The Apple Doesn't Fall Far From the Tree

The Apostolic Origins of Historic Premillennialism

Mar 01, 2023

Thomas Clark Oden (1931–2016) “was an American Methodist theologian and religious author. He is often regarded as the father of the paleo-orthodox theological movement and is considered to be one of the most influential theologians of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century. He was Henry Anson Buttz Professor of Theology and Ethics at Drew University in New Jersey from 1980 until his retirement in 2004. He remained faculty emeritus until his death.”1

Paleo-orthodoxy “is a Protestant Christian theological movement in the United States which emerged in the late 20th and early 21st centuries and which focuses on the consensual understanding of the faith among the ecumenical councils and Church Fathers. It represents a calling for a return to "classical Christianity".”2

According to Oden, Premillennialism was the dominant position among the ant-Nicene (before 300AD) Fathers.3

Oden also says that, “The expectation of a messianic earthly reign of a thousand years is present before the time of Jesus in the literature of late Judaic apocalypticism. It held a strong conviction that the world as we know it is being readied for the consummation of God’s purpose.4

Premillennialism, based primarily upon a historical grammatical and futurist interpretation of Revelation 20, “is the time when the Messianic Deliverer is expected to reign on earth (Isa. 2:3; Dan. 7:14; Zech. 14:9). In this time it is expected that satan will be restrained (Rev. 20:2-3), that righteousness and peace will come to the whole world (Isa. 11:3-5; 2:4), and that the fruitfulness of the earth will increase abundantly (Isa 35:1-2).”5

Here is the historical lineage of this interpretive method traced directly from the Apostle John, author of the book of Revelation.

Polycarp

Polycarp (AD 69 – 155) “was a Christian bishop of Smyrna. According to the Martyrdom of Polycarp, he died a martyr, bound and burned at the stake, then stabbed when the fire failed to consume his body."

“Both Irenaeus and Tertullian say that Polycarp had been a disciple of John the Apostle, one of Jesus' disciples. In On Illustrious Men, Jerome writes that Polycarp was a disciple of John the Apostle and that John had ordained him as a bishop of Smyrna."6

Papias

Papias “was a Greek Apostolic Father, Bishop of Hierapolis and author who lived c. 60 – c. 130 AD.”

"Very little is known of Papias apart from what can be inferred from his own writings. He is described as "an ancient man who was a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp" by Polycarp's disciple Irenaeus.”7

“The fourth century church historian Eusebius considered Papias to be a primary source for the millennial views of early fathers. He wrote:

In these [Papias' accounts] he says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. . . . yet he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers, urging the antiquity of the man, were carried away by a similar opinion; as, for instance Irenaeus, or any other that adopted such sentiments."8

Irenaeus

“Irenaeus was a Greek (bishop) from Polycarp's hometown of Smyrna in Asia Minor, now İzmir, Turkey, born during the first half of the 2nd century. The exact date is thought to be between the years 120 and 140. Originating from Smyrna, he had seen and heard the preaching of Polycarp,”9

“Shirley Jackson Case summarizes Irenaeus' millennial view: This period of millennial bliss corresponds to the seventh day of rest following the six days of creation described in Genesis. During this time the earth is marvelously fruitful. Jerusalem is magnificently rebuilt, and the righteous joyfully become accustomed to the new life of incorruption. After this preliminary regime of bliss has passed, a final judgment of all the world is instituted, and the new heaven and the new earth are revealed. In this final state of blessedness the redeemed shall live in the presence of God, world without end.”10

When it comes to a correct interpretive method of eschatological/apocalyptic biblical material, especially the book of Revelation, it stretches credulity to think these men differ from the method used by non other than the author of the book himself, the Apostle John.

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

The alternative that arose to historic premillennialism is called amillennialism, which means, “no millennium”. It is based on the spiritual/idealist and/or the preterist interpretation of books like Revelation. It posits there will be no literal historical reign of Christ on earth for 1000 years. The 1,000 years is a symbolic number referring to the church age (current age). Amillennial Christians see the millennial age as occupying the entire period of time between the first and second coming of Christ. Generally speaking, amillennial Christians see the millennial age as one of both the triumph of the spiritual kingdom of God and the corresponding rise of evil in a stalemate. The millennium occurs primarily in heaven, the earth is always in tribulation until Christ’s final return. Amillennialists insist that the promises made to national Israel, as well as David and Abraham in the OT are fulfilled by Christ and the Church during this age, which is the millennium.

Preterist Approach – Revelation was fulfilled in the past, shortly after the time of writing. Maintains an early date to the writing of Revelation before 70 A.D. The events refer to the Fall of Jerusalem and the fall of the Roman Empire. The writings of Flavius Josephus have many parallels with Revelation.
Spiritual or Idealist Approach – There is no specific fulfillment of Bible prophecy, only spiritual lessons and recurring themes expressing themselves at multiple points in history. Prophecy can mean whatever your imagination sees fit to project upon the text.

“In the third century premillennialism began its historic decline, and it is admitted by all that opposition arose to premillennial ideas. Opponents of premillennialism are found in Gaius, Clement, Origen, Dionysius, and others. The form in which the attack came consisted in the adoption of the allegorizing method of interpreting Scripture in a manner which is no credit to amillennialism. Rutgers, though a determined foe of premillennialism, analyzes Clement, for instance, as follows: “Clement, engrossed and charmed by Greek philosophy, applied this erroneous allegorical method to Holy Writ. It was a one-sided emphasis: opposed to the real, the visible, phenomenal, spacial and temporal. A Platonic idealistic philosophy could not countenance carnalistic, sensualistic conceptions of the future as that advanced by chiliasm (premillennialism). It shook the very foundations on which chiliasm rested. Robertson observed that ‘it loosed its [chiliasm’s] sheet-anchor,—naïve literalism in the interpretation of Scripture.’“11

“Premillennialism is entirely confined to those who are conservative in their general theological position. Premillennialism has always been the foe of liberal theology and of unbelief in the Scriptures . . . (Amillennialism) was not the product of orthodox studies in the Scripture, nor of the application of tried and true hermeneutics. It was rather the subversion of the plain meaning of Scripture not only as applied to the millennial question but all other areas of doctrine . . . Opposition to premillennialism had its rise in the attackers of true Scriptural doctrine, and it was not until the time of Augustine (354-430) that one reputable adherent of amillennialism can be cited." (John F. Walvoord, long-time president of Dallas Theological Seminary)12

“The third century had its own continued witness to premillennialism, however. Among those who can be cited are Cyprian (200-258), Commodian (200-270), Nepos (230-280), Coracion (230-280), Victorinus (240-303), Methodius (250-311), and Lactantius (240-330).”13

The most important argument amillennialists use to support their case against apostolic premillennialism is found in the language of prophetic events using words like “soon”, “near”, and “at hand”. This language, according to them, cannot possibly refer to events that will occur 2,000 some odd years in the future. Below is my response to that claim: