Thankyou George. My mind is not on "absorption function" today. I've started reading your essay, but I'm racing to get out the door at the same time. I'll get back to you on this at a later time. Again, tks!

> MILLENNIUM - May, 2004

> Introduction

> Before calendars turned over at midnight in
> 1999, the word “millennium” was used quite a
> lot in the media. Apocalyptic movies and
> writers of end-time fiction make regular use
> of it, as well. Whether or not people know
> it by its proper name or understand its
> biblical underpinnings, the kind of
> millennialism most westerners are familiar
> with is premillennialism.

> This paper will undertake to look at
> competing views which may be less familiar:
> amillennialism and postmillennialism; their
> origins, something about the groups that
> adhere to them today, and a very general
> comparison of these views with
> premillennialism.

> What is the Millennium?

> The millennium (Latin for “thousand years”)
> of Revelation 20 -- the only New Testament
> passage that deals with the subject -- is a
> time when: (verses 1-3) Satan is bound in a
> bottomless pit, unable to deceive the
> nations, and (vs. 4-5) “the souls of them
> that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus,
> and for the word of God, and which had not
> worshipped the beast, neither his image,
> neither had received [his] mark upon their
> foreheads, or in their hands” would live and
> reign with Christ “as priests of God”; after
> which (vs. 7-10), “Satan shall be loosed out
> of his prison, and shall go out to deceive
> the nations…to gather them together to
> battle” against the Lord and his saints,
> precipitating the destruction of the
> attacking armies by fire from heaven,
> followed by Satan’s being cast into the lake
> of fire and the beginning of the final
> judgment (vs. 11-15) of all people before
> the Great White Throne.

> Literal or Symbolic?

> A major source of disagreement over the
> millennium is the question of whether it is
> literal or figurative. Both amillennialists
> and postmillennialists believe it to be
> symbolic, interpreting the thousand years as
> being accomplished, in one sense or another,
> in the interim between Christ’s ascension
> into heaven and His second coming, i.e. the
> “church age”. Premillennialists, such as
> Wayne Grudem and Timothy LaHaye (of the
> “Left Behind” book series), though they
> differ on important points, both take a
> literal approach to this passage, with Satan
> physically bound and saints ruling over an
> earthly kingdom of Christ for a thousand
> solar years (This view was originally called
> “chiliasm”, from the Greek word chiliá,
> “thousand”).

> The debate has carried on unresolved since
> the very early days of Christianity.
> “Literalists” warn “symbolists” that they
> are not giving proper credence to the Word
> of God. “Symbolists” claim that
> “literalists” miss the primary meaning of
> the Word, and dishonor God in another way.
> Each side claims that historical
> Christianity supports its view and places
> the other in the wrong. This writer makes no
> pretense of being able to settle the issue,
> but hopes to illuminate the bases for some
> of the arguments, to demonstrate to the
> reader that honest believers, who take the
> Bible seriously and study it earnestly, may
> differ to a surprising degree, and still
> qualify as Christians.

> Claims and Counter-claims

> From the time of Mathetes in A.D. 90 to
> Augustine in A.D. 386, by this writer’s
> count, 30% of post-apostolic church leaders
> can be said to have had chiliastic views,
> while 23% were either unclear about what
> they believed or wrote nothing at all on the
> subject. The remaining 47% held to some form
> of postmillennialism (Until the twentieth
> century, when the term was first coined,
> amillennialism was considered a sort of
> sub-category of belief within
> postmillennialism. Thus, the argument,
> historically, has been mostly between
> premillennialism and postmillennialism).

> One of the earliest chiliasts was Papias
> (A.D. 80-163), a disciple of Polycarp, who
> was a disciple of John. So it might be
> thought that this idea originated with the
> revelator himself. Certainly the idea of a
> physical kingdom of God might seem to be
> consistent with arguments against
> proto-Gnostic teachings that threatened to
> distort the gospel message in John’s day.
> But early church historian Eusebius of
> Caesarea (A.D. 263-340) says that it came
> instead from Cerinthus, whom John considered
> a heretic:

> "About the same time…appeared
> Cerinthus, the leader of another heresy.
> Caius, in The Disputation attributed to him,
> writes respecting him: ‘But Cerinthus, by
> means of revelations which he pretended as
> if they were showed him by angels,
> asserting, that after the resurrection there
> would be an earthly kingdom of Christ, and
> that flesh, i.e. men, again inhabiting
> Jerusalem, would be subject to desires and
> pleasures. Being also an enemy to the divine
> scriptures, with a view to deceive men, he
> said that there would be a space of a
> thousand years for celebrating nuptial
> festivals.’" (The History of the
> Church)

> Tertullian (A.D. 140-230) also attributes
> the origins of chiliasm to Cerinthus. He
> writes, "They are not to be heard who
> assure themselves that there is to be an
> earthly reign of a thousand years, who think
> with the heretic Cerinthus. For the Kingdom
> of Christ is now eternal in the saints,
> although the glory of the saints shall be
> manifested after the resurrection."
> (The Writings of Tertullian)

> Origen (A.D. 185-254) seems to refer to the
> same teaching when he says, “Certain
> persons, then, refusing the labor of
> thinking, and adopting a superficial view of
> the letter of the law, and yielding rather
> in some measure to the indulgence of their
> own desires and lusts, being disciples of
> the letter alone, are of the opinion that
> the fulfillment of the promises of the
> future are to be looked for in bodily
> pleasure and luxury . . . And consequently
> they say, that after the resurrection there
> will be marriages, and the begetting of
> children, imagining to themselves that the
> earthly city of Jerusalem is to be rebuilt…”

> It might be argued that those criticizing
> chiliasm were more concerned with the speck
> in their brother’s eye than they were about
> the beam in their own. Didn’t Tertullian
> wander off into Montanism? And wasn’t Origen
> accused of blending the Gospel with
> Platonism and Stoicism? Whatever the case,
> after Augustine, premillennialism all but
> disappeared, inextricably linked, in the
> minds of many (and officially linked, in the
> Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches),
> with other heretical ideas. Reformers, as
> well, distanced themselves from
> premillennialism as its reputation was
> further sullied by embarrassing episodes
> such as the Anabaptist uprising in Münster
> in 1534.

