What is Premillianism
As I mentioned in my sermon yesterday, it was regrettable that the Queensland Police Service (QPS) and national media misconstrued the Christian eschatological (end times) position of Premillianism, labeling it an 'extremist belief' and linked it to the Wieambilla shootings (i..e., 6PR, 9News, The Canberra Times).
To help untangle this knot, it's first helpful to know that, broadly speaking, there are three different eschatological (end times) positions, premillennial, postmillennial, and amillennial. As the name suggests, these perspectives centre around how the millennium (1000 years) spoken of in Revelation 20 is to be interpreted.
Premillennialism is the belief that Christ will physically return prior (pre) to establishing his physical kingdom on earth that will last for 1000 years.
Amillennialism, takes the millennium to be symbolic in keeping with the (symbolic) literary style of the Revelation and understands Christ to reign now from heaven during the church age, that he will return physically, followed by final the judgment and final states.
Postmillenialism understands Christ's Kingdom to grow on earth and that the nations will become more and more Christian, and that the earth will experience a period of peace and prosperity before Christ's return.
In each of these positions, there are variations of the tribulation, which is a period of suffering that Christians are expected to endure prior to Christ's return.
Each of these positions can be found throughout Church History, for example, the writings of the early church Father Tertullian (155 AD - 220 AD) indicate that he was a premillennialist. Augustine, and later on the reformers were largely amillennialists. And the Puritans were largely postmillennialists. This matter has been regarded as being secondary to salvation, and while we might debate about them, it should not be a cause for division. Jesus will return, and when he does, we will all know which was the right perspective.
The question is however, "are premillennialists extremists because they hold to this interpretation?"
The answer is categorical "no!" In fact, premillennialists likely take the largest piece of the percentage pie, at least in the evangelical, pentecostal, and non-denomination world.
The matter should however be reframed. Extremists can attach themselves to any religion, race, community, or political persuasion. The question is, were the Trains consistent in their obedience to Biblical teaching? And the answer is clearly no. Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and we are never commanded to take up arms to advance this kingdom. The weapons given to Christians are prayer and proclamation. Paul writes (Ephesians 6:12),
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
When Peter drew his sword and cut off the ear of a man in order to defend Jesus, Jesus healed the man and then left us with the following saying (Matthew 26:52),
"For all who take the sword will perish by the sword."
And it's well known that countless Christians, when persecuted by the state, chose to die as martyrs, refusing to pick up weapons in their own defense.
Even during tribulation, Jesus gives us no call-to-arms (Revelation 13:10),
If anyone is to be taken captive,
to captivity he goes;
if anyone is to be slain with the sword,
with the sword must he be slain.
The regrettable position that the QPS and media promoted was that the 'premillennialist interpretation' plus 'antivaccine sentiment' plus a distrust for government is a recipe for religious terrorism. But Christians have no call-to-arms to defend the faith against persecution.
On the matter of the Trains, there was no conduct in their behaviour that was remotely Christian, no verse in the Bible could justify their actions. Jesus says (Matt. 7:16), "You will recognize them by their fruits." The fruit of the Trains could never be said to be Christian.
Should anyone be interested in my eschatological position, I personally believe that amillennialism makes the best sense of the symbolic literary style of The Revelation. Though I wish I could be convinced of Postmillennialism!
