Supporting a Premillenial View of the End Times

Introduction

In Christianity, eschatology (the study of the end times) is defined by the study of the last days with the physical return of Jesus Christ in his second coming and the final judgment of God for the righteous who will enter into everlasting life and judgment for the unrighteous who will enter into everlasting death. Jesus Christ himself referred many times to the last days and after his resurrection and ascension, the writers of the New Testament place themselves in the last days. Some of the things that are clear from these passages is that while nobody knows exactly when, Jesus is definitely coming again. And leading up to his return, there will be a rise in tribulation as well as an expansion of the gospel to the ends of the earth. It is also clear from Scripture that we are currently living in the end times. However, changes in the scope of influence of the Christian faith in the world over the last 2,000 years as well as solidifying of doctrine and theology has led to a variety of emphases regarding eschatology. 

In his book “Historical Theology,” Gregg Allison highlights the contribution of world events in addition to changing theological convictions, such as the Protestant Reformation, that shaped the prevailing interpretation of the end times, especially in regards to the return of Jesus Christ in relation to the millennial kingdom described in Revelation 20:1-10. Looking at the writings of early Christians such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Tertullian and others, Allison showed that the early church held a strong belief that the return of Jesus would inaugurate the 1,000 year millennium kingdom which is defined as the historical premillennial view. However, as Christianity gained influence by becoming the state religion of the Roman empire, there was also a growing aversion to the premillennial emphasis of “luxurious material blessings.” And so, the premillennial view was superseded by a more symbolic interpretation of the millennium kingdom by church leaders such as Clement, Origen and Augustine. They interpreted the millennial kingdom in Revelation 20 figuratively to represent the current age of the Church which is defined as the amillennial view.

But with the rise of the age of the Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th century and the victory over imperialism through the Revolutionary War in America, the hopeful possibility of endless progress and prosperity led to the rise of another view of eschatology, one where the return of Christ would occur after a period of prosperity of the Church in all the world defined as the postmillennial view. In his book “The Last Things,” David Hohne also observes the influence of historical and political context to the interpretation of eschatology. He writes, “millennialism for those who experience persecution, or who have a political minority status, tend to be more premillennial, as traditionally defined, while those who enjoy political power, even if it is simply peace and prosperity, reflect a more postmillennial view.” With the influence of historical and political context in mind, I would support the premillennial view primarily through historical and biblical support.

Support for the Premillennial View

The main consideration that needs to be made in viewing the millennial kingdom is to decide on whether the millennial year rule of Christ is figurative as the amillennial view suggests or if it is literal. According to the premillennial view, the millennial kingdom is a literal kingdom which Jesus Christ will establish with his second coming. And in this premillennial view, the duration of this millennial kingdom can be viewed as exactly 1,000 years or just a symbolic figure of a long period of time. Regardless of the interpretation of how long the millennial kingdom will last, the premillennial view interprets that this millennial kingdom will be a real kingdom established with the return of Christ in his resurrected body and ruled by Christ in the physical world.

In contrast, the amillennial view holds that our current age is the figurative millennial kingdom. It argues that the binding of Satan to keep him from deceiving the nations (Revelation 20:2-3) is what Jesus essentially did during his ministry on earth as well as through his death and resurrection so that the gospel could advance to the ends of the earth. This view interprets the rule of Jesus Christ to be of a heavenly nature and the “first resurrection” of the faithful who are chosen to rule with him is a spiritual resurrection for the soul to be with Christ in heaven until the final bodily resurrection of all the righteous and the unrighteous for the Day of Judgment. In a similar way, the postmillennial view also leans towards a figurative view of the millennial kingdom by looking forward to an era of church history where Christianity will have a predominant influence over the culture and governments of the entire world.

However, in his book “Systematic Theology,” Wayne Grudem makes a strong argument for a literal and distinct millennial kingdom through the descriptions of this kingdom in the Old Testament. Distinct from the new heavens and the new earth described after the final judgment where there will no longer be death and all will worship Jesus as Lord, the millennial kingdom includes unbelievers who will come to faith in Jesus Christ (Isaiah 11:10-11). And in Isaiah 11:6-9, the millennial kingdom will have a distinct “renewal of nature that takes us far beyond the present age,” where there will be peace between predatory animals and their prey. We also find in other places, like Zechariah 14:5-17, the depiction of the millennial kingdom to include people who will still rebel against God and die in sin that correlate with the fact that after the millennial kingdom, “Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth” (Revelation 20:7-8). 

In these ways, the millennial kingdom as described in the Scriptures is unlikely to be the current age of the church as argued by amillennialists or simply the Christianization of the world as argued by postmillennialists. Not only was the premillennial view the predominant view held by the early church living during and shortly after the time when the New Testament writings were written, it is the most straightforward interpretation of the millennial kingdom found in Revelation 20:1-10 and supported by the Old Testament prophecies as well. 

Implications of a Premillennial View

Studying eschatology and desiring to understand the details of the end times is not purely an academic endeavor. It impacts the perspective of Christian faithfulness and the mission of the church. It may be difficult to maintain the urgency found in the early church regarding their expectations for the imminent return of Christ after having waited over 2,000 years but it is not unbiblical. As the psalmist says in Psalm 90:4 and the Apostle Peter echoes in 2 Peter 3:8, “with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” We can trust in Peter’s encouragement that “the Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise” and that “the day of the Lord will come like a thief” (2 Peter 3:8-10) swiftly and surely.

Holding an amillennial or postmillennial view may lean towards a more optimistic view of the current age and encourage the church to continue to work towards the redemption and restoration of godliness and holiness but the premillennial view helps Christians put the final hope in Christ and not in the ministry we have been given to steward. The premillennial view also prepares the church to face trials and tribulations of many kinds and prepare for the increase of our suffering as believers. In these ways, a church formed in the premillennial view will be helped to remain faithful to Christ just as Christ is with us to the end of the age.