# Are the Geneva Bible notes postmillennial?



## SeanAnderson (Jun 17, 2015)

I've been reading Junius' notes on Revelation in the 1599 Geneva Bible, and he makes a compelling historicist case.

There were others at the time with very similar interpretations: https://creationconcept.wordpress.com/2012/05/20/richard-baxter-on-the-millennium/

The position is technically postmillennial, since the the millennium has already been fulfilled, but all of the postmillennialists I come across today believe that the millennium is a golden age yet to come, immediately followed by the final judgment. Therefore, is it correct to call Junius' position postmillennial?


----------



## Beau Michel (Jun 17, 2015)

The Geneva Bible was the Bible of the Puritans. The notes in Geneva were definitely from a PostMillenial perspective.


----------



## SeanAnderson (Jun 18, 2015)

On further cursory reading, it looks like Thomas Brightman was a pioneer of the idea of a future golden age/millennium before the final judgment.

He interpreted much of Revelation in the same way other Reformed had - the millennium, as a literal time period, was fulfilled. But he also believed in a 'second millennium' (where the thousand years are twice mentioned in Revelation 20), by which he hinted at an indeterminate period of time before the judgment. I don't believe, however, that he was the only one who was optimistic about the pre-judgment period, even among those who believed in a fulfilled millennium.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 19, 2015)

I have a question Sean. I have not studied the millennial views much. I have read a few books such as Hoekema The Future and the Bible, Venema's The Promise of the future, a four views booklet and a few other Amil books. Of course I have read books that refuted Dispensational thought. I don't think I have ever read a book positing two Millennial periods. I know that Amillennialism is a rather new term. In Venema's book the Amill view was expressed through Post Mil during earlier periods, if I remember correctly. As I understand it some Posties held to the view that Satan was bound when Christ came. I can't quote any sources. And I have long given Venema's book away. Am I correct in what I am saying about Post Mil, that there were various understandings through the ages concerning Post Millennialism? Some believed it started at the binding of Satan (it might not be a literal 1K) and we are moving closer and closer to the Earth entering a "Golden Age", and some believe the there was a literal 1K period that was still a futuristic Promise? In other words there were many various views.


----------



## SeanAnderson (Jun 19, 2015)

There's a brief talk of some who held to a fulfilled millennium, and the dating thereof, on this blog post: https://creationconcept.wordpress.com/2012/05/20/richard-baxter-on-the-millennium/

This seems to be a 'modified Augustinianism' in the sense that, instead of an indefinite millennium between the two advents, the millennium was limited to the flourishing of the early Church, largely based on a historicist interpretation of the prophecies, including the papal Antichrist. 

There are some, like Brightman, who followed this interpretation, but also believed in a future age of glory before the final judgment. If you search for _Brightman second millennium_ on Google, you can find some of the resources I came across on Google Books. There are subsequently others who followed this optimistic postmillennialism. Brightman actually believed that the two mentions of 1,000 years in Revelation referred to two different millennia, from what I've read. I'm not sure how that can be justified, neither can I find evidence that any others interpreted the text in such a way, even those who spoke of a future glorious age before the second advent. But in the historical context, with the Reformation and several governments becoming more hostile to Rome, Reformed Christians would have perceived Christ's upcoming victory being increasinly realized.


----------

