Reformed Chiliasm (Part 5)

I cannot stress too highly the importance of learning the real nature of last things by going back to the first things. For these first things, when properly discerned, may serve as a key to unlocking the true import of last things. And indeed many have already figured this out. But since so many false systems of eschatology are current, concerning whose teachers the sacrifice of evidence on the altars of delusion is all too common, it does little good to investigate these matters unless one is willing to accept the facts as they stand.

Some heretics, although they have no comprehension of the first principles of Christ's salvation, are nevertheless shrewd enough to see that the validity of their eschatology relies on certain views of "first things." Thus they contend hotly over such topics as the Genetic creation, the Garden of Eden, and even the nature of the death which Adam incurred on the whole human race. These sophists, skeptics, and downright heretics, have so confused and jumbled the Gospel message, that a deal of repair is necessary, that more Christians be not carried away by their falsehoods. It is for this reason that I mentioned in my last article the importance of the term, "the restitution of all things." Because if we can find out what Adam lost, we'll be able to see what God's plan of salvation really consists of.

Now the facts are these: Adam was made a rational being compounded of both body and soul (Gen. 2: 7). He was placed in the Garden of Eden (on earth) to have communion with God and enjoy His presence, and to rule over the Creation which God had prepared for Him. When he transgressed God's law, he incurred death upon himself, and forfeited the right to eat of the Tree of Life. The ground was cursed (Gen. 3: 18), and Adam and Eve were evicted from Eden, to live in toil and hardship, while looking forward by faith in Christ to the consummation of their (and our) restoration. This will be the restoration of exactly what they lost, with the added privilege of partaking of the Tree of Life.

I must here concur with Methodius, in that death, while being the just punishment for sin, was nevertheless given as a remedy. Alluding to the parable of the potter and the marred vessel (Jer. 18: 3-6), he writes: "Now God's plan seems to me to have been the same as that which prevails among ourselves. For seeing Man, His fairest work, corrupted by envious treachery, He could not endure, with His love for man, to leave him in such a condition, lest he should be forever faulty, and bear the blame to eternity; but dissolved him again into his original materials, in order that, by remodeling, all the blemishes in him might waste away and disappear." (Discourse on the Resurrection, vi). Thus, the marred vessel (man) is melted down by death, in order that God may refashion it in glory in the resurrection. And God gave the promise to Adam and Eve that this salvation would be effected by Christ.

Of course, it is needless to say that this has not all happened yet. For the restitution is incomplete until Christ comes to establish His presence among us. That is why it is essential that we understand why in John's vision the New Jerusalem is seen descending to earth. Because as Paradise is within the New Jerusalem, access to the Tree of Life is not possible until the city descends.

At that time, there will be a renewal of the earth's pristine condition, a resurrection of the just shall take place, and Christ will commence His glorious reign over mankind. Satan shall be bound, and the nations given liberty to eschew evil and follow King Immanuel. In fine, this is what the doctrine of the Millennium is about. It involves the restitution of all things. Wherefore I have embraced Chiliasm in opposition to what is known as Preterism, or past-fulfillment. For Preterism must deny all of the above truths; and because it does so, by its tenets restoration based on the original promises of God simply isn't possible. But God's promises stand sure and immutable. "Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar" (Romans 3: 4).

That the Bible teaches a resurrection of these very bodies in which we now dwell, should be evident to anyone that reads the Scriptures. Past fulfillment systems would do away with this resurrection, making it a salvation of the soul, and not the whole man. However, we ought to know better than that. Indeed, every Christian who has been trained in sound orthodoxy will recognize any such views as the Hyper-Preterists assert as highly dangerous and subversive of the truth. "Is salvation really of the flesh?" they ask. "No, it is not of the flesh at all, but of souls." Kurt Simmons, the foremost proponent of Hyper-Preterism, has stated that resurrection consists of the soul, and not the body. He writes: "The general resurrection consisted in the release of all souls from Hades, which was then destroyed. At death, the souls of men now go directly to their respective rewards – eternal life in heaven, or destruction of the soul in Hell." Let us take a closer look at Simmons' view, to find out whether it is indeed "sound doctrine."

