Differentiating Amillennialism and Postmillenialism
- Thread starter cthorn14
- Start date
- Status
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
About the dating of Revelation, and in particular Irenaeus, I'd like to quote from Richard D. Phillips', Revelation, Reformed Expository Commentary. If pressed I'll show further evidence to demonstrate its solidity.
And more on Irenaeus' testimony, which some doubt:
From G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, in The New International Greek Testament Commentary series (his larger commentary) :
I should add to this that every time Paul speaks of the temple of God in New Testament times he refers to a spiritual – figurative – application of it, for example: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” (1 Cor 3:16).* Likewise in Revelation, it is only and always figuratively that John uses the word temple. With respect to Rev 1:11, when John is told, “Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein”, we get the clear clue in the last phrase that this is symbolic: the measuring them that worship. In the OT the measuring by divine command has significance. I’ll briefly quote from William Hendriksen’s More Than Conquerors to illustrate:
* With regard to 1 Cor 9:13, “Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?” This pertains to the OT practices / laws applicable to the priests and Levites in the temple while its worship was legitimate and (sometimes) acceptable to God. In Paul’s day – even though he mentions this – in spirit and truth the Levitical worship was null and void, unacceptable to God. The true temple was the people of God, the body of Christ (John 2:19,20,21), and that temple in God’s heaven.
'Equally important is the date of Revelation’s writing. The strong consensus among evangelical scholars holds that John wrote Revelation during the last years of the emperor Domitian’s reign, probably around A.D. 95. This dating agrees with the early church tradition through Irenaeus, who said that it was given “not a very long time since, but almost in our own day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign” [Ante-Nicene Fathers, Roberts and Donaldson, eds., 1:416].
'Some scholars argue instead that Revelation was written much earlier, before the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. Most who hold this view argue that Revelation does not look forward to the return of Christ but only prophesies Jerusalem’s destruction. Important to this argument is the assignment of the symbolic number 666 to the mad emperor Nero, who first persecuted Christian in Rome.
'There are important reasons, along with Irenaeus’s testimony, for giving Revelation the later date of A.D. 95. First, the persecution described in Revelation involves the beast’s demand for worship, which corresponds not to Nero’s but to Domitian’s reign. Second, while there was no empirewide persecution in Domitian’s reign, there is evidence that severe persecution took place in the province of Asia, where the churches of Revelation were located, whereas there was no persecution in Asia during Nero’s reign. Finally, the description of the churches in Revelation 2 and 3 fits into the circumstances of the later date; indeed, at least one of the churches, Smyrna, may not have existed during the earlier period of Nero’s persecution.' (pp 11, 12)
And more on Irenaeus' testimony, which some doubt:
From G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, in The New International Greek Testament Commentary series (his larger commentary) :
‘The consensus among twentieth-century scholars is that the Apocalypse was written during the reign of Domitian around 94 A.D. A minority of commentators have dated it immediately prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.’ (p 4)
___
‘The testimony of the earliest patristic authors supports a date during the time of Domitian. The most important of these witnesses are Irenaeus, Victorinus of Pettau, Eusebius, and possibly Clement of Alexandria and Origen.
‘The most decisive witness is Irenaeus, who, in discussing the identity of the Antichrist in Revelation, writes, “We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of the Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the Apocalypse. For it was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign.” [italics GKB’s] A few commentators have suggested that “it was seen” should be translated “he [John] was seen,” so that the phrase does not mean that the Apocalypse was written during Domitian’s time but only that John was seen during Domitian’s time. But the Apocalypse is the closest antecedent, and the Latin translation of Irenaeus supports this understanding of the clause. The majority of patristic writers and subsequent commentators up to the present understand Irenaeus’s words as referring to the time when the Apocalypse “was seen.” [GKB footnote: Even many espousing an early date for Revelation acknowledge this translation; e.g., Robinson, Redating, 221; Hort (Swete, Apocalypse).]’ (pp 19, 20)]
___I should add to this that every time Paul speaks of the temple of God in New Testament times he refers to a spiritual – figurative – application of it, for example: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” (1 Cor 3:16).* Likewise in Revelation, it is only and always figuratively that John uses the word temple. With respect to Rev 1:11, when John is told, “Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein”, we get the clear clue in the last phrase that this is symbolic: the measuring them that worship. In the OT the measuring by divine command has significance. I’ll briefly quote from William Hendriksen’s More Than Conquerors to illustrate:
‘Why this measuring? What does it mean? On the basis of the immediate context, the parallel expression (21:15), and the Old Testament background (Ezek 40:5, 42:20; Zec 2:1), we arrive at the conclusion that measuring the sanctuary means to set it apart from that which is profane; in order that, thus separated, it may be perfectly safe and protected from all harm. The sanctuary is “accepted” while the court is “rejected”.’ (p 126)
* With regard to 1 Cor 9:13, “Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?” This pertains to the OT practices / laws applicable to the priests and Levites in the temple while its worship was legitimate and (sometimes) acceptable to God. In Paul’s day – even though he mentions this – in spirit and truth the Levitical worship was null and void, unacceptable to God. The true temple was the people of God, the body of Christ (John 2:19,20,21), and that temple in God’s heaven.
