Chiliasm Defended, From Sources Ancient And Modern (Chapter 3)

Chapter III.

In my last paper, I demonstrated the necessity of a literal reign of Jesus Christ on earth, as a fulfillment of the restoration of that which fell through Adam’s single act of transgression. I also pointed out that the doctrine of this literal future reign is contained in the Lord’s prayer petition: “Thy kingdom come; thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6: 10). While the full spectrum of Scripture proof relating to the establishment and nature of the coming kingdom must be left for future pages, it is expedient at this time to trace the progress and development of the “kingdom” idea throughout the Old Testament.

Firstly, we may preface our remarks by saying that the great majority of those early church writers who succeeded the apostles in their God-given duty of edifying the body of Christ (Eph. 4: 12), expected and looked for a future establishment of Christ’s kingdom on earth. Even those who held to what many would consider an A-Millennial approach (a position based entirely on arguments of silence respecting the “1000 years”) nevertheless expected a literal kingdom. This belief is preserved in the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 325 A.D., the last clause of which reads: “We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.” The phrase “world come to come” is a translation of the Greek “mellontos aionos,” which literally means the “age about to come.” In the New Testament writings it is generally represented as the age of kingdom blessing. That the early church still looked for this coming age is conceded by nearly all students of church history. Far from being irrational or absurd (as some revisionists have suggested), the expectation was grounded on the hope of the kingdom which would be (as it is yet to be) established following the resurrection of the saints. As Christ says: “The children of this world marry and are given in marriage: but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels: and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection” (Luke 20: 34-36, italics mine). The Nicene creed therefore agrees with the Scriptures of truth.

Filed under: Chiliasm, Church History, Irenaeus , arno gaebelein, biblical covenants, Chiliasm, Irenaeus, nicene creed, pre-millennialism, scofield, Throne of David

Chiliasm Defended, From Sources Ancient And Modern (Chapter 2)

Chapter II.

Despite the fact that Christians of various persuasions have at times allegorized the prophetic Scriptures, it has become generally apparent that we must, in order to understand the Bible, maintain the meaning of language, according to standard laws which govern exegesis. This is nothing more nor less than the science of Biblical interpretation. If we learn one thing from a survey of ecclesiastical history, it is the facility with which false teachers have in all ages promulgated their heresies through an allegorical reading of Scripture. While there is much talk nowadays concerning the uses or inconveniences of a “grammatico-historical” interpretive approach, it is seldom perceived that the true hermeneutic is in fact “grammatical, historical, contextual, and canonical.”

Understanding all too well the need to return to a plain, untainted reading of God’s word, the Protestant Reformers rightly repudiated an allegorical hermeneutic. Martin Luther once declared: “I have grounded my preaching upon the literal Word. He that pleases may follow me, he that will not may stay” (Luther’s Table-Talk, pg. 6). So also: “The literal sense of Scripture alone is the whole essence of faith and of Christian theology… allegories are empty speculations… an interpreter must as much as possible avoid allegory that he may not wander into idle dreams… to allegorize is to juggle with Scripture… If we wish to handle Scripture aright, our effort will be to attain unum, simplicem, germanum, et certum sensum literalem” (Encyclopedia Americana, 1918 edition, Vol. 10, pg. 632). Hence it is with the keenest pleasure that those who hold to the “one faith” of the “one body” (Eph. 4: 3-4) may attest that an allegorical heremeneutic is rarely accepted among Christians professing sound orthodoxy.

Filed under: Chiliasm, Church History, Figurative or Literal?, Typology , Chiliasm, martin luther, Millennium, reformation, Typology

Chiliasm Defended, From Sources Ancient And Modern (Chapter 1)

Note: The following article was originally part of a 21-chapter series I wrote in 2008 entitled “Reformed Chiliasm.” I am now in process of revising these chapters, and publishing them one by one as they are completed. The reason I am doing this, is because I recently came to the steadfast conviction that what Christians now need more than ever is a return to pure historic Christianity. This is the only solution to all the heresies plaguing the churches. It is also the only solution to all the novel systems being propounded by men who wilfully diregard and set aside what 2,000 years of Christianity taught concerning eschatology. My hope is that the points made in this series will commend themselves to the hearts of those who have wandered from the paths of truth, so that they too may repent of their errors and return to the “faith delivered once and for all to the saints” (Jude 3).

 

Chapter I.

It is no misstatement to say that Chiliasm lies at the core of Christian eschatology. Even among its staunchest adversaries, its antiquity is unquestioned. Although Chiliasm has had ups and downs throughout the centuries, and while it has sometimes even been branded as heresy, a large majority of the saints recognize that it alone properly explains and interprets the Messianic promises in language that “little children” would understand. That Chiliasm was the faith of men such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Lactantius, Commodian, and others influential in the early church, tells us that it is compatible with the orthodox faith. It also claims a spiritual power that it is conspicuously absent from A-Millennial and Post-Millennial systems. “For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power” (1 Cor. 4: 20).

This series will be aimed at defending the doctrines of Chiliasm from a Biblical as well as historical perspective. It will take into account advances made in prophetic studies since the Reformation — not discounting, of course, the voice of the ancient church. It is my frank opinion that in the first three centuries of Christianity will be found the purest expression of the faith. These papers will therefore reflect that assumption. At the same time, I intend to adhere closely to the Protestant doctrine of “Sola Scriptura.” The result will be a well-balanced study of eschatology, and one which I pray the Lord will use to encourage, strengthen, and bless others.

