“The Millennium”
1000 Year Reign of Christ

A Report
Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Course
Bibl 450-B09

By
Rodney Courson
Student ID # L03489834

February, 2011

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………..….3
AMILLENNIALISM…………………………………………………………………....3
The Origin of Amillennialism………………………………………………….…4
The View of Amillennialism’s Strengths and Weaknesses……………................4
POSTMILLENNIALISM……………………………………………………………..…6
The Origin of Postmillennialism……………………………………………….….7
The View of Postmillennialism’s Strengths and Weaknesses…………………….8
PREMILLENNIALISM………………………………………………………………..…8
The Origin of Premillennialism……………………………………………………9
The View of Premillennialism’s Strengths and Weaknesses………………………9
CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………10
BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………11

INTRODUCTION
In the world of Christianity, there seems to be numerous debates on several topics of interpretation of Scripture. One of those debates is the interpretation of the millennial reign of Jesus Christ mentioned in Revelation 20. Many Bible students throughout the history of the church have been very divisive over the fact of this chapter being interpreted from a literal viewpoint or symbolically. With all the debate among the Bible students, there seems to be three distinctive views in which they view the millennium from an amillennialism, postmillennialism, and the premillennialism interpretations. In order for any serious Bible student to draw a fair conclusion of the interpretation it would be to clearly examine each interpretation in light of other Scriptures and closely analyze each one carefully.

AMILLENNIALISM
The amillennialist believe that the millennial reign of Christ is not a literal reign on the earth. There seems to be two primary positions that amillennialists have; first, that the promise of the Old Testament of the kingdom of the Messiah is now being fulfilled, in heaven, where Jesus Christ rules together with saints who have gone on to heaven. The second position is to believe that the Kingdom of Jesus Christ is currently being fulfilled now on earth through the church. In order to have these positions, when relating to the millennial reign of Christ, would be to interpret the related passages of Scripture as symbolic rather than literal.
The amillennialists understand that Revelations 20 is an outline of the church age that began with the resurrection of Jesus Christ all the way to the end of the age. When the end of the church age comes, according to the amillennialist interpretation, Christ will return and impose the great final judgment that will be to the righteous and the wicked. Daniel Akin mentions that those who hold fast this belief believe that Satan was bound at the death and resurrection of Christ, and that Satan’s control in deceiving the world has been restricted as the followers of Christ carry out the fulfillment of the Great Commission. This interpretation would therefore be that the saints’ reigning with Christ would not be a literal 1000 year reign as mentioned in Revelations 20:4.
Origin of Amillennialism
There seems to be very little evidence that gives an absolute establishment of the origin of the amillennialist viewpoint. There does seem to be a popular suggestion that Augustine was a contributor to the amillennialist interpretation mainly because he was of the first to suggest that the 20th chapter of Revelations should be understood to be symbolic rather than literal. There appears to be a lot of similarities between the postmillennialism and amillennialism viewpoints primarily in the view of the reign of Christ being more of a heavenly reign with the saints. In fact, there doesn’t seem to be much difference in the two until the 20th century when the views of the postmillennialism began to diminish.
The View of Amillennialism’s Strengths and Weaknesses
If there is any strength to the amillennialist’s view it would appear that it would be the simplicity of the position. Their interpretation would be that the Book of Revelations is to be mainly interpreted as symbolically and not literal. Since the amillennialist believe that the vast majority of Revelations is symbolical, then the 20th chapter is not literal either, in which they have a consistency in the symbolic interpretation of the Book of Revelations. There defense for this view is that millennium is not mentioned anywhere else in all of Scripture.
However, the very position that seems to be the greatest strength also seems to be the greatest weakness. By taking a simple approach and interpreting the Book of Revelations as being symbolic leaves a host of problems. Looking at the main text, Revelations 20:4-5, the phrase “come to life” is mentioned in both verses in which verse 4 mentions the coming to life of the saints that will reign with Christ for the thousand years and verse 5 mentions the coming to life of those who do not come to life until the end of the thousand year reign. If the verses are to be interpreted as being symbolic, this would indicate that these two phrases in the verse, that are identical, have to be interpreted as two separate resurrections of the saints.
This sort of interpretation appears to be very improbable. The phrase in the verses are referring to the physical resurrection of the saints and there is no evidence to support that the phrase “come to life” would indicate two different meanings, making a weak argument for the amillennialist that there is two resurrections for the saints.
Another weakness of the view is that nothing in Scripture would indicate the saints’ reign with Christ is an out-of-body experience. Ironic enough that Jesus speaks to the church of Thyatira that in the end, they together with Christ, will rule the nations with an iron scepter and they (saints) would tear against the other nations like a “piece of pottery” (Rev. 2:27). With Jesus using this sort of terminology, it sounds more like a literal rule of the saints in a physical sense rather than a spirit sense.
One more added weakness to the amillennialists view is that of the location and binding of Satan. The amillennialist believe that the binding of Satan and being sealed into the abyss, mentioned in Revelations 20:2-3, has already occurred. If this were true, how could we explain the absolute turmoil of deception that occurs daily all around us? Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian Church explaining that “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:4). It appears that Paul was speaking of Satan and indicates that Satan is very much at work during the Church Age and not bound.
POSTMILLENNIALISM
The postmillennialist believe that the 1000 year reign of Christ is literal, but rather an extended period of time in which Christ reign will be a spiritual reign rather than a physical reign. They also interpret that the millennial reign is after the whole world has been converted or saved. It will be the true Great Commission and after the conversion of the people there will be an ultimate peace and harmony time as Jesus will then rule over all the nations making Christ reign in the heart of the people. This seems to be sort of a hopeful analysis of the world becoming an improved place before the coming of Jesus Christ.
The postmillennialist gather this interpretation not from Revelations 20, nor from any other place in Revelation, but rather from an interpretation of Jesus’ teaching about the parables concerning the Kingdom of god in Matthew 13. They believe that the kingdom will grow, though slow at times, into the entire world. So, for this sort of building of the Kingdom, it will evidently be longer than a literal thousand years. Then after the worldwide peace comes, then Satan will let loose for one ultimate act of rebellion in which Christ will end it, thus leaving the people to begin the everlasting life.

