Why Amillennial?

Article: 7 Reasons Tom Schreiner (Tentatively) Holds to Amillennialism by Justin Taylor – Original source: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/7-reasons-tom-schreiner-tentatively-holds-amillennialism/

It would be hard to find a more gracious and humble commentator than Tom Schreiner. This is especially true when it comes to the controversy of what Revelation 20 teaches on the millennium.

Schreiner has recently written a full-length commentary on Revelation in the ESV Expository Commentary series. Schreiner’s colleague Rob Plummer—who wrote the commentary on James—calls it “the clearest and most helpful commentary on Revelation I’ve ever read.”

When it comes to the various and disputed end-time paradigms, Schreiner admits that he does not regard the exegesis behind the dispensational premillennial view or the postmillennial view very compelling.

Against dispensational premillennialism, he notes:

  • The notion of a rapture seven years before Jesus returns is quite unlikely. (1 Thessalonians 4:16 does not describe a secret rapture. 2 Thessalonians 1–2 teaches that the punishment of the wicked, deliverance of the righteous, and gathering of the saints occur at the same time.)
  • The notion of promises specially fulfilled for the Jews in the millennium is not even mentioned by John in Revelation 20. Nor is this idea found in the rest of the NT. Dispensationalists read their interpretations of OT prophecies into Revelation 20, but their interpretation is flawed, for the NT maintains that Jews and Gentiles are equally members of the people of God (e.g., Eph. 2:11–3:13). The notion of Jews having a special place in the millennium contradicts the NT witness that all believers are children of Abraham (cf. Rom. 4:9–17Gal. 3:6–9).

Against postmillennialism, he writes:

  • Scripture clearly indicates that evil will intensify before the end (cf. Matt. 24:9–311 Tim. 4:1–32 Tim. 3:1–5).
  • Revelation 19:11–21 almost certainly refers to the second coming—not, as postmillennialists claim, to the routing of God’s enemies, leading to a long period of peace and prosperity on earth.

Therefore, he focuses on the historic premillennial and amillennial readings of the passage.

Contrary to the rhetoric of partisans on either side, he writes: “I include both views equally since it is difficult to decipher which view is correct, and readers should appreciate this difficulty.”

“Still,” he notes, “for the following reasons I tentatively opt for the amillennial view, although I have changed my mind more than once and feel uncertainty as I write.”

Here are his seven reasons.

[1. Scripture Nowhere Else Clearly Teaches a Thousand-Year Millennium]

First, nowhere else in Scripture is a thousand-year millennium clearly taught, and a new doctrine should not be founded on an intensely controversial text, especially from an apocalyptic book full of symbolism.

[2. Revelation 20 Might Be Telling the Story of Revelation 19:11–21 from Another Perspective]

Second, we have seen that Revelation is recursive and recapitulatory, coming to the end and then telling the same story again from a fresh perspective. John might be doing the same thing in Revelation 20, telling the story of Revelation 19:11–21 from another perspective.

[3. The Supposed Millennium Texts of the OT Don’t Appear in Revelation 20—But They Do in the New Creation Texts of Revelation 21–22]

Third, many of the texts allegedly speaking of the millennium in the OT (e.g., Isaiah 60 and Ezekiel 40–48) are not alluded to in Revelation 20.

What is even more striking is that these same chapters are copiously alluded to in Revelation 21:1–22:5. In other words, the so-called millennial texts are fulfilled in the new creation! This suggests the promises of a renewed world and new temple in the OT are fulfilled in the new creation, not in a millennium.

Some want to say the fulfillment is in both the millennium and the new creation, but it is hard to see how the new temple prophesied in Ezekiel 40–48 is fulfilled in any way in the millennium.

[4. The Early Church Fathers Were Divided on This Question]

Fourth, the early church fathers were divided on the millennium. Sometimes it is claimed the earliest fathers were premillennial, but Charles Hill has demonstrated the matter was disputed, and many were amillennialists. Hence, we cannot appeal to the early church to find a consensus on the matter.

[5. Who Are the Unglorified People in the Millennium If Jesus Destroys All His Enemies at the End of Revelation 19?]

Fifth, the historic premillennial view has difficulty explaining the unglorified people in the millennium, for when Jesus returns at the end of chapter 19, he destroys all his enemies.

It is straining to say that some were left on earth who survived Jesus’s return.

The NT clearly teaches Jesus’s return is the day of reward and judgment for all (Matt. 25:31–46).

[6. Scripture Nowhere Separates Out the Timing of the Final Resurrection, Final Judgment, Victory over Death, Arrival of the New Creation, and Second Coming of Christ]

Sixth, in Scripture the final resurrection, final judgment, victory over death, arrival of the new creation, and second coming of Christ are part of a total package.

There is no indication in any other text that these great events are separated.

[7. Amillennialism Fits Best with the Rest of the Scriptures]

Finally, we will see below that the premillennial reading of Revelation 20 has some very good arguments, but the amillennial reading has remarkable strengths too. And since the latter fits best with the rest of the scriptural witness, it should be favored.

