Revelation: Four Views and a Millennium?

There are four main views of interpretation of the book of Revelation and of eschatology in general. There is more to the doctrine of Eschatology than the book of Revelation, there are many places in the Bible that discuss eschatology or “last things”. Some examples are: Daniel 2, 7, and 9; Matthew 21, 23, 24, 28; Mark 13; Luke 21; Acts 1; 1 Corinthians 15; 2 Peter 3; the book of Hebrews; Joel 2; 1 Thessalonians 4; Deuteronomy 28; Isaiah 42, 60, and 65; Psalm 2, 72, and 110 the list goes on (this is not exhaustive). Eschatology is much bigger than just Revelation, and our interpretation of Revelation depends heavily upon our Hermeneutic. It also involves our understanding of other doctrines such as: Baptism of Christ and our own Baptism, Lake of Fire (Second Death), The Kingdom of God, The Ascension of Christ, The Last Resurrection, The Intermediate State, The Return of Christ (Second Coming), Heaven, and The New Heavens and Earth. There are far more doctrines but if you do not understand these ones, and if you do not let Scripture interpret Scripture (the proper Hermeneutic) and adhere to what the text says and let it inform you (Exegesis) then you will be swayed by any kind of idea or thought, you’ll run into the far greater risk of getting creative and developing terms that the Bible does not give.

The four views of Revelation are views of interpretation yet they are more of a smorgasbord as people do not always stay in their favored interpretation. Such as myself, I agree with the Preterist and Idealist interpretations. When it comes to interpretative issues a study of all viewpoints often leads to the best possible outcome of coming to a decision to which one you agree with. Yet a disclaimer, Scripture trumps all of these interpretations and when an interpretation veers off from Scripture, we do our best with being honest with the text and being consistent with the Word of God. No matter how disruptive that might be to what we’ve been taught and our traditions.

The book of Revelation is a notoriously difficult book of the Bible, and understanding its genre and context is key, also how it ties to other parts of Scripture. Let’s be honest, we often get the idea that the Bible says this, then Revelation is somehow separate from the Bible and has all these confusing images and events depicted in it. Yet, Revelation is part of the Bible, it is God’s Word, it is His story, He makes the rules in how we are to read it and adhere to it. So, we treat the book of Revelation like any other book of the Bible. We stay consistent with the proper Exegetical Hermeneutic, letting Scripture interpret Scripture, this does not mean that we are consistent throughout the entire Bible then veer off at the end.

Bear with me as I address some more starting details by giving a recommendation. If you are new to the faith or do not know a lot about the Bible and what it teaches, do not read Revelation right now; it will not be helpful or fruitful to you. John uses a ton of Old Testament motifs and allusions that if you do not know, Revelation is going to be very confusing for you. I recommend that you study the Gospels and how Christ fulfills the Law and what it means that Jesus brought His kingdom and is ruling at the right hand of the Father (1 Corinthians 15; Psalm 110; Matthew 28). Once you have that and other essential doctrine (Gospel, Trinity, Salvation, Justification, God’s Holiness and His Attributes; just a few of many) under your belt, the motifs and allusions that John makes in Revelation will not be like looking into a foggy landscape, although it is easy to fall into the desire to be creative over consistency with what the Bible teaches. Eschatology is a non-essential (secondary), meaning that your understanding of it does not save you; better to understand your salvation and being in Christ and what that means than about seals and trumpets, then locust/scorpion creatures and fire breathing horses with stinging tails. Eschatology is important and it matters, but it will take time for your understanding. The conversations should be had, but not prioritized over what the Gospel is and what does it mean that we are in Christ; that is a far better thing to learn and discuss. With my disclaimer and recommendation over, lets discuss the four views of Revelation.

The first interpretation that we will discuss is that of Futurism (Futurist) which asserts that the majority of the prophesies of Revelation have not yet been fulfilled and await future fulfillment. They usually apply that everything after chapter 4 to a relatively brief period before the return of Christ. The visions of chapters 6-18 will occur in a period of final crisis just before the second coming, noting that chapters 19-22 foretell the second coming of Christ with its accompanying events: general resurrection, last judgment, replacement of the first heavens and earth by a new heavens and earth. For the Futurist, the traumas portrayed in the preceding chapters lead up to the history-consummating events of chapters 19-22.

The second interpretation is that of Historicism (Historicist) which can be called the classical Protestant interpretation (although not all Protestants are Historicists as I have mentioned above, looking at all four views is more helpful than just one). Historicists see the book of Revelation as a prewritten record of the course of history from the time of John to the end of the world (history). Fulfillment is thus considered to be in progress at present and has been unfolding for nearly two thousand years. This course of history is better understood as the history of the Church which is depicted through Revelation 6-18:24 with the sequence of the visions and sevenfold cycles of visions correlating directly to the order of the events or eras they symbolize.