Last edited:
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
Hello Jason,
You said, "A common mistake that I've observed, and I've been guilty of it myself, is letting what we observe in the present time shape our eschatology more than the Word."
True, and rightly called "newspaper exegesis"! However, common sense also plays a part. For example, when the entire world is turning against the Christian faith, in more than just feelings and opinions, but enacting "hate laws" against gospel proclamation – even nations once friendly and open to hearing the Gospel – and when one sees governments, even in the once-free West, censoring dissidents and promoting serious disinformation to the end of establishing increasingly dictatorial control over its citizens, one might legitimately wonder what these new developments purport.
And there is the matter of sorcery – its widespread use for over half a century allowing demonic influence and presence into the collective human consciousness, to the point where it appears a madness of sorts has taken hold of both citizens and governments.
It is a taking seriously the state of our world and not ignoring certain developments that are distinct "signs of the times" spoken of in Scripture (do you know sorcery is a specific development in the time of the end – Rev 18:23; 9:21?).
We are told that there is coming "little season" when Satan shall be loosed to deceive the nations once again. Of this William Hendriksen, respected New Testament commentator, discussing Rev 20:3,7,8,9,10, wrote,
Note that he wrote this around 1962! Were he writing today he would no doubt express himself far more strongly. We are being slaughtered in so many countries around the globe, and the “civilized” West appears to be gearing up for a massive dealing of the “problem of Christians” and their “witness” – which many can see, though it has been slow coming. It may well be speeding up.
We have become a laid-back bunch, thinking it shall be business as usual for the Christian. But not for long.
You said, "A common mistake that I've observed, and I've been guilty of it myself, is letting what we observe in the present time shape our eschatology more than the Word."
True, and rightly called "newspaper exegesis"! However, common sense also plays a part. For example, when the entire world is turning against the Christian faith, in more than just feelings and opinions, but enacting "hate laws" against gospel proclamation – even nations once friendly and open to hearing the Gospel – and when one sees governments, even in the once-free West, censoring dissidents and promoting serious disinformation to the end of establishing increasingly dictatorial control over its citizens, one might legitimately wonder what these new developments purport.
And there is the matter of sorcery – its widespread use for over half a century allowing demonic influence and presence into the collective human consciousness, to the point where it appears a madness of sorts has taken hold of both citizens and governments.
It is a taking seriously the state of our world and not ignoring certain developments that are distinct "signs of the times" spoken of in Scripture (do you know sorcery is a specific development in the time of the end – Rev 18:23; 9:21?).
We are told that there is coming "little season" when Satan shall be loosed to deceive the nations once again. Of this William Hendriksen, respected New Testament commentator, discussing Rev 20:3,7,8,9,10, wrote,
“. . . the era during which the church as a mighty missionary organization shall be able to spread the gospel everywhere is not going to last forever; not even until the moment of Christ’s second coming. Observe what is happening in certain countries even today. Are certain regions of this earth already entering Satan’s little season?” [emphasis added] (More Than Conquerors, pp 194-195)
Note that he wrote this around 1962! Were he writing today he would no doubt express himself far more strongly. We are being slaughtered in so many countries around the globe, and the “civilized” West appears to be gearing up for a massive dealing of the “problem of Christians” and their “witness” – which many can see, though it has been slow coming. It may well be speeding up.
We have become a laid-back bunch, thinking it shall be business as usual for the Christian. But not for long.
Polanus1561
Puritan Board Senior
Our eschatology should not be shaped by world events but it certainly does involve world events
So far, we have discussed some of the exegetical and theological differences and similarities between amillennialism and postmillennialism.