Simmons and the Hyper-Preterists would like us to believe, firstly, that God's salvation does not involve the whole man. But when Adam and Eve transgressed, they were in their natural bodies; the same bodies, mind you, in which we dwell today. Know that the perfect man consists of body, soul, and spirit. For, as we've said in our last article, we do not call the soul 'man,' nor do we call the body 'man.' We are accustomed to refer to the soul and the body as of man. Because man is a compound being, salvation must include all components, not one or two alone. When Adam and Eve sinned they were in their natural bodies. Thus, restoration must bring us back to Paradise in our natural bodies; except that then our bodies will be no longer subject to corruption, but rendered immortal. Perceiving these facts, it is manifest that Simmons errs when he limits the resurrection to the soul only.

He also makes another blunder when he says that the general resurrection consisted of souls being released from Hades. And where do we suppose that Simmons would have them to go? Apparently to Paradise, which he contends is for souls alone, and not bodies. But he forgets that souls were already in Paradise when this invisible and unverifiable resurrection took place. For the righteous after death were gathered unto their fathers, and were 'comforted' in Abraham's bosom (Luke 16: 25). Paul claimed that after death he would be "with Christ" (Phil. 1: 23). Where? Certainly not in the Garden of Eden, for that, even by Kurt's admission, was not yet available. But in Hades, the same state of blessedness to which Lazarus and the Fathers themselves departed after death. Whereas the wicked are described as being in torment, and that immediately after death. Simmons would assert, then, that the resurrection (which he claims to be a past event) merely consisted of souls being transferred from one Paradise to another, or from one hell to another. But this is obviously not what the Bible is talking about!

The Lord says: "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matt. 10: 28). If the resurrection has already occurred, as the Hyper-Preterists contend, then we should expect to see bodies raised to judgment and removed from our midst. For if the resurrection is still ongoing, the raising of bodies must be ongoing. But if it be a past event only, then it cannot apply to us. Otherwise, if it applies to us, why do we not see bodies raised either to life, or to judgment? Concerning the general judgment, Christ says: "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of damnation" (John 5: 28). Christ tells us that it is from the graves the dead shall arise. So, if the resurrection applies now, why are dead bodies still in the graves? Or, if it only applied at one time, why isn't there any verification that the bodies arose?

Remember, the restitution must restore exactly what Adam and Eve lost when they transgressed. Now, they had personal communion with God in their own bodies, and that communion was on earth. They had dominion over the creation, which had not yet been made subject to vanity (Rom. 8: 20). They had the right to eat of the Tree of Life, and had not known sin or death. Very well. What, then, is restoration? It must include-- 1): Communion with God in our very own bodies, and that on earth; 2): Dominion over the Creation; 3): The right to partake of the Tree of Life; and 4): freedom from death and sin.

Therefore, considering the above, it is obvious the Hyper-Preterism is fallacious. For, firstly, it denies the personal, visible presence of Jesus Christ on earth. Secondly, it denies that salvation involves our physical bodies. Thirdly, it denies that we shall have dominion over the Creation. All of this denial springs from, as stated, a misconception concerning last things, which may be traced to false notions of first things. Fix your equations, gentlemen. You cannot claim that Christ is on earth now, and in the same breath aver that Paradise is located in heaven. John has already described the New Jerusalem as coming down to earth (Rev. 21: 2-3).

Our answers regarding the resurrection will not line up, or in any way be consistent, unless we perceive that it involves the entire man. It does not appertain to the soul only, but to the body as well. In fact, it is that pre-ordained epoch when the soul will become united to the re-formed body. As sin brought the penalty of death upon us all, it is necessary that our bodies must die. But this is a remedy more than anything else. Irenaus writes: "He (God) set a bound to his state of sin, by interposing death, and thus causing sin to cease, putting an end to it by the dissolution of the flesh, which should take place in the earth, so that man, ceasing at length to live to sin, and dying to it, might begin to live to God." (Against Heresies, III. xxiii. 6).