Origin of Postmillennialism
The postmillennial view can be traced back to around the days of Constantine and was pretty much the main view from that point on, until the conclusion of the 19th century. During this timeline, as Christians were spreading the gospel of Christ they witnessed the fall of the Roman Empire, which was one of the biggest hindrances to the spreading of the gospel. After the Roman Empire began to fade away, Christians witnessed Christianity’s growth like that of Acts and believed that it would continue until the entire world was converted and Christ would come to reign by the actual year 1000.
However, as the year 1000 A.D. came and went, this theory had to be altered and readjusted. So from that point on the literal interpretation of the thousand years was being a literal thousand years but rather symbolic of the entire church history. Even though many people were leaning towards a belief in the postmillennialist view, especially after the 19th century saw an extreme rise in the missionary work all over the globe, but the view lost its luster during the 20th century as the world witnessed two world wars and a host of wars continually being fought all over the planet. Now with the constant threat of a nuclear war and terrorist attacks, it appears that the postmillennialist view has faded away and has very little followers, predominately the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
The View of Postmillennialism’s Strengths and Weaknesses
The postmillennialist view doesn’t have much of any strength due to the fact there is little support of it from Scripture. Maybe the only strength would be the fact concerning the spreading of the Gospel throughout the world. Postmillennialist often quote the fact that Jesus stated, concerning the end of times, in Matthew 24:14, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”
The weaknesses seem to really mount up as the views of postmillennialism are held up in light of the Scriptures. There is not one verse of Scripture to point towards the circumstances of this world becoming better before coming of Christ. In order for that to occur, one would have to believe that the enemy of the believers (Satan) would have to be bound or in a place where he could not interfere in the lives of the people. As it was discussed earlier, it very evident that Satan has not been bound and will not be bound until it is Christ that will come and bind Satan up and seal him into the abyss.
PREMILLENNIALISM
The premillennialist view is that Jesus’ return or second coming will be a literal return to the earth personally and physically to begin a literal one thousand year reign with the resurrected believers over the entire earth. The premillennialist have historically believed that Christ will restore to life those that believed in Him as their Savior prior to His second coming, in which this will begin their reign with Christ as promised. At that time, the armies of the world will come to fight against Christ at the final battle called Armageddon in which Christ will destroy the armies with a spoken word and then Christ will bind Satan for a literal thousand years. The people that are not destroyed will then submit to the reign and ruling of Jesus and the saints. These survivors will continue to live on the earth as they will repopulate it as well. The world will never be at war with one another due to Christ and His saints ruling the world in peace. Premillennialist believe that after the thousand years is up, Satan will be released for a short period and will lead a rebellion against Christ with the people who remained. After the short period Satan again will suffer a final defeat and then the final judgment of the wicked.
Origin of Premillennialism
From the start of the early church, it is believed that the premillennial view was the foremost millennial view. Many of the early church leaders believed that Jesus would return rather quickly as they suffered severe persecution. Unfortunately the premillennial view lost support due to the amillennial view of Augustine and the fact Christ did not return as quickly as they thought. Today, premillennialism has began to be the main view by many of the evangelicals.

