In this article I will defend the Postmillennial position. I will add the disclaimer that an individual’s eschatology is not a church-dividing issue unless it produces already condemned heresies e.g., Origenism, and it would be wrong to treat it as such. I will only defend the postmillennial position as the position that makes sense of the apocalyptic prophecies of Scripture.
Definitions
Eschatology is the part of theology concerned with the understanding of the “last things” ie the future of the individual soul and humankind as a whole. So, understanding a person’s destination after death, the particular and final judgement, and the end times falls under eschatology. The end times refers to the end of the current age of human history and the beginning of the age to come. In Christian eschatology, particularly pertaining to the end of the age, the Millennium is the part of eschatology which affects how the end of days will be perceived and how one will approach discerning the “signs of the times”.
When speaking of the Millennium there are 3 main positions that can be subdivided into different views. Premillennialism (the belief that Jesus will come before the millennium and inaugurate it), amillennialism (the belief that the Church age is itself the millennium kingdom that precedes the second return of Jesus Christ) and postmillennialism (the belief that Jesus Christ will come after the millennium inaugurated by an inspired the Church).
Pertinent to understanding the differences between these views is understanding that they differ on:
When the Millennium will happen (before or after the return of Christ)
What the nature of the Millennium is (is it a physical earthly kingdom or purely one of a spiritual nature)
In order for any of the aforementioned eschatological views to ground your view of the last things, it has to do the following:
· Explain the Tribulation and other disastrous conditions on earth that the Scriptures say will happen prior to the Second Coming/Advent of Christ e.g. wars, apostacy, famine (Matthew 24; Revelation 15)
· Explain the optimistic verses that speak of great blessings and an increase in the knowledge of God that will come upon the earth (prior to the New Creation) mentioned in various passages in Scripture, and where Christ will rule the Earth (Revelation 20; Isaiah 2; Psalm 72).
· Explain the how present kingdom of God is and how it relates to the Millennial Kingdom “the Kingdom of God is at hand” (Mark 1:15; Matthew 3:2)
I will show that Postmillennialism makes sense of all of these better than any other view, first by showing how Postmillennialism makes sense of these passages and in fact the whole of Scripture in a Christocentric way, from the Creation to Incarnation to the Judgement.
Tribulation, suffering and apostacy
“For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.” – Matthew 24:21-22 KJV
For proponents of other views, Matthew 24-25, the Olivet Discourse, is the sliver bullet that takes down Postmillennialism, since the Church establishing the Millennium before Christ comes makes little sense given that Christ Himself mentions various troubles that will come upon the earth prior to the end. It appears easier for more pessimistic views such as premillennialism to explain these texts. However, there exists an explanation of these texts in the Postmillennial view that fits in with the rest postmillennialism, is parsimonious and that follows from the larger narrative of Scripture.
In Postmillennialism, the Great Tribulation is seen through a preterist lens. (Partial) Preterism is the view that some prophecies in Scripture have already been fulfilled, particularly this refers to the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a “judgment-coming” of Christ. However not all partial preterist believe that all of the listed prophecies have passed. Many partial preterists believe in a future Day of the Lord, Antichrist and even Great Tribulation. I believe that the Day of the Lord is in the future (2 Peter 3:8-10) and that there are past, present and future antichrist(s), however I will defend the view that the Great Tribulation mentioned in Scripture is already passed. If the Great Tribulation has already passed, then it has no bearing on our future and Postmillennialism is preserved.
For us to understand the Great Tribulation, we must look at the text where it is expounded the most, the Olivet Discourse. In order to understand the Olivet Discourse however, we must understand its context, we must look back to Matthew 23.
The timing of the Great Tribulation
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, if we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” – Matthew 23:29-38.
Here we see the backdrop in which the Olivet Discourse will be made. Christ in this whole chapter brings many woes upon the Pharisees and scribes of his generation, He prophecies that “Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers” meaning that they will fill up the cup of their fathers who are “them which killed the prophets” and when the cup is full, judgement will come down upon them, specifically “this generation”. What judgement? Christ says that “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate”. That house of Jerusalem, the temple, was left desolate. Now, it historical and archaeological fact that the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in the year AD 70. We know Christ was referring specifically to this event when we look at what exactly prompted Christ to give the Olivet Discourse.
After Christ left the temple, after previously declaring it desolate, we read: “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say unto you, not one stone here shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down. And as he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately saying, ‘Tell us when shall these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age?’”