For the body shall be refashioned anew in the resurrection, that we may enjoy communion with God in exactly the same condition in which Adam and Eve stood before they transgressed; however, with this added privilege of eating of the Tree of Life and living for ever. For when our first parents sinned, and were evicted from Eden, they did not lose spiritual communion with God, inasmuch as they were given the promise of Christ, and believed. Else, if they did not believe, how did their children learn to do sacrifice?

It is evident, however, that Adam and Eve believed, attaining the promise of eternal life through Christ. As Lightfoot once wrote, they were the first to enter the New Covenant. But if the Covenant applies to souls alone, then what did they not already have prior to their eviction from Paradise? For after death, we must conclude that they, as believers, entered the state of the blessed. And if resurrection involves the soul only, what need was there for the prophets to speak of a future resurrection? For in that case, resurrection was secured through faith in Christ, and enjoyed in the afterlife. Then, too, if resurrection doesn't pertain to the body, why were Adam and Eve barred from partaking of the Tree of Life? For their faith in Christ should have qualified them to lay hold of life then and there, and not at some future time. It is obvious that those who hold Simmons' views are not consistent on all points. In fact, they contradict themselves repeatedly, not seeing that Christ's salvation is brought to bear upon the entire man.

To be continued...

Chiliasm Defended (Part 1)

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.

Notwithstanding, when one takes a panoramic view of church history, he/she will find that few doctrines have been more bitterly assailed than have Chiliasm.  One would think that it were calculated solely to arouse the enmity in men's hearts; whereas the intent of its foremost teachers has been aimed at promoting the three Christian graces: faith, hope, and charity (1 Cor. 13: 13).  Yet when we realize the spiritual nature of warfare in which Christians have in all ages engaged for their Lord, such opposition becomes deveiled of mystery.  In fact, its existence seems at times the most natural thing in the world.

Much of the enmity against Chiliasm arises from allegorical interpretations of Scripture. Though it a fixed law of interpretation that the literal must always govern the figurative (and not vice versa), some have not found it so.  The allegorical method was highly favored by Origen, and was admired and taken up by his disciples. Even Methodius of Olympus, Origen's earliest known opponent, followed his methods of spiritualizing nearly every passage he got his hands on. While Methodius himself leaned towards a Chiliastic view, after reading his writings one must concede that it is very difficult to maintain a Pre-Millennial position when one allows for such indiscriminate allegorizing of the prophetic Scriptures. It is at least highly difficult to prove anything with any degree of clearness or precision. And so Chiliasm seldom if ever survives in a non-literal hermeneutical environment.

Let us note that it was not a practice of the early church to allegorize the Scriptures. Tertullian freely admitted that some of the prophecies could be taken allegorically, but that this was an exception rather than a rule. Irenaeus had already shown that allegorical interpretations will often plunge one into serious hermeneutical problems. One must really ask whether the allegorizing of Scripture is even permissible, when we see every day the kind of damage it does to one's understanding of the Bible, and the stumbling-blocks it places before "him that is weak in the faith" (Romans 14: 1).  In many cases, those who invent newfangled theologies rely on allegorical interpretations because the meaning of the words must first be changed in order to promote their views. With all this nonsense going on, it would seem that allegorizing has a direct linkage to heretical theorizing. Let us beware of such methods; or, at the least, let us investigate to see whether they are sound to begin with.

Although various forms of Chiliasm survived into the Post-Nicene era, it was St. Augustine who put an effectual halt to its further growth. In his work The City of God, he claimed that the Millennium represents the spiritual reign of Christ's people "during the entire duration of this world" (XX. vii). It has been rumored by many, that Augustine's theology capitulated before the altar of political expediency; and so a spiritual ongoing kingdom craftily replaced a literal one headed by Christ in person.  Obviously such a view could only spring from the rampant spiritualizing of the Scriptures. For it is evident in the Word of God that the Millennial reign must occur after antichrist was thrown into the lake of fire (Rev. 19: 20-21; 20: 4). Also, the reign is continually promised as a future event:

(Matt. 19: 28) "Verily I say unto you, that ye which have followed me in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

(Rev. 2: 26 ff.) "And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations."