Filed under: Chiliasm, Church History, Garden of Eden, Typology , adam and eve, Chiliasm, Church History, Garden of Eden, pre-millennialism, Typology

Land Promises Fulfilled In The “First Resurrection”

  The message of Christ’s return to dwell with man is the keynote of all Messianic prophecy.  In the beginning, man dwelt with God.  Yet on account of sin, God left His throne in Eden to take up His abode in the heavenlies.  In the years succeeding man’s exile from Eden, the wickedness of the world became so great, that God destroyed all except eight with a universal deluge of water (2 Peter 2: 5).

  After the Flood, however, God sought a particular family with whom He might make a covenant.  It would be the purpose of this family to preserve God’s statutes and ordinances, to function as both “salt and light,” and to keep the worship of the true God alive in the world.  God chose Israel to be that special family.  And so He made a covenant with Abraham, saying, “In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed” (Gen. 12: 3).

  Appended to this promise were certain privileges of land ownership, as well as dominion over the entire world (Romans 4: 13).  Abraham received these promises by grace through faith (Gen. 15: 6).  The promises were then ratified by a solemn covenant, the form of the covenant itself manifesting the nature of the promise, which is purely of grace.  When Abraham was about to pass through the pieces of the slain animals, a deep sleep fell upon him, and “behold, a smoking furnace and a burning lamp passed between those pieces” (Gen. 15: 12, 17).  Thus the covenant was ratified by one contracting party, making it unconditional in nature (see Galatians 3: 18-20).

  To Abraham’s descendants these promises were confirmed: first to Isaac (Gen. 26: 3) and then to Jacob (Gen. 28: 13).  Subjoined to the promises of eternal land inheritance were those which looked forward to dominion over the world (Gen. 27: 27-28).  During the patriarchs’ own lifetimes, however, these predictions were unfulfilled.  When arraigned before the Sanhedrin, Stephen reminded the Jews that Abraham “had none inheritance, no, not so much as a foot” in the land God promised him (Acts 7: 5).

  Going back to the original promise, we find the patriarchs themselves included among those who would possess the land.  The promises, then, remain future, and will be fulfilled when JESUS CHRIST, the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3: 16), returns to dwell with the family which He chose from all the nations of the earth to be His people.

  The natural descendants of Abraham thought these promises were through the law.  But the law was added 430 years after the covenant made with Abraham, and so could not annul the original nature of the promise (Gal. 3: 17; Romans 4: 13, 16).  Because Israel could not keep the law, they were continually driven out of the land.  Hence the prophet Jeremiah revealed that the land promises are secured only in the “New Covenant” (Jer. 31: 27-40). 

   The promises of land inheritance and dominion are by grace, and because so, those who partake of them must be grafted into JESUS CHRIST through faith.  When all the children of both dispensations (the law & the gospel) have been gathered into Christ, the true Seed of Abraham will return to the land that God promised the fathers, and will raise up those who are joint-heirs with Him (Romans 8: 17 ff.).  The “one new man,” formed of both saved Jews & Gentiles (Eph. 2: 15), the holy nation of kings and priests, shall then rule and reign with Christ for 1000 years, in the city of Jerusalem.  This is what the “Millennium” is about.  See Revelation 20: 4-6.

  Amazingly, there are many Christians today who scoff at these promises.  Some even say that the land inheritance is “already fulfilled in Christ.”  But any Christian with a grain of common sense, and who really knows the Scriptures, can see that it isn’t so.  Unfortunately, the phrase “in Christ” is too often a vague term used by ‘spiritualizers’ to nullify God’s promises. 

   Unbelief in the simple truth that Christ will return from heaven to dwell with man on a renewed physical earth is Gnostic in nature, and perhaps arises from the belief that matter is essentially evil.  The question is not, however, what man believes, but what God has revealed.  Has He promised through His inspired prophets that Christ will one day return to rule and reign over the earth?  If He has, then man has nothing to say in the matter.  The word of God shall be fulfilled in its time.

   Aside from the unconditional promise made to Abraham concerning the land, God made another unconditional promise to David, regarding the throne (2 Samuel 7).  The fulfillment of both these promises shall come in the “First Resurrection,” when Christ will sit on the throne of David in the literal city of Jerusalem, ruling and reigning with His saints, who in that day shall have ”power over the nations” (Rev. 2: 26)–the same power wherewith the Lord Himself will be invested (Psalm 2: 8-9).

  Thus, the two promises–the land and the throne–are the twin subjects of Messianic prophecy, to be fulfilled only when the Heir (JESUS CHRIST) comes into His own.  During the present dispensation, the Lord is like David in Hebron.  He has already been anointed (2 Sam. 2: 4), but has yet to attain possession of the kingdom.  Paul writes: “But now we see not yet all things put under Him” (Heb. 2: 8, italics mine).  The words of the psalmist still ring true today: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool” (Psalm 110: 1; Acts 2: 34-35; 1 Cor. 15: 25).

   The reason for this “abeyance of the kingdom” is quite simple.  Because the children of Abraham are still being gathered from among the Jews and Gentiles, and since Israel has not yet been grafted back into their own olive tree (Romans 11: 23-25), the time of fulfillment is future.  JESUS CHRIST is still in the Holy Place making reconciliation for the sins of His people. 

   But when the full number of the elect have been sealed, Christ will return to raise His saints from the dust (1 Thess. 4: 16), to transform the living (1 Cor. 15: 51), and to grant all that are His a “better resurrection” (Heb. 11: 35), when the eternal city will come down from God out of heaven (Rev. 3: 12).  This will be the “restitution of all things” (Acts 3: 21), when God will again dwell with man, in the person of His Divine vicegerent, JESUS CHRIST.

Filed under: Faith, First Resurrection, Jesus Christ, Land Promises, Millennium, Parousia, Restitution of All Things, Throne of David, Uncategorized , abraham, Land Promises, Millennium, Revelation 20, Throne of David