Amillennialism

• Marcion (c. 85 – 160) taught that only souls will resurrect, rejecting the bodily resurrection. He followed the teachings of Simon Magus (1st century) and Cerdo (1st-2nd centuries) [See. St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 1, 27; St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, Panarion. Against the Marcionites, Heresies 22 and 42].
• Origen (c. 185 – 254) further developed the Amillenarism of Marcion in his teaching about the reign of the saints in heaven while rejecting the idea of the Kingdom of the righteous coming down to the earth [On the First Principles, book 2, chapter 11; Against Celsus, book 2, chapter 5]. This teaching was later supported by Gaius of Rome (died c. 217) [See Eusebius], St. Dionysius of Alexandria (died 265) [See Eusebius], and Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263 – 340) [Church History, volume 3, chapter 28; volume 7, chapters 24-25].
• Emanuel Swedenborg (1688 – 1772) taught about the reign of saints in heaven but denied the bodily resurrection [The Open Apocalypse, chapter 20].
• In A.P. Lopukhin's Explanatory Bible (1904 – 1913), the first resurrection refers to the state of the righteous souls reigning in heaven, that is, "they can be guides and helpers to the Christians who are still fighting the good fight of faith on the earth. The souls find in this a new source of joy and blessing" [Rev 20:4-5].
• Sickenberger (20th century) interprets the first resurrection as the ascension of the souls of martyrs into heaven. The Millennium is for him "a symbolic number".
• Giblin (20th century), Tadros Malaty (20th century) see the Millennium as the life of saints in heaven.
• Daniil Sysoev, a priest (1974 – 2009), taught that the first resurrection is the life and reign of the righteous souls in heaven [Conversations on the Apocalypse, chapter 20].

• Cerinthus (1st-2nd centuries) believed that Jesus Christ "has not yet risen but will rise when the general resurrection of the dead takes place" [See St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, Panarion, Against Cerinthians, or Merinthians, Heresies 8 and 28, §6], i.e. he denied the first resurrection. At the same time, he also said something quite different: "Jesus suffered and rose from the dead, but Christ, who had descended upon Him, went up to heaven without suffering. And the one who came down from heaven in the form of a dove is Christ, but Jesus is not Christ" [ibid., §1; St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, book 1, chapter 26].
• St. Ephrem the Syrian (c. 306 – 373) believed that the first resurrection would occur simultaneously with the second and both would constitute "one resurrection". The Millennium signifies "the immensity of eternal life" [Discourse 96. On repentance].
• Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus (386 – 457) expressed similar views on the Millennium to those of St. Ephrem's. [A Brief Exposition of Divine Dogmas, chapter 21].
• Kraft (20th century) describes the first resurrection as the resurrection of the martyrs and sees the second one as the judgment over all the dead, which basically means that he denies the Millennium.

Few early Christians wrote about this aspect of eschatology during the first century of Christianity, but most of the available writings from the period reflect a millenarianist perspective (sometimes referred to as chiliasm). Bishop Papias of Hierapolis (A.D. 70–155) speaks in favor of a pre-millennial position in volume three of his five volume work and Aristion and the elder John echoed his sentiments, as did other first-hand disciples and secondary followers.[5] Though most writings of the time tend to favor a millennial perspective, the amillennial position may have also been present in this early period, as suggested in the Epistle of Barnabas, and it would become the ascendant view during the next two centuries.[6][7][8][9][10][11] Church fathers of the third century who rejected the millennium included Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c. 215), Origen (184/185 – 253/254), and Cyprian (c. 200 – 258). Justin Martyr (died 165), who had chiliastic tendencies in his theology,[12] mentions differing views in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, chapter 80:

"I and many others are of this opinion [premillennialism], 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."[13]

Certain amillennialists such as Albertus Pieters understand Pseudo-Barnabas to be amillennial. In the 2nd century, the Alogi (those who rejected all of John's writings) were amillennial, as was Caius in the first quarter of the 3rd century.[14] With the influence of Neo-Platonism and dualism, Clement of Alexandria and Origen denied premillennialism.[15] Likewise, Dionysius of Alexandria (died 264) argued that Revelation was not written by John and could not be interpreted literally; he was amillennial.[16]

Origen's idealizing tendency to consider only the spiritual as real (which was fundamental to his entire system) led him to combat the "rude"[17] or "crude"[18] Chiliasm of a physical and sensual beyond.

Premillennialism appeared in the available writings of the early church, but it was evident that both views existed side by side. The premillennial beliefs of the early church fathers, however, are quite different from the dominant form of modern-day premillennialism, namely dispensational premillennialism.[19]

Amillennialism gained ground after Christianity became a legal religion. It was systematized by St. Augustine in the 4th century, and this systematization carried amillennialism over as the dominant eschatology of the Medieval and Reformation periods. Augustine was originally a premillennialist, but he retracted that view, claiming the doctrine was carnal.[20]

Amillennialism was the dominant view of the Protestant Reformers. The Lutheran Church formally rejected chiliasm in The Augsburg Confession—"Art. XVII., condemns the Anabaptists (of Munster—historically most Anabaptist groups were amillennial) and others ’who now scatter Jewish opinions that, before the resurrection of the dead, the godly shall occupy the kingdom of the world, the wicked being everywhere suppressed.'"[21] Likewise, the Swiss Reformer Heinrich Bullinger wrote up the Second Helvetic Confession, which reads "We also reject the Jewish dream of a millennium, or golden age on earth, before the last judgment."[22] John Calvin wrote in Institutes that chiliasm is a "fiction" that is "too childish either to need or to be worth a refutation." He interpreted the thousand-year period of Revelation 20 non-literally, applying it to the "various disturbances that awaited the church, while still toiling on earth."[23]

Amillennialism has been widely held in the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches as well as in the Roman Catholic Church, which generally embraces an Augustinian eschatology and which has deemed that premillennialism "cannot safely be taught."[13] Amillennialism is also common among Protestant denominations such as the Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, Methodist and many Messianic Jews.[24] It represents the historical position of the Amish, Old Order Mennonite, and Conservative Mennonites (though among the more modern groups premillennialism has made inroads). It is common among groups arising from the 19th century American Restoration Movement such as the Churches of Christ,[25]^:125 Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and Christian churches and churches of Christ. It also has a following amongst Baptist denominations such as The Association of Grace Baptist Churches in England. Partial preterism is sometimes a component of amillennial hermeneutics. Amillennialism declined in Protestant circles with the rise of Postmillennialism and the resurgence of Premillennialism in the 18th and 19th centuries, but it has regained prominence in the West after World War II.