What are the most distinguishing differences in terms of application/practical outworking? I realize this question is extremely broad in nature. Obviously on the most important things we are agreed. Matthew 28:19-20 KJV.
My guess is that 'non-theonomic' post-mils would have more in common with a-mils than 'theonomic' post-mils where the rubber hits the road.
I have heard it said that post-mils tend to emphasize the building of institutions and missions. This is certainly the impression given in The Puritan Hope. Yet, my guess is that the majority of reformed seminaries in the US have an amillennial outlook.
RobertPGH1981
Puritan Board Sophomore
Amillenials view the world through the lens that good and evil will be in constant conflict until the return of Christ.
Post Millennials view the world through the lens that the gospel wins, and eventually, everybody will bow their knee to Jesus before he returns.
Based on these two generic views, would dictate how important being a cultural force is in spreading the gospel. Post-Mills tend to be more engaged with politics and other spheres due to the belief that the gospel needs to spread. Amillenials tend to view an equal force rising against the gospel, so they tend to not be as engaged with culture, but there is a camp of optimistic Amill's that view this cultural narrative as important.
Post Millennials view the world through the lens that the gospel wins, and eventually, everybody will bow their knee to Jesus before he returns.
Based on these two generic views, would dictate how important being a cultural force is in spreading the gospel. Post-Mills tend to be more engaged with politics and other spheres due to the belief that the gospel needs to spread. Amillenials tend to view an equal force rising against the gospel, so they tend to not be as engaged with culture, but there is a camp of optimistic Amill's that view this cultural narrative as important.
Yes sir this kind of speaks to my point. That was 60+ years ago. There has been something (war, catastrophe, natural disaster, apostasy, etc.) in every generation since the early church that the men of that time could point to as a sure indicator of the end, and yet here we are. I would just say that despite how things appear to us, the Lord "must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet" (1 Cor. 15:25).
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
Hello Jason,
You said, "I would just say that despite how things appear to us, the Lord 'must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet' (1 Cor 15:25)."
And the verses immediately before that declare, "...they that are Christ's at his coming . . . . [shall be made alive] (vv. 22, 23). . . . Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power" (1 Cor 15:24).
So yes, Christ will have "put down all rule and all authority and power" that opposes God's kingdom. The immense evil that arises shall be put down at the eschaton. John gives us a cameo of this in Rev 20:9, 10,
But your point is not made, as 60 years were evidently needed for things to develop to the current situation. Can you not see the extraordinary progress of evil over that period? Will you just blow it off with the old line, "There has been something (war, catastrophe, natural disaster, apostasy, etc.) in every generation since the early church that the men of that time could point to as a sure indicator of the end, and yet here we are"?
If you cannot see what is happening – evil of unprecedented immensity, not seen in every generation – I would term that severe myopia.
What I observe in the present time does not shape my eschatology more than the Word, rather the Word illumines what I observe.
You said, "I would just say that despite how things appear to us, the Lord 'must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet' (1 Cor 15:25)."
And the verses immediately before that declare, "...they that are Christ's at his coming . . . . [shall be made alive] (vv. 22, 23). . . . Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power" (1 Cor 15:24).
So yes, Christ will have "put down all rule and all authority and power" that opposes God's kingdom. The immense evil that arises shall be put down at the eschaton. John gives us a cameo of this in Rev 20:9, 10,
"And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
But your point is not made, as 60 years were evidently needed for things to develop to the current situation. Can you not see the extraordinary progress of evil over that period? Will you just blow it off with the old line, "There has been something (war, catastrophe, natural disaster, apostasy, etc.) in every generation since the early church that the men of that time could point to as a sure indicator of the end, and yet here we are"?
If you cannot see what is happening – evil of unprecedented immensity, not seen in every generation – I would term that severe myopia.
What I observe in the present time does not shape my eschatology more than the Word, rather the Word illumines what I observe.
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Junior
Is this true the world over? Are there not parts of the world currently experiencing great revival and reformation (just not largely in the West)?
DanSSwing
Puritan Board Sophomore
Not to mention that people of the World War 2 era might have a wee objection.
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
You are right, Andrew! For the LORD works despite the growth of immense evil. Even in these parts of the world experiencing great revival there is great evil. The Lord snatches some out of the fire to keep for Himself.
Sovereign Grace
Puritan Board Sophomore
A cake without heat will never rise.
- Status
Similar threads