Unfortunately, clarity will be lacking on this issue until Jesus returns. Fortunately, the central truth is that Jesus is indeed returning!

The Book of Revelation

Teachings by G. K. Beale:

This monumental study of the book of Revelation will be especially helpful to scholars, pastors, students, and others seriously interested in interpreting the Apocalypse for the benefit of the church. Too often Revelation is viewed as a book only about the future. As G. K. Beale shows, however, Revelation is not merely a futurology but a book about how the church should live for the glory of God throughout the ages — including our own. Approaching Revelation in terms of its own historical background and literary character, Beale argues convincingly that John’s use of Old Testament allusions — and the way the Jewish exegetical tradition interpreted these same allusions — provides the key for unlocking the meaning of Revelation’s many obscure metaphors. In the course of Beale’s careful exegesis, which also untangles the logical flow of John’s thought as it develops from chapter to chapter, it becomes clear that Revelation’s challenging pictures are best understood not by apparent technological and contemporary parallels in the twentieth century but by Old Testament and Jewish parallels from the distant past (at this link).

And by Joel Beeke (at this link).

Interpreting the Book of Revelation

Article: How Should We interpret the Book of Revelation? by Dr. Sam Storms (original source here)

Perhaps the single greatest controversy surrounding Revelation and the most important issue when it comes to interpreting the book, is the question of its structure. Many, perhaps most, evangelicals read Revelation as if it is describing a short period of time that is still in the future. Those who embrace what may be called the futurist view of the book most often will argue that what we have in Revelation 6-19 is a description of events that will take place in the future in a period of seven years they call The Great Tribulation.

And as you know, there are many who insist that Jesus will return and rapture his people out of this world prior to the outpouring of divine judgment in the “Great Tribulation.” The result is that what we read in Revelation 6-19 has little, if any, immediate practical relevance for a lot of Christians. For them it is fascinating to talk about, but it has little impact on how they live. One often hears: “Praise God that I won’t be here for any of this. Jesus will rescue me so that I won’t ever have to suffer what others endure.”

Although I held to this view for many years, I don’t any longer. Now, please understand that I do believe what we read in Revelation 6-19 applies to the end of the age, just before and including the Second Coming of Jesus. But I think it also applies to and describes what happens throughout the entire course of church history, including our own day and age. In other words, I believe Revelation 6-19 (actually 6-20) portrays for us the commonplaces of history spanning the period from the first coming of Jesus all the way through to his second coming.

Think about it this way. You are at a college football game and have been given the privilege of recording on camera the entire game from a variety of different vantage points. So, you place one camera on the 50 yard line, about 10 rows up. It is the perfect vantage point from which to view the game. Whether with your I-phone or some other form of video camera you begin recording everything that occurs, from the opening kickoff through the end of the game.

Now imagine that you are able to record or video tape the same game but from a different place in the stadium. This time your seat is located in the north end zone, about 50 rows up. Instead of viewing the game horizontally, from left to right, or right to left, you record everything vertically, as the action moves away from you, from one end zone near you to the far end zone at the other end of the field. You video tape the same game, the same plays, but the camera in the end zone provides you with a different perspective on how the game unfolds. You see the players spread across the field and can see much more accurately how a play will unfold.

Now imagine that another camera is in the opposite end zone, at the south end of the field. From this vantage point you can see the game moving toward yourself, as your team takes the ball from the far end of the field and gradually moves it toward the end zone directly in front of where you are sitting.

Now, for one more example, suppose another camera is placed in the Goodyear Blimp, hovering overhead and providing an entirely different perspective of how the game unfolds and develops. You are still watching the same game. But from this vantage point, overhead, you will have a recording of how the teams run and pass and eventually move from one end of the field to the other. From this angle in the blimp you can see both teams equally well. You can observe movements of players in a way that no one sitting anywhere in the stadium can.

Now, in each of these positions you would be watching and recording and eventually describing the same game and the same plays and the same events unfold. But your explanation of how the game started and ended would sound somewhat differently every time. But it’s still the same football game, with the same events unfolding, with the same players on both teams, leading to the same outcome.

This would actually greatly enhance your understanding of what happens in the game. You get to watch it from different perspectives, from different vantage points. Each of the cameras provides its own unique contribution to the same game. One camera focuses almost exclusively on the offense, while another focuses on the defense. Yet another camera hones in on only one player, recording every move he makes. And then there is a camera that sets its sights on the coaches and how they interact on the sidelines with their players.

I want to suggest that this is basically what is happening in the book of Revelation. The technical term for this is recapitulation. John the Apostle is, in my opinion, describing the events of this entire present age in which we live. His description covers the expanse of church history from the first coming of Christ in the first century to the second coming of Christ in some later century, perhaps our own. Sometimes he provides a panoramic view of the entire age of church history. At other times he focuses in on one major event or a series of developments. On occasion he may concentrate on telling us about one person or movement in the course of history. Continue reading