This is the fourth article in a series of articles demonstrating that the church is distinct from Israel, Israel still holds an important place in God’s program, and they have the right to exist in the land God gave them.
Article 1: Distinctives Between Israel and the Church
Article 2: Israel is Israel’s By Covenant
Article 3: The Miracle of Israel’s Existence
Early Christians understood the difference between the church and Israel. Their views may not have been thoroughly systematized, but there are undeniable elements of what we know as dispensationalism today. They knew the church was distinct from Israel and they knew Israel, the physical descendants of Abraham, had a future.
I will share a few quotes from early church leaders that reveal they expected a literal millennium, during which ethnic Israel will exist, distinct from the church and in line with what most dispensationalists teach. I do not claim 100% with all they taught, however, it proves that some primary tenants of dispensational belief is not modern or heretical as some teach.
Papias – 70-163
Papias served as bishop to the church at Hierapolis, Phrygia. His vicinity to the Apostle John in nearby Ephesus afforded him unique access to teachings concerning eschatology. Papias also had regular fellowship with John’s disciple, Polycarp.
In the fourth section of Papias’ “Oracles of Papias” he supposedly quotes the Lord in saying,
“The days will come in which vines shall grow, having each ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and in every one of the shoots ten thousand clusters, and on every one of the clusters ten thousand grapes, and every grape when pressed will give five and twenty metretes of wine…”
The historian Eusebias speaks of this and other similar quotes in his Ecclesiastical History, book III, Ch.39 when he states, “The same person, moreover, has set down other things as coming to him from unwritten tradition, amongst these some strange parables and instructions of the Saviour, and some other things of a more fabulous nature. Amongst these he says that there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on earth.”
Being an amillennialist Eusebias looked upon Papias’ writings with some disdain, but none-the-less, our goal of proving the prevalence of pre-millennialism in the early church is only strengthened by his record of Papias’ writings.
Polycarp – ce100-156
Polycarp studied, reportedly, under the Apostle John who received the Revelation and committed it to writing. Surely this Christian had an advantage over us all in understanding exactly what John meant in Revelation!
Polycarp’s student, Irenaeus, is considered one of the greatest defenders of the early church doctrine and his writings concerning eschatology are extensive as he studied prophecy beginning in Genesis and then throughout all Scripture, so for the sake of time and space we will just look at a single statement by Polycarp.
Polycarp asked these questions “But who of us are ignorant of the judgment of the Lord? Do we not know that the saints shall judge the world? As Paul teaches.” Now the only Scriptural occasion on which Christians shall judge the world is during the millennial reign of Christ. In the amillennial scheme this does not fit in anywhere. Polycarp spoke as if it were the predominant belief that saints would judge the world. In a surprised manner he questions the reader as if to say, “Who doesn’t know this?” The most natural meaning of this is that the amillennial believers of this time were a very small minority and that the majority expected a literal millennium.
Irenaeus – 120-202
Now Irenaeus, who studied under Polycarp who in turn studied under the Apostle John, also wrote a vast amount concerning the Millennium. Unlike any before him he confronted and disputed heretical teachers. He lived between 120-202 AD and eventually became bishop of Lyon.
Irenaeus wrote a five volume work titled, “Ad versus Haereses” which translates as “Against Heresies.” In book five, chapters 23-36 he provides a defence for a future restoration of Israel, a millennial reign and God’s final judgement occurring after the millennium. Further, he argues against allegorising any of these precious truths. Apparently the allegorising of Scripture had already begun to occur. This lengthy quote gives a very clear indication what the early church expected:
“The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead; when also the creation, having been renovated and set free, shall fructify with an abundance of all kinds of food, from the dew of heaven, and from the fertility of the earth: as the elders who saw John, the disciple of the Lord, related that they had heard from him how the Lord used to teach in regard to these times, and say: The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and in each one of the shoots ten thousand dusters, and on every one of the clusters ten thousand grapes, and every grape when pressed will give five and twenty metretes of wine. And when any one of the saints shall lay hold of a cluster, another shall cry out, I am a better cluster, take me; bless the Lord through me. In like manner [the Lord declared] that . . . all animals feeding [only] on the productions of the earth, should [in those days] become peaceful and harmonious among each other, and be in perfect subjection to man.”
