Why I Am An Amillennialist

In my last post I introduced the discussion of what I believe about the end-times, since those viewpoints led to my relinquishing my ordination with the Evangelical Free Church Of America. I explained the three main end-times positions: Premillennialism, Postmillennialism, and Amillennialism. We saw that in two of the positions (Pre-and Post-), the labels are given based in large part on the relationship of the Second Coming of Christ to the millennium. In the third position, the one to which I hold, the belief is that the language of the millennium in the Bible refers to the reign of Christ with saints in heaven during this present age we now live in—the age before he comes again. This position also believes that some of the passages that are thought to refer to a millennium actually refer to the new heaven and new earth. Amillennialism also believes that there is no literal 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth that is a distinct period from the future new heaven and new earth.

There are primarily seventeen reasons I take this position, although more reasons could be offered. Over the next few weeks I will look at each of these reasons, explain them, and seek to show how they represent what the Bible teaches. Before I look in detail at those reasons, I thought it would be helpful to state them upfront (without commentary) so you can get the overview of where we will be heading.

Here are the seventeen reasons I am an Amillennialist.

1. It appears that the New Testament understands the so-called “millennial” language of the Old Testament as being fulfilled in the age-to-come (the new heaven and new earth), not in a future literal millennium.

2. The Scripture’s use of two age terminology (this age and the age-to-come) fits better with an Amillennial position.

3. The only mention of a 1,000 year reign of Jesus Christ is found in Revelation 20.  That text is best understood in the context of Revelation as a reign of Christ in heaven with saints during the present Church age.

4. The best understanding of the language of a tribulation (a period of seven years, made up of two 3.5 year periods) is that it is a figurative reference to real suffering and tribulation for the Church that extends throughout this entire Church age.  As such, a precedent is already set for end-times events that span the entire period of the New Testament Church, as does the “millennium” of Revelation 20.

5. The Strong New Testament emphasis that the New Testament Church (Jew and Gentile) is now the people of God and a continuation of God’s people in the Old Testament, decides against any end-times position that would see two programs for two people of God (the Church and Israel), as do the most popular forms of Premillennialism.

6. The second coming of Jesus Christ is most likely after the tribulation.  Since there is no clear evidence for a secret rapture forming a two-stage coming, any Premillennarian position setting forth such a position is untenable.  This means that one must hold either to post-tribulational Premillennialism or Amillennialism—especially in light of the problems of Postmillennialism as discussed below.

7. New Testament theology prevents taking some of the Old Testament prophetic language as literal (examples: rebuilding of a temple and restoration of sacrifice).  This leads one to see such language as depicting future realities to Old Testament saints in language they would understand, but not taken as literally fulfilled.

8. Amillennialism preserves more than any other view the Christ-centered nature of the entire Scriptures.

9. Amillennialism does the best job of dealing with the emphasis in the New Testament that the Kingdom of God has already been started, but it is not yet fully here.

10. Amillennialism does the best job of dealing with resurrection and judgment language in the Bible which appears not to put these events into different stages.

11. The New Testament is to be allowed to give greater clarity to Old Testament end-times expectation, rather than those Old Testament expectations silencing the progression of the New Testament.

12. We must interpret texts according to the intent of the authors, even if that intent is figurative. It appears that many Old Testament texts that Premillennialists have interpreted as prophesying a literal millennium are instead intended to prophesy the future new heaven and new earth, using language of the current day as symbolizing what would happen in the future.

13. There are some key passages that support Amillennialism.

14. It is difficult to see any legitimate purpose for a future literal millennial reign, especially in light of the way Revelation 21-22 appears to be the counter-point to Genesis 1-3 and the climax of Scripture, and in light of the reality there are not two separate programs for Israel and the New Testament Church.

15. A future literal millennial reign of Christ with glorified and non-glorified saints on a non-glorified earth (a reality for which Premillennialists argue) is problematic.

16. Amillennialism does justice to the language in the New Testament which suggests the end-times events surrounding the Second Coming of Christ are impending and therefore one must always be ready and expectant.

17. Though Postmillennialism would share some tenets with Amillennialism, it also has problems that decide against it.