The third interpretation is that of Idealism (Idealist/Spiritual) which says that the visions of Revelation represent trends and forces, often spiritual and thus invisible, that are engaged in the ongoing warfare of the kingdom of God with the devil’s kingdom of darkness, warfare that continues between the victory won by Christ in His suffering and exaltation and His glorious bodily return. Fulfillment is seen either as entirely spiritual or as recurrent, finding represented expression in various historical events throughout the age, rather than in one-time, specific fulfillments. The prophecy is thus rendered applicable to Christians in any age.

The fourth interpretation is that of Preterism (Preterist) which says that fulfillment of most of the visions occurred in the past and specifically in the fall of Jerusalem (if Revelation was written sometime in the A.D. 60’s instead of the 90’s), the fall of the Roman empire, or both. Preterist interpreters appeal to the in-text descriptions of what is going to come is soon to take place (1:1,3; 22:6,10). So, the fulfillment was “future” from the point of view of the inspired author, but is “past” from our vantage point in history. Most Preterists believe that the final chapters of Revelation look forward to the second coming of Christ. Others think that everything in the book reached its culmination in the past (That view is called Full-Preterism, which is a heresy), most Preterists would call themselves a Partial-Preterist or just Preterist (much like Calvinists don't call themselves partial-Calvinists just because some would be susbcribe to be hyper-Calvinists).

Once again, I want to make a point that these four interpretations by themselves do not answer all the questions, it is best to look at all of them and glean from them for better help understanding the text, but the use of Scripture is vital in understanding the allusions and motifs used by John, which can all be found in the Old Testament. After the four views there is also the Millennium, which is only mentioned in Revelation in chapter 20 the word never comes up again in Scripture. There are three views on what the Millennium pertains to the reign of Christ and the complete establishment of the New Heavens and Earth.

The first view of the Millennium that we will look at is called Premillennialism (Pre-Mil) which holds that the thousand years follows the second coming that is described in 19:11-21. After the second coming, Satan is bound and Christ ushers in a long period of earthly peace and prosperity. Some think of this as a literal thousand years, but others consider the number to mean a very long period of time. Christians will receive resurrection bodies at the beginning of the millennium but the final judgment for all others takes place at the end after a rebellion by Satan once he is released for a little while. In the second century Justin Martyr and Papias were among those who held a Pre-Mil view. There are two principal varieties of premillennialism: that of Historical Premillennialism and that of Dispensational Premillennialism (better understood as just Dispensationalism as it is a theological system, such as how Reformed Theology is not a denomination but a teaching). The Dispensationalist differs from the Historical Pre-Mil in its emphasis on the continuing centrality of national Israel in God’s eschatological program and anticipation of a ‘Rapture’ also known as a ‘Secret Rapture’ of Christians to heaven before the beginning of the Tribulation. Although in Dispensational theology there are also three different views of when the Rapture takes place in the Tribulation, the three are dubbed as Pre-Tribulation, Mid-Tribulation, and Post-Tribulation which I will not go into full detail here. Why? Well after studying Dispensational Theology and once believing in it myself, I find it to be in severe error on many of its teachings of the ‘Rapture’, National Israel, and the Great Tribulation and when it occurs or occurred, and how they deal with Biblical prophecy.

Premillennialism has been accused by its critics of promoting a pessimistic outlook for the temporal future—although, if this is what Scripture teaches, Pre-Mils can hardly be fouled for such pessimism. This view of the millennium is most likely to be held by those who have a Futurist interpretation of Revelation and a Dispensational theology. Yet that does not mean a Futurist has to be Dispensational or Historically Pre-Mil, it is just more likely that they are. Notable Pre-Mils either of Historical or Dispensational: Graham, Swaggart, Hagee, Lindsey, Lahaye, MacArthur, Ladd, Walvoord, Archer, and Fienberg.

The second view of the Millennium is that of Amillennialism (A-Mil) which understands the millennium to be a picture of the present reign of Christ and of the saints of heaven initiated by the binding of Satan (Matthew 12:29) and with the result that Satan can no longer deceive the nations (Matthew 4:14-16; Acts 17:30, 31). The number thousand is a symbolic number representing an indefinite long period of time, which happens to correspond to the entire span of time from the first coming of Christ until His second coming. In other words, the Millennium is the same as one might call the “Church Age”. Most aspects of Revelation 20 like most of Revelation is taken symbolically. The binding of Satan happened spiritually at the cross; the reign of the saints is the present age; the loosing of Satan is a final period of deception coming on the world in the end of the age; the fire from heaven that devours the wicked is the second coming of Christ. Those embracing this understanding have included virtually every theologian from St. Augustine (although he was optimistic of the future of the Church) through the Reformation and many adherents today. The A-Mil view is found in many of the various approaches to Revelation, including Historicists (Martin Luther), Preterists (Jay Adams), and Idealists (William Hendriksen), but is rare among Futurists (Abraham Kuyper); other notable A-Mils are Hoekema and Johnson.