> Only in the early part of the twentieth
> century, since C.I. Scofield’s
> popularization of J.N. Darby’s concept of
> dispensationalism has premillennialism
> returned to respectability and ascendancy
> among Protestants. Today, proponents –
> mostly evangelicals – include Hal Lindsey,
> Tim LaHaye, and Christian television’s Jack
> and Rexella Van Impe. Serious theological
> writings have come from H.A. Ironside,
> Charles Ryrie, and a variety of authors from
> Dallas Theological Seminary. Their view
> features a pre-tribulational rapture of the
> church, with special status given to Jews in
> a reconstructed Davidic kingdom
> headquartered in Jerusalem.

> Systematic Theology author Wayne Grudem
> endorses a less popular, but theologically
> well-respected type of premillennialism --
> historical (or classical) premillennialism.
> His view is shared by early church fathers
> Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and Papias; the
> late George Eldon Ladd of Fuller Theological
> Seminary, Walter Martin, Pat Robertson, and
> current scholars from Trinity Evangelical
> Divinity School. Historical premillennialism
> sees the return of Jesus as coming after the
> tribulation, with less of a distinction
> between the church and Israel in the
> millennial kingdom.

> Distinguishing Amillennialism from
> Postmillennialism

> Both of these systems of interpretation
> agree on one thing: that Jesus will return
> after the millennium. Amillennialists are
> consistent in their belief that the
> millennium is spiritual; that it represents
> the time period between Christ’s first and
> second comings; that God’s kingdom is
> established through the preaching and
> demonstration of the Gospel, which Satan is
> unable to withstand, having been bound by
> “the Strong Man” in His victory at the
> cross. At the end of the millennial age,
> Christ returns, the general resurrection
> occurs, final judgment takes place for all
> men and women, and a new Heaven and Earth
> are established. This has been the
> prevailing view of the church since
> Augustine. Included are the Catholic and
> Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Reformers,
> and churches of both Reformed and Lutheran
> confessions. Contemporary writers endorsing
> amillennialism are J.I. Packer and the late
> Anthony Hoekema.

> Postmillennialists are divided as to whether
> the millennial age is figurative
> (representing simply a long period of time)
> or literal (a thousand years), and if
> literal, at what point it actually begins.
> Some say it has already begun. Others
> believe that it will begin with the
> conversion of Israel, or the binding of
> Satan, or the defeat of the Antichrist. At
> any rate, postmillennialists say that, at
> some point during the present age, the
> kingdom of God triumphs over the kingdoms of
> this world.

> How this comes about is also a source of
> disagreement. Postmillennial “pietists”,
> typified by the Dominion Theology of Earl
> Paulk, adhere to the belief that individual
> conversions will gradually bring about the
> transformation of society, ushering in a
> time of God’s special blessing in peace and
> plenty before the return of Christ.
> “Theonomists” or “Christian
> Reconstructionists” among them believe it
> will be accomplished through the imposition
> of Old Testament law in societies in which
> Christians take seriously the Genesis
> mandate to “subdue the Earth” (Professor
> Gilbert Bilezikian, of Wheaton College calls
> them “Christian ayatollahs”). This view,
> developed by Marcellus Kik and R.J.
> Rushdoony, finds acceptance primarily in
> conservative Presbyterian and Reformed
> churches, and is promoted by authors Greg
> Bahnsen, Gary North, David Chilton, Gary
> DeMar, and Kenneth Gentry Jr.

> “Thy kingdom come”. Who’d have thought there
> were this many theological implications in
> the prayer we’ve prayed so many times?

> Bibliography

> Books

> Friedrich, Otto, The End of the World – A
> History, New York, Coward, McCann &
> Geoghegan, 1982

> Geisler, Norman L., and MacKenzie, Ralph E.,
> Roman Catholics and Evangelicals –
> Agreements and Differences, Grand Rapids,
> MI, Baker Books, 1995

> Gonzáles, Justo L., A History of Christian
> Thought, vols. 1 and 2 (Revised), Nashville,
> TN, Abingdon, 1991

> Grudem, Wayne, Systematic Theology, Grand
> Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1994

> Kyle, Richard, The Last Days are Here Again,
> Grand Rapids, MI, Baker, 1998

> Sproul, R.C., The Last Days according to
> Jesus, Grand Rapids, MI, Baker, 1998

> Internet

>
> http://www.preteristarchive.com/GeneralStudies/gs_comparison-chart.html
>
> http://members.aol.com/twarren19/athacreed.html
>
> http://www.northforest.org/classic/kingisrael/h002h000.html
>
> http://www.orthodoxphotos.com/readings/end/chiliasm.shtml
>
> http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Larsen-SomeKeyIssuesInTheHis.pdf
>
> http://www.catholic.com/library/Rapture.asp