No commentary is needed as clearly Irenaeus took a literal approach to interpreting Scripture. But Irenaeus did not stand alone, his contemporary, Justin Martyr also clearly wrote of a literal millennium.
Justin Martyr – 100ce-167ce
Justin was an enthusiastic premillennialist despite the fact that by his day opposition to “chiliasm” was growing. In one of his “arguments” with Trypho, most probably a hypothetical Jew, he writes,
“And Trypho to this replied, I remarked to you sir, that you are very anxious to be safe in all respects, since you cling to the Scriptures. But tell me, do you really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the men of our nation, and other proselytes who joined them before your Christ came? Or have you given way, and admitted this in order to have the appearance of worsting us in the controversies? Then I answered, I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise . . .. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.”
‘This Jerusalem…’ ‘your people…’
The expectation is clearly, not for the church, but for ethnic Israel to receive the promises God had made to Abraham.
In a much more concise statement Justin states, “I and as many as are orthodox Christians in all respects do acknowledge that there shall be a resurrection of the body and 1,000 years reign in Jerusalem.” “Dialogue with Trypho”, chapter 80
Justin’s views were built upon not just New Testament writings or mere hearsay but upon the writings of Old Testament saints such as Ezekiel and Isaiah. Clearly he expected a resurrection of the dead, a literal thousand-year reign in Jerusalem and blessings upon that great city and the rest of the world. Some criticise Justin as paving the way for the allegorical movement. He is charged with having made the Old Testament mean more for the Church than the synagogue and in so doing opened the door to allegorical thought but this is open to dispute. However, this quote does reveal the expectancy of the early church.
Hippolytus –? -235ce
This bishop of a church in Rome died for his faith sometime around 235AD but during his life he authored many works regarding eschatology. His work, “In De Christo et Antichristo” (The Christ and Antichrist”) documents his belief of a coming Antichrist and tribulation period. Hippolytus’ commentary on Daniel details his belief in a millennium and links Daniel and Revelation in their descriptions of end times. His commentary on Daniel is the oldest Scriptural commentary that is available.
Ephraim The Syrian – 306-373
Published in 376AD he wrote a book he entitled “Anti-Christ and the End of The World.” It has only been in the last few decades that his works were translated into English and made available for study. As a testament to his character and the quality of his hymn writing and sermons some are still used in Syrian churches even today. Here is an excerpt from his writings.
“Let us prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ so that He may draw us from the confusion which overwhelms the world. Believe you me, dearest brothers, because the coming of the Lord is nigh. Believe you me, because the end of the world is at end. Believe me because it is the very last time. Because all Saints and the elect of the Lord are gathered together before the Tribulation which is about to come and are taken to the Lord in order that they may not see at any time the confusion that overwhelms the world because of our sins. And so brothers most dear to me, it is the eleventh hour, and the end of this world comes to the harvest and angels armed and prepared hold sickles in their hands awaiting the empire or kingdom of the Lord.”
We must take note of the fact that this writer expected a time of tribulation, before which the saints would be removed, and both events precede “the empire or kingdom of the Lord.” This kingdom cannot mean the same thing as the amillennialist would like it to be because of the preceding events this Ephraim expected.
Conclusion
Volumes more could be included as many of the believers in the early church did indeed hold to the chiliast, or pre-millennial view. Quite early on the allegorising of Scripture did occur but until the marriage of church and state this practice was not received on the whole.
Walvoord in his book, The Millennial Kingdom, sums up his chapter on amillenialism in the early church with this statement: “Amillenialism in the first three centuries rests for the most part on silence, on one disputed representative in the first century, none in the second and a fallacious and destructive principle of interpretation in the third century.”
Israel is distinct from the church and the land belongs to them in the past, present, and future.
Leave a Reply