The View of Premillennialism’s Strengths and Weaknesses
The premillennialist view has many solid strengths mainly because it a clear and likely interpretation of Revelations 20. The view is more logical, in comparison to the others, as it gives the martyrs hope throughout Revelations in which they that overcome will be resurrected and will reign with Christ as they rule over the nations of the world. This view will also agree and support the Old Testament prophecies which speak of Christ having an earthly messianic reign in a time that death, sin, and enemies of Christ still present.
There is an argument for a weakness in the premillennial view concerning the rebellion mentioned towards the end of Christ’s millennial reign. The argument is that concerning who those people are, because Jesus spoke that at the end of the age, people would no longer be able to marry (Luke 20:35). So the argument would be that if there is no one in a natural body, then the possibility of a rebellion would not be.
CONCLUSION
In order to come to a fair conclusion on the most appropriate view of the millennial reign of Christ, would be the process of elimination of the views best supported with Scripture. Of the three views, the postmillennial view seems to be the least favorable in light of Scripture. To believe that the entire world will become so much better and all of the earth will accept Christianity and Christ is hard to comprehend. Especially when it is reported that missionary efforts are on the decline and people are converting to other religions in record numbers. There also appears of no supporting Scripture of the fact that the conditions of the world will ever improve to the extent of Christ coming because of it.
The amillennial view has too much of a weakness especially in the area of the belief that Satan is currently bound. As anyone would see with the current affairs of the world, as well as the given past conditions, it is evident that Satan is very much at work in the work around us. The struggle to understand the different possible resurrections that is mentioned in Revelation 20:4-5 lacks a solid foundation of interpretation of these passages.
The premillennial view has the strongest supported Scriptures to show that the return of Christ during the millennial reign will be a literal 1000 years as well as an earthly return. This is supported by numerous of other verses outside of Revelation 20, which would indicate that Christ’s return is a physical return to reign with His saints. In fact, more of the prophecies in the Old Testament concerning the coming of the messiah spoke about His second coming rather than the first. The belief that the binding of Satan is an event to come is more accurate giving that evidence of the deception that has been going on in the world since the beginning. Peter even mentioned that the devil walks about as a “roaring lion” in search of people that he could devour (1 Peter 5:8-9). This surely doesn’t appear that Satan is anything but loose and very much at work.
It appears that the premillennial view is the best and is clearly in agreement with other Scriptures. As a premillennialist, I look forward to the Rapture of the Church and to the time when Christ shall rule the earth. Jesus Himself told us that the whole world will hear the Gospel and “then the end shall come” (Matthew 24:14).

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1) Elmer L. Towns, Theology for Today (Belmont: Wadsworth, 2002), 800.
2) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), 1218.
3) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), 908.
4) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), 1219
5) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p. 1220
6) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), 908.
7) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1213
8) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1215
9) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1213
10) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1214
1) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology for the Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), 910
2) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology for the Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
3) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology for the Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
4) Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1215
5) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology for the Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
6) Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology for the Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
7) James Montgomery Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1986), p.705

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. Elmer L. Towns, Theology For Today (Belmont: Wadsworth, 2002), 800.
[ 2 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), 1218.
[ 3 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), 908.
[ 4 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), 1219
[ 5 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p. 1220
[ 6 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), 908.
[ 7 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1213
[ 8 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1215
[ 9 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1213
[ 10 ]. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1214
[ 11 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), 910
[ 12 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
[ 13 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
[ 14 ]. Millard J. Erickson , Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2001), p.1215
[ 15 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
[ 16 ]. Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology For The Church (Nashville: B & H Publishing, 2007), p.911
[ 17 ]. James Montgomery Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1986), p.705