In Amillennialism the “First Resurrection” is either the life of the Christians who have died and are with Christ in Heaven, or life with Christ starts with spiritual new birth (Romans 6:8-11; Ephesians 2:6; Colossians 3:1-4), though the former is more likely. Satan has been bound through the triumph of Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection (John 12:31; Colossians 2:15).

The third view of the Millennium is that of Postmillennialism (Post-Mil) which asserts that the kingdom of God and the church will experience much more expansion—and, typically, increasingly visible influence in social and political conditions—on earth before the second coming. The thousand years is understood by some Post-Mils as a final period of earthly Christian triumph following the spread of the Gospel. Other Post-Mils agree with Amillennialists in identifying Revelation 20:1-6 with the entire period that begins with the resurrection of Christ. Post-Mils and A-Mils often agree on a lot of the details, the only thing that distinguishes them is the physical aspect of God’s kingdom as Christ reigns at the right hand of the Father. Many great evangelical leaders including B. B. Warfield and Jonathan Edwards [and most Puritans], were Postmillennialists, as are a growing number of modern evangelicals, known as Christian Reconstructionalists. They place emphasis on the need to reform, through Law and the Gospel, the political and cultural spheres, as a part of bringing the world systems into greater conformity to the demands of Christ; the King. Post-Mils are often Preterists, yet like I’ve pointed out they do not have to be. Anyone can be one of the four views and one of the three millennial views, I am only noting the most common thing to happen. Notable Post-Mils are Chilton, Gentry, DeMar, Gore, Wilson, Bahnsen, Durbin, Boot, Sanderlin and White. While Rushdoony is an Idealist Postmillennialist. Postmillennialism is also seen as the more optimistic of the three views.

That is quite a bit of information of the three millennial views. I am going to give you a last paragraph on all three for reiteration.

Premillennialism: The eschatological view that Christ will return “before the millennium” in order to resurrect the saints, the “first resurrection”, establish a military rule from Jerusalem over the rebellious nations “the battle of Armageddon”, and usher in a thousand year period of material peace and prosperity; at the end of this period the nations (still in natural bodies) will rebel and make war against Christ and the resurrected saints (the battle of Gog and Magog), who will be saved by the fire from heaven, followed by the second resurrection—now of unbelievers—and the final judgment.

Amillennialism: The eschatological view that on earth before the return of Christ there will be no age of military rule by Christ (contrary to Premillennialism) nor an age of great blessing and success for the Gospel (contrary to Postmillennialism); at Christ’s return the general resurrection of the righteous and unrighteous will take place, followed immediately by the final judgement.

Postmillennialism: The eschatological view that Christ will return “after the millennium”; Christ has established His Messianic kingdom on earth, it is growing in numbers, area, and influence by means of the preaching of the Gospel and Christian nurture, and it will have visible, worldwide, and blessed success before Christ returns at the general resurrection for final judgement.

Again, it is important to keep in mind that each of the four views: Futurist, Historicist, Idealist, and Preterist can belong to any of the millennial views: Pre, Post, and A-Mil. There are connections that are most likely to be the case but not always. I do not personally feel that just one view is sufficient enough as a definitive interpretation. Scripture teaches the correct view and if we let our traditions go and approach the text honestly and reverently I believe it teaches what each of the four views offer.

With that information out of the way, I believe it is only right that I let you know my view on Eschatology and how I interpret Revelation. I do not much care for the different views in the idea of what I want to call myself. But, it is important to know what people would label you as. If we wanted to get technical I am a Partial-Preterist/Idealist Postmillennialist. I do not discount Historicism or Futurism, but I do think they miss the target by quite a lot. Preterism is great for the historical aspect of Revelation and Idealism is great for applying the themes of the book for the Christian in our everyday life. Yet, even with all the fancy terms, I care about what the Word of God says, I will go with the interpretation of what Scripture says over everything else. Yet in what I have studied I am not ashamed to be tacked on into those groups of Christians who see it in those views. Yet, we are God’s people, we are the body of Christ and we should come together and sharpen our iron of the things of God and live our lives evermore in the image of Christ. I also adhere to Reformed Theology or as Charles Spurgeon once called it, Biblical Christianity. It gets complicated real fast when we involve all the moving pieces, but at the end of the day we want to be consistent with the Word of God and live our lives as He has commanded us to live.