(Rev. 5: 10) "And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth."

(Rev. 20: 6) "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years."

A simple glance at the above verses will tell us that the "First Resurrection" can not occur in the celestial realms, but on earth. For both priesthood and kingship belong to the earthly realm.  As a king rules over living men in the flesh, so the priest intercedes between living men and God.  To say that anyone can fill this dual role prior to the second advent of Christ is to trifle with the Scriptures.  When writing to the Corinthian saints, Paul emphatically stated that neither he nor they were reigning as kings (1 Cor. 4: 8).  This is sufficient to refute A-Millennialism.

There is no way one can spiritualize or allegorize the passages listed above. For Christ has clearly told His disciples that "The meek shall inherit the earth" (Matt. 5: 5). The earth is not a super-celestial inheritance.  To Abraham was given the promise of inheriting the world (Gr. kosmos), and all all true children of Abraham will partake of conjoint sovereignty with Christ when He returns from heaven.  See Romans 4: 13.  The prophet David places the earthly allotment in connection with the destruction of the wicked (Psalm 37: 9, 11). Our belief is that when the wicked are consumed, the kingdom will be consummated.  Paul intimates as much in 2 Thessalonians 2: 7-10. 

It is my intention in these papers to show how passages speaking of the Messianic kingdom will be fulfilled during the Millennium, and also to confute the false views that have sprung up within, or in opposition to, Chiliastic theology.

*************

Now, as we begin these studies, let me draw your attention to what I call the "diurnal typology." For this is really the true starting point for bringing forward Pre-Millennial truths.

Through my studies of the Scriptures, I have found that the seven days of the creative week are actually typical of a larger redemptive week. I have already related in previous articles, that when Adam sinned on the sixth day, he frustrated what would have been a perfect Sabbath, which had to be postponed to a future time. The true sabbath was therefore moved to the last day of the redemptive week.  Paul alludes to this in his letter to Hebrews, saying: "There remaineth therefore, a sabbath-keeping (Gr. sabbatismos) to the people of God" (Hebrews 4: 9).

But how was the perfection of the original sabbath frustrated?   God told Adam that in the day he ate of the fruit of the forbidden tree, he would surely die (Gen. 2: 17). The punishment was carried out on that same day; yet it fell on a substitute -- most likely a "lamb without blemish."  This slain animal typified the redemptive work which would be wrought in Christ, Who is called the "lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13: 8). The skins wherewith our first parents were clothed (Gen. 3: 21) sets forth the doctrine of imputed righteousness, which Adam and Eve must have received before leaving the Garden. 

 After their exile, Adam lived to be nine-hundred and thirty years old (Gen. 5: 5). That is exactly one thousand minus seventy. Moses states that seventy signifies the years of man's life (Psalm 90:10). But a day of the Lord is a thousand years (Psalm 90: 4; 2 Peter 3: 8). Thus, Adam truly died during the first day; for he was deprived of the number of his years in the midst of the day he ate of the fruit.  But it was the first redemptive day.  Wherefore we conclude that on the day the innocent lamb was slain, the redemptive week began.  The seventh day is the Millennium, whereas the eighth will bring in the eternal economy.

Now, Christ died for our sins after four thousand years had passed. But since Christ was crucified on Friday (sixth day), it is not likely that His death has any correspondence to the redemptive days. At any rate, since days are reckoned from evening unto morning (Gen. 1: 5), the coming of Christ marks the evening of the fourth day and the beginning of the fifth. This leaves two redemptive days of 1000 years each, until the expiration of the "present evil age" (Gal. 1: 4) and the inauguration of the Millennium.  But if we would undertake a chronological reckoning, we are not at all sure where to mark the actual expiration of the four thousandth year. In this we need help from orthodox Bible scholars.