Christ is clearly speaking about the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, and the disciples are asking him to expound on that. Christ then tells us that all that shall occur prior to the destruction, including the Great Tribulation. He then says, “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” – Matthew 24:34. The most parsimonious reading of this text is that all the events previously described are addressed to the generation alive at the time of Christ’s ministry. Furthermore, Christ says to those who will witness the “abomination of desolation” (Matt. 24:15) prior to the Great Tribulation, “Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:” (Matt. 24:17), clearly referring to a phenomenon that was local to Jerusalem and Judea, not worldwide. The early church historian Eusebius (ca. AD 263–339), records in his Ecclesiastical History 3:5 that during the time of Jewish War with Rome that led to the destruction of the temple, Christians fled the land of Judea. All that I have mentioned so far clearly grounds the Great Tribulation some time prior to AD 70.
That seems to answer how the Great Tribulation would fit into a Postmillennial worldview. However, a few charges are brought against the dating the of the Great Tribulation to AD 70 that need to be answered. First, is that the writing of the Book of Revelation ought to be dated with an early date under this view, i.e prior to AD 70, else the Book of Revelation ceases to be the prophetic book that it obviously presents itself as. The problem with doing that is modern scholarship dates the book of Revelation to have been written around AD 90, a 20-year difference. First, to preface why I believe in an early date it is important note that the chronology of the Scripture matters, as chronology is the foundation of history, without a Biblical chronology you cannot have a Biblical History. Therefore, for theological reasons of affirming consistent Biblical history I believe it is important that Revelation be written prior to AD 70.
AD 70 as the end of the age
These theological reasons are: The martyrs in Revelation 6:9-10 are told that they will have to wait “yet a little while” for their blood to be avenged, and we are told in Revelation 10:6 that “there shall no longer be delay”. This makes the most sense on a preterist reading of the text, which forces us into accepting an early date for the writing of Revelation, as then this judgement was given to the persecutors of the Church at that time (Nero and the Jews). Further, the destruction of the temple marks the end of the old covenant and the beginning of the New. The old Covenant is described as the covenant given through angels by St Paul in Galatians 3:19. Revelation through its entire narrative shows Man’s ascension to the divine council as the new ministers of the covenant. This sets up the Church as the one through which the New Covenant is given to Israel and the nations who had previously been living under the Mosaic and Noahic covenants respectively. This is important because it means that Revelation is really prophesying the end of the age, that is the age of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New Covenant ie the Millennium which is the Church Age.
On these grounds we must accept an early date, as these important eschatological events are inextricably linked to an historic event that we know happened. The fact that most modern scholarship does not support this is not important since this is the case with a Young Earth Creationist account of the chronology of the cosmos, which has some scholarly support but is very, very far from being the view of most scholars but is similarly important to a correct understanding of Biblical History which also informs the rest of out theology. An early date, similar to YEC, has some (growing) scholarly support and this is mostly the work of scholars who make Biblical Chronology the basis of their view of history.
History being views through the lens of a Biblical Chronology allows us to conclude that AD 70 is the end of the age. This is important as it allows us to historically locate the things spoken of by Christ in the Olivet Discourse in that timeframe, such as false prophets and persecutions (see the book of Acts and the Pauline Epistles), wars and rumours of wars (the time of Christ was during the Pax Romana, one of the most peaceful periods in Roman history which is ended by Nero engaging in the Jewish war), famines (attested to by many writers writing in AD 50s and 60s such as Tacitus, Josephus etc), and apostasy (the book Hebrews constantly addresses the question of apostacy, which would naturally follow from persecution as Christ said in the Parable of the Sower). So, if the great tribulation is passed, what of the future of the Church in this new age?
The Millennial Age of the Church
Having established the Church, Christ, after His Resurrection, gave out the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” Christ has told the Church to teach all nations, which in the view of the postmillennial, will happen, the Gospel will be victorious, and the nations will be disciples. For the postmillennial, Satan has been bound, and the Gospel will gradually come to dominate the earth, the Gospel will be victorious then the end shall come. We see this view in Scripture.
In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, He created man and told him to “subdue” the earth. Adam, the first man, failed in completing this task, however, Christ as the Last Adam will fulfil this task. In 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, St Paul teaches this: “But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. Then cometh 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. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”
Here we see that the end will come only after all enemies are defeated, with the last enemy to be defeated being death. First, we see Christ as the firstfruits of the resurrection, who we know has risen from the dead. Then Christ reigns until all enemies are but under His feet. Then He shall deliver the kingdom to the Father then the end shall come. The use of “must reign” is a present active infinitive, meaning the reign of Christ was going on as St Paul was writing. Then Christ shall reign until He delivers the kingdom to the Father so that “God may be all in all”. Based on history so far, and the words of St Paul here it appears that this will be a gradual process, which makes sense as Christ is the New Joshua who like the old Joshua conquers the nations gradually. So Christ, through the Church gradually subdues the nations, and also gradually transfigures the cosmos as the New Adam, since the cosmos fell because of the Adam, but Christ as Last Adam restores it and glorifies it.
