matthew's Gospel but rejected the rest, and held the epistles of St. Paul in great abhorrence." (Gregory and Ruter's Church History., Page 30)
"Even though the floods of the nations and the vain superstitions of heretics should revolt against their true faith, they are overcome, and shall be dissolved as the foam, because Christ is the rock by which, and on which, the church is founded. And thus it is overcome by no [16] traces of maddened men. Therefore they are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years; who think, that is to say, with the heretic Cerinthus. For the kingdom of Christ is now eternal in his saints." (From a commentary on the Apocalypse, by Victorinus, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
Regarding how well received and believed this idea of an earthly millenial reign of Christ and the pre-millenial ressurection actually was, contrary to the assertion above, it was not generally believed. And, contrary to the assertions made about Origen by some, his position was not influenced by gnostic belief. His attacks were not based on a "wish" to have literal interpretations discarded, etc. He was a brilliant apologist and theologian, the finest of the Early Church.
The first distinguished opponent of this doctrine was Origen, who attacked it with great earnestness and ingenuity, and seems, in spite of some opposition to have thrown it into general discredit." (Wadington's History, Page 56).
"This obscure doctrine was probably known to but very few except the Fathers of the church, and is very sparingly mentioned by them during the first two centuries; and there is reason to believe that it scarcely attained much notoriety even among the learned Christians, until it was made a matter of controversy by Origen, and then rejected by the great majority. In fact we find Origen himself asserting that it was confined to those of the simpler sort.
(Wadington's History, Page 56).
Schaff has this to say regarding Millenialism and a particular proponent of it, Nepos :
He taught that the promises given to holy men in the scriptures should be understood more as the Jews understood them, and supposed that there would be a certain Millennium of sensual luxury on this earth: thinking, therefore, that he could establish his own opinion by the Revelation of John . . . He (Nepos) asserts that there will be an earthly reign of Christ.
Though Millennialism had been suppressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects.
(Dr. Schaff's History, Page 299).
The assertions that have been made about chilaism in defense of dispensationalism simply do not hold up to an honest look at history, but are the result of revisionist tendencies employed by those who have promoted this theology.
Chilaism, pre-millenialism, is absent as a teaching of the Church. It does not resurface again as a teaching in any significant way until the birth of Dispensationalism in the 1800's by Darby and promoted heavily by Scofield at the turn of the century . .
As I have been stating, this is not a prophetic book, it is an apocalyptic book
It is, of the APOCALYPTIC genre of books in the bible . . the strongest of them all.
Notice, it is not described as prophetic.