There are two theories of chronology which may be accepted. Usher's chronology would make the fourth day end in 4 B.C. Whereas John Lightfoot's reckoning makes the fourth day to end around A.D. 68. What does this prove? Well, if we harmonize the two reckonings it shows that sometime between Christ's birth and the destruction of Jerusalem the fourth day elapsed and the fifth day began. Since that time approximately two thousand years have passed. That means that sometime within the present century, the sixth day will expire, and the seventh will begin. What does all this mean?

Let us recall that the seventh day is the missing Sabbath, which was frustrated by Adam's fall.  It must be clear to the most casual observer, that if six thousand years have not already elapsed, then the redemptive Sabbath is still future. It is my firm conviction that the redemptive "sabbatismos" is described in Rev. 20: 1-6. In other words, the seventh day is what Christians call the Millennium. This period shall last 1000 years, during which Christ and His overcoming saints will rule all nations with a rod of iron. This will be the fulfillment, or rather perfection, of the original Sabbath which was originally frustrated by Adam's sin. It will be made perfect by the Second Adam.  It takes place on earth; for as the kingdom was forfeited on earth, so it must be consummated thereupon.

Adam lost Christ's presence on earth, physically --  and not in any mere spiritual sense. When he left the Garden of Eden, he believed the Gospel, and called his wife's name Eve (Heb. Chavvah), which signifies "Lifespring;" for from her should Messiah be born. Adam later taught his sons to sacrifice, indicating that he was the first priest of Jehovah.  Else it is uncertain as to how, when, or where Cain and Abel learned to bring their offerings unto God. It is also possible that Adam kept the Sabbath after his eviction from Eden, as a pledge of Christ's future kingdom on earth; though it should pointed out that by the time the law was given to Israel on Mount Sinai, the sabbath as an institution of redemptive significance had become forgotten among men (see Nehemiah 9: 14).   

It is natural to suppose that as true worship was gradually eclipsed by idolatry, the keeping of the sabbath became obsolote.  Jehovah restored the true religion when he called Israel out of bondage; and from thenceforth began the institutition of those types, both sacrificial and prophetical, which would find their consummation in the Millennial day of rest.  Thus, it is fair to conclude that the Sabbath looks forward to the Seventh day on earth, to the restoration of Christ's presence among us (cf. Acts 3: 19-21), in which He shall be rule and reign in His physical person.

(Psalm 22: 27) "All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee. For the kingdom is the Lord's: and He is the governor among the nations."

(Psalm 86: 9) "All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before Thee, O Lord; and shall glorify thy name."

(Zech. 14: 9) "And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day there shall be one Lord, and His name one."

Again, these verses cannot be allegorized, nor can they be relegated to any present hypothetical reign, such as A-Millennialists would have us to believe.  The verses will be literally fulfilled. Our Lord speaks in His parable of going to receive a kingdom, and then returning (Luke 19: 12 ff.). Hence if the kingdom He received is a universal kingdom, then it follows that He shall return to fulfill the prophecies of His reign on earth (which was the scene of the original fall), and to distribute rewards unto His servants. That nearly every orthodox creed preserves the idea of a universal dominion of Christ following the resurrection of men, leads us to believe that the very germ of Chiliasm is latent in orthodoxy.

Scripture gives us no warrant, however, for concluding that the pre-millennial advent of Christ will issue in the general resurrection of all men.  Only "they who are Christ's" will be raised at His parousia (1 Cor. 15: 23), as corporate harvest to Christ the firstfruits.  The "church which is His body" (Eph. 1: 22-23) represents only one rank or tagma, which is raised at Christ's second advent.  The wicked dead form another rank altogether, and will not be raised until the close of the Millennium. In the following articles, we hope to bring into sharper profile the mechanics of the several resurrections, and the typological relationship which they occupy in God's redemptive program. 

To be continued...