Is Satan really bound?
The most common objection to the optimistic view that postmillennialism has is why if Satan has been bound and Christ is gradually conquering all of His enemies then why is there such chaos today and why does it seem as if the Church is declining? It should be noted, that when Scripture speaks of Satan’s binding it speaks specifically to binding him from deceiving the nations, because while there existed a remnant among the nations prior to the coming of Christ, Satan by an large had dominion ie rulership over the nations (Acts 14:18), but with the conquest of Christ at His death and resurrection, Satan was soundly defeated (Colossians 2:15) and thus lost his dominion. With the Church following the Great Commission, whom Christ has promised that the gate of hell will never prevail against, Satan is unable to deceive the nations since the light of the Gospel is being brought to them. This means that Satan is unable to stop the Gospel, try as he might, he has lost. Let me employ an analogy to explain this.
There is what is called a moral victory, which is defined by Wikipedia as: “when a person, team, army or other group loses a confrontation, and yet achieves some other moral gain. This gain might be unrelated to the confrontation in question, and the gain is often considerably less than what would have been accomplished if an actual victory had been achieved”. For the purposes of my analogy, I’ll describe how it is commonly used in sports, which is when a team loses a game but in the process does something that they can take as a “moral victory”, such when a bad team loses a game to a much better team but they made the game close, so even though they lost they feel like they’ve gained something, even if they have not. In this case, Satan might at times in history deceive some, even weaken the Church, but that does not mean he is winning, or that he still has dominion like he once did. He does not and cannot stop the Church from spreading the Gospel to all nations and discipling the nations.
This section has at once shown that the kingdom is present with the Church and that there is a future age of prosperity.
Why other views fall short
So far I have shown why the postmillennial worldview is correct. Now I will demonstrate that other views do not match it.
Premillennialism
Premillennialism is the view that the Millennium will only arrive at the Second coming. Premillennialism can be divided into historic premillennialism and dispensationalist premillennialism. Dispensationalist premillennialism is the popular view among modern Evangelical and Charismatic Christians. If you grew up Evangelical or Charismatic then this is likely the view you held to or currently hold. Dispensationalism divides history into 7 (or 8) dispensations and believes not only in a post-Second Coming Millennium but also either a pre-Great Tribulation or mid-tribulations “rapture” which is the translation of the Church from earth into heaven prior or in the middle of the tribulation. The problem with this view is that of all the views of eschatology within Christianity, this one is the only one which believes in a rapture, a view which is very difficult to reconcile with Scripture and which only came into being in the 19th century. Dispensationalism also heavily Judaizes, focusing on ethnic Jews and Israel as the those with whom God primarily deals with and makes the Church secondary. In fact, the point of the rapture was is so that God can return to dealing with ethnic Israel covenantally after the Church Age. Judaizing and innovation make this position untenable.
Unlike Dispensationalism, historic premillennialism has a case of being orthodox, since it also has some historical support in the early centuries of the Church. Historic premillennialism teaches that the Millennium is after the Second Coming of Christ. While premil has no problem answering the first two questions I stated every position needs to answer, it struggles to explain the kingdom of heaven being at hand, that is to say, present without arbitrarily distinguishing between the kingdom of Church Age and the kingdom of the future. Secondly, by placing the Great Tribulation in the future it struggles to make sense of how what Christ meant when He that that “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled”, since it seems clear that Christ was directly addressing the generation who were alive at the time. Thirdly, Scripture repeatedly affirms that the general resurrection follows the Return of Christ (John 5:28–29; Acts 24:15) and is then immediately followed the end (John 6:39–40, 44, 54) then the Dread Judgement (Revelation 20:12-13). This is inexplicable under premillennialism which teaches a 1000-year period between the Second Advent and the judgement since Satan is to be loosed after the end of the 1000 years. This inability to consistently explain these prophetic passages makes historic premillennialism inferior to postmillennialism
Amillennialism
Amillennialism is similar to postmillennialism in that it teaches that the Millennium began with the Church Age at the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and that Satan has been bound from deceiving the nations. However, Amillennialism does not look forward to a future golden age of the Church, it teaches a purely spiritual Millennium. This distinction means that it is unable to answer for the great blessings that will come upon the earth during the Millennium. Also, if before Satan was bound there was a remnant of among the Gentiles and Jews, and we’re expecting the same thing after Satan has been bound then not much has really changed. Ultimately, Amillennialism is unable to answer these questions without turning into Postmillennialism. So just be Postmillennial.
