Originally published in "The Lord's Coming Herald & Wesleyan Bible Prophecy Advocate," Summer Edition 2001
Three Dangers Of Premillennialism
In circles where Christian doctrine is not
important, or is not taken seriously, folks may question what can be so
"dangerous" about the harmless teaching of premillennialism. We would suggest
that the following three areas of danger respecting the popular premillennial
teaching of today are worth noting.
1. Speculation. Modern premillennial
teaching is based on men's speculation, not on a sound exegesis of God's Word.
This one example proves our point: if it were not for Revelation chapter twenty,
nobody would have ever heard of the idea that Jesus was coming back to set up
his kingdom and reign on earth for a thousand years. Nobody, that is, except
those Jews who rejected Jesus as their Messiah in the First Century, and even
they would not have known from the Old Testament that Messiah's kingdom was to
last a thousand years!
So now what does Revelation chapter twenty itself actually
say? Here are the facts: Revelation twenty says nothing about the reign of
Christ on earth, it says nothing about the reign of the saints on earth after
the second coming, and it says nothing about the involvement of the Jews in any
type of a political kingdom.
Rather, the chapter centers around four distinct visions that
John says he "saw." Here thery are: (1) John saw a conquering Savior (vss. 1-2),
(2) he saw compensated
sufferers (vss. 4-6), (4) he saw the consummation and the Sovereign (vss. 7-11), and
(4) he saw the courtroom scene (vss. 12-15).
Now what John Himself actually says that he "saw," if one
reads the text and pays any attention to it, is obviously very different than
what the "fruitful imaginations" of modern premillennial theorists conjecture.
They are reading their own ideological preconceptions derived from their
misunderstanding of Old Testament messianic prophecies into the text. They do
not pay sufficient attention to what the text of Revelation chapter twenty
itself actually says and does not say. They are not careful or honest students
of the Word of God, but are "handling the Word of the Lord deceitfully." Only those who are not keen to know what the Bible really teaches--who are
content to substitute fiction for facts, and fables for faith--should pay any
attention to them.
Here are the New Testament facts by which we should interpret
the "millennial question" of Revelation chapter twenty: Scripture clearly teaches that the devil was potentially and
judicially bound at the first advent of Christ (Mark 3:27; John 12:31; Hebrews
2:14) in order
to accomplish the divine purpose of redemption, that is, that the nations should
not be deceived by Satan any longer, but should now, rather, become Christ's
disciples ( Matthew 28:19-20)!
Further, there is no indication that Christ sets up any
kingdom, or initiates his own reign at the point of, or in conjunction with, the
resurrection of martyred "souls" mentioned in Revelation 20:4-6. The assumption
that Jesus is coming back to set up His messianic kingdom at this juncture is merely preconception and conjecture--premillennial speculation—a dogma
without cognitive substance—an emperor that has no clothes!
2. Subversion. A second danger of
premillennialism is doctrinal subversion. Premillennialism subverts the clear
New Testament teaching of the present messianic reign and kingdom of Jesus
Christ, thereby arming its devotees with a conception of Christianity having no
messianic content, when, in fact, messianism was the core idea of New Testament
Christianity, and definitive of the apostolic faith. "Thou art the Christ" (Matthew 16:16)--not, "thou shalt become the Christ, Jesus, in the future
millennial age, when you have returned to set up your kingdom."
Robert B. Yerby, in his excellent book, Up, Up and Away, has aptly called the premillennial theory "the great reign robbery." Where did we ever get the idea that Christ is coming
back to set up his kingdom and to reign, or that he will be crowned at some
future time? He already did that two-thousand years ago! He is crowned now! What
kind of mentality has my church had for the rest of its life? What about yours?
3. Substitution. Thirdly, there is the
danger of gospel content substitution. If Christ's messianic kingdom is
redemption, or the plan of full salvation, then to postpone the kingdom means in
essence to substitute something else in place of holiness in heart and life as
God's revealed plan for the nations in this present age.
Such a denial of the full salvation redemptive content of
this present age (as premillennialism must of necessity maintain in order to
make room for the glories of its millennial era--that is, the robbing Peter to pay Paul principle) leads both logically and
naturally to antinomianism.
Why does the world need a post-second coming millennium to
have righteousness, peace, and joy on earth when, according to the New
Testament, these are the very benefits that are intended to result from an
acceptance of the Christian gospel?
The only answers premillennialists can offer are based,
ultimately, not on logical, rational, or biblical foundations, but on the
erroneous theological axioms of John Calvin's predestinarian system of
humanistic ideology!
The great awakening revivals of the past that gave birth to
the modern Wesleyan Holiness Movement did not move forward on the speculative
biblical interpretation, chaotic doctrinal formulation, or emotional/subjective
affinity toward antinomianism, that so characterize a modern evangelical
church-world crazed by dispensational premillennialism.
Adam Clarke stated it well:"Thousands, in their affections, conversation, and
conduct, are wandering after an undefined and indefinable period, commonly
called a millennial glory, while expectation is paralyzed, and prayer and faith
restrained in reference to present salvation: and yet none of these can tell
what even a day may bring forth; for we now stand on the verge of eternity, and,
because it is so, 'now is the accepted time, now is the day of salvation'" Clarke's Christian Theology, p. 492).
We rest our case against premillennialism on the text of
Revelation chapter twenty itself, on the facts of what the text itself does and does
not say, and on the common sense understanding thereof.
Yes, it makes more sense to see the thousand years of
Revelation chapter twenty as portraying the present gospel age! End-time Bible prophecy
logic, in dealing, as we are, with a book of symbols, means common sense. Such common
sense, literal approach to Scripture, we believe, is the church's
true purifying hope. It is Gnosticism, friends, that cannot see
in spiritual revelations literal meanings. Christianity is not Gnosticism,
however, for within Christianity (which itself has no such metaphysical dichotomies
as Gnosticism engenders)
spiritual entities are just as real and literal as are are all physical and
material substances.
Premillennialism is based on the dualism of Platonic
philosophy with says that spiritual entities cannot be real or literal in
substance--only the material world is real and literal. Thus, a "spiritual"
understanding of Revelation chapter twenty, so premillennialists reason, cannot be
taking the Bible "literally."
In case you think we are only making this up, let me refer you to the words of O. Palmer Robertson, in The Christ of the Covenants, p. 214, who says:
"Dispensationalism . . . emphasizes God's activity of setting apart a people for himself physically as it relates to Israel and spiritually as it relates to the New Testament people of God. The distinction is indeed one of metaphysics. A form of Platonism actually permeates the hermeneutical roots of dispensationalism."
The false premises of the premillennial
position stand philosophically, exegetically, and theological exposed. Now are
you willing to give that erroneous theory up? The absolute fact of the matter is, friends,
that the Bible does not teach it at all. If you still chose to cling to it, you are
choosing to be extra-biblical. And what is the point or advantage in being
extra-biblical?
It is enough. Let us go foward in being only "Christians."
Related Article Links
Premillennialism: Orthodox Faith Of The Protestant Church?
Why Premillennialism Is Heresy
Why Premillennialism Should Be Rejected