Historic support
The common view of Postmillennialism is that it is a view that only came into existence with the second generation of the Reformation ie those who came after Luther, Zwingli, etc. This would put Postmillennialism in the same category as premillennial dispensationalism as a view which only came from the views of men at a particular point in history, and not a consistent view traditionally held throughout Church history. I will now put forward some patristic support to show that this view has more historical merit than often thought.
First, we must note that as I prefaced at the beginning of this article, aside from dispensationalism, one can remain orthodox albeit inconsistent with amillennialism and premillennialism. This is because many fathers and writers throughout the centuries have held differing views on this topic, and different euchologies have come to be popular in the Church at different times, such as premillennialism in the earliest centuries. This issue has also never been one which divides the Church like issues of Christology, triadology, soteriology and ecclesiology. It should be note, however, that the Nicene Creed only really fits with amillennialism and postmillennialism “he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.” This does not really fit well with premillennialism’s having a 1000-year gap between the Second Coming and the Dread Judgement. At that time, premillennialism had fallen out of favour and the view of the Church was Amillennialism which as shown before can easily become Postmillennialism. Since we can expect general development in most theology, that is, the sharpening of language and deepening of understanding of Biblical doctrines, Amillennialism becoming Postmillennialism is not far-fetched.
In fact, one of fathers who was instrumental in the council that produced the creed (Nicaea I), St Athanasius the Great wrote in his work Four Discourses Against the Arians: “And then, from Dan to Beersheba was the Law proclaimed, and in Judea only was God known; but now, unto all the earth has gone forth their voice, and all the earth has been filled with the knowledge of God, and the disciples have made disciples of all the nations, and now is fulfilled what is written, ‘They shall be all taught of God’”. Keep in mind that this was a man who lived during the Arian crisis, when the divinity of our Lord was under question and many within the Church rejected it or made compromise with those who did. Yet here he is writing an obviously Postmillennial statement, namely the view that the Church has and continues subdue the earth and disciple the nations, and that this is a fulfilment of the Millennial verses about the earth being filled with the knowledge of God. This shows that having a Postmillennial eschatology is not contingent on current events.
Next, we have St Augustine of Hippo, who is considered to be Amillennial, however in a commentary on Psalms 2 he writes concerning Psalms 2:4: “it is to be understood of that power which he giveth to His saints, that they seeing things to come, namely, that the Name and rule of Christ is to pervade posterity and possess all nations.” Later in the same commentary he writes concerning Psalms 2:7: “‘Ask of Me,’ may be referred to all this temporal dispensation, which has been instituted for mankind, namely, that the ‘nations’ should be joined to the Name of Christ, and so be redeemed from death, and possessed by God. ‘I shall give Thee the nations for Thine inheritance,’ which so possess them for their salvation, and to bear unto Thee spiritual fruit.” Clearly here St Augustine is not speaking of the New Creation, neither is he coming from a premillennial POV, rather what he says here is particularly Postmillennial.
St Maximus the Confessor, in Ambigua 7, after quoting Ephesians 1:17-23 writes: “For such a person these words will suffice for the manifestation of the truth believed by Christians, and from which he has clearly learned that we are the members and the body of Christ, and that we constitute the fullness of Christ God, who fills all things in every way according to the plan hidden in God the Father before the ages, with the result that we are being recapitulated to Him through His Son and our Lord and God Jesus Christ”. For St Maximus, this recapitulation is of the whole cosmos, which is a key part of Postmillennialism in which the whole cosmos is being healed and gradually transfigured by Christ through the Church and eventually when torches it with fire (Revelation 20) it will be the New Creation, the New Heaven, and the New Earth. The Age that is to come.
Conclusion
We see then that Postmillennialism makes sense of the last things better than any other eschatology. We see that other eschatological systems fall flat in certain areas, and we see that Postmillennialism has pre-Reformation support going back to the 4th century. It is not a product of Protestantism. With this, I believe I have adequately defended Postmillennialism. You can leave comments below or contact me on Twitter or Discord if you disagree. With that I close this article. God be with you.
