Historic Pre-Millenialism: The Early Church Fathers Were Not Dispensational, Pre-Millenial Zionist

The book, The Theocratic Kingdom by George N. H. Peters is a dispensational pre-millennial work with early Zionist views.  In this book, Peters cites several early Church fathers as proof of his views, contrasting their views of the Millennial Reign of Christ.  However, most people reading works like Peters do not realize that there is a huge gulf between what is misconstrued as pre-millennialism in the Church fathers, known as Historic Pre-millennialism,  versus modern dispensational pre-millennialism:

A major difference between historic and dispensational premillennialism is the view of the church in relation to Israel. Historics do not see so sharp a distinction between Israel and the church as the dispensationalists do, but instead view believers of all ages as part of one group, now revealed as the body of Christ. Thus, historic premillennialists see no issue with the church going through the Great Tribulation, and they do not need a separate pre-tribulational rapture of some believers as the dispensational system requires. – Wikipedia

The fathers who did subscibe to some form of pre-millenialism were few:

“But it is not correct to say, as premillenarians do, that it was generally accepted in the first three centuries. The truth of the matter is that the adherents of this doctrine were a rather limited number. There is no trace of it in Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Tatian, Athenogoras, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dionysius, and other important church fathers.” (Louis Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrines, p. 262).

The majority of the Church fathers were partial preterist or a mix with amillennial views.  Some contain a mix of partial preterist and pre-millennial views. Either way, Justin Martyr speaking of his belief in a thousand year reign on Earth, stated that it did not matter what view was held:

“I and many others are of this opinion, and believe that such will take place … but, on the other hand, many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.” -Justin Martyr

What the Church Fathers felt was orthodox doctrine was firmly defended. For example,  that the Church is the ONLY Israel (something dispensational Zionist would not agree with), the last judgement,  the Trinity and so on. But here we see the concession of Justin Martyr that other views existed and that was acceptable. His view was not a dogma, or a must have view. And as dismaying as it may be to modern Zionist, he goes on to explain a view of the thousand year reign that did in fact excludes the Jews:

the Sadducees, or similar sects of Genistæ, Meristæ,  Galilæans, Hellenists,  Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews (do not hear me impatiently when I tell you what I think), but are [only] called Jews and children of Abraham, worshipping God with the lips, as God Himself declared, but the heart was far from Him. 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.

Justin Martyr’s views of the thousand year reign only included Christians, not the restoration of the Jews to Israel as Zionist believe. He also viewed the reign of Christ as happening, not on Earth as it exist now. Quoting from Isaiah he believed it will be during the time of the new Heaven and Earth:

“For Isaiah spake thus concerning this space of a thousand years: ‘For there shall be the new heaven and the new earth, and the former shall not be remembered, or come into their heart; but they shall find joy and gladness in it, which things I create.” -Justin Martyr

Justin Marty believed the dead will rise first and the faithful to Christ who reign with Him.  This is exactly what Revelation 20 says:

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Tertullian wrote that the thousand year reign would happen in a divinely built Jerusalem,  not in a man made third temple:

“But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; in as much as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem”

Again, there is no mention of the restoration of the Jews to Israel, a third temple or reinstatement of sacrifices as taught by Pre-Millennial Zionism.

Irenaeus is often cited as well in support of false doctrines concerning the Millennium:

“The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead“

Irenaeus’ views of the Millennium again has nothing in common with Modern Pre-Millennial Dispensationalism or Zionism. In Irenaeus’ writings we see that the risen dead will reign in the Millennial Kingdom or the New Heaven and Earth era.

In opposition to what is believed by Zionist, Justin Martyr did not believe in dual covenants either:

Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law–namely, Christ–has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance.

Other Church fathers quoted by Peters held the same views of the Covenants.  Irenaeus, for example is cited by Peters as holding to a thousand year reign of Christ, yet he also does not hold any Zionist dispensational views. In Irenaeus’ writings the church is the only true Israel. The restoration of the Jews to the Nation of Israel and restoration of the Old Covenant are not found in his writings:

Further, also, concerning Jerusalem and the Lord, they venture to assert that, if it had been “the city of the great King,” it would not have been deserted. This is just as if any one should say, that if straw were a creation of God, it would never part company with the wheat; and that the vine twigs, if made by God, never would be lopped away and deprived of the clusters. But as these [vine twigs] have not been originally made for their own sake, but for that of the fruit growing upon them, which being come to maturity and taken away, they are left behind, and those which do not conduce to fructification are lopped off altogether; so also [was it with] Jerusalem, which had in herself borne the yoke of bondage (under which man was reduced, who in former times was not subject to God when death was reigning, and being subdued, became a fit subject for liberty), when the fruit of liberty had come, and reached maturity, and been reaped and stored in the barn, and when those which had the power to produce fruit had been carried away from her [i.e., from Jerusalem], and scattered throughout all the world. Even as Esaias saith, “The children of Jacob shall strike root, and Israel shall flourish, and the whole world shall be filled with his fruit.” The fruit, therefore, having been sown throughout all the world, she (Jerusalem) was deservedly forsaken, and those things which had formerly brought forth fruit abundantly were taken away; for from these, according to the flesh, were Christ and the apostles enabled to bring forth fruit. But now these are no longer useful for bringing forth fruit. For all things which have a beginning in time must of course have an end in time also.

Since, then, the law originated with Moses, it terminated with John as a necessary consequence. Christ had come to fulfil it: wherefore “the law and the prophets were” with them “until John.” And therefore Jerusalem, taking its commencement from David, and fulfilling its own times, must have an end of legislation when the new covenant was revealed. – Irenaeus, Against Heresies – Book IV

The Early Church fathers were anti-political and anti-military. Modern Zionism however is a political entity:

No new covenant was given, but they used the Mosaic law until the coming of the Lord; but from the Lord’s advent, the new covenant which brings back peace, and the law which gives life, has gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: “For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem; and He shall rebuke many people; and they shall break down their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks, and they shall no longer learn to fight.”… the law of liberty… caused such a change in the state of things, that these [nations] did form the swords and war-lances into ploughshares, and changed them into pruning-hooks for reaping the corn, [that is], into instruments used for peaceful purposes, and that they are now unaccustomed to fighting, but when smitten, offer also the other cheek – Justin Martyr

I refuse to do military service. I desire to rule over no one – I have withdrawn from worldly politics! Now my only politics is spiritual – how that I might be anxious for nothing except to root out all worldly anxieties and care.……..So we have no pressing inducement to take part in your public meetings. Nor is there anything more entirely foreign to us than the affairs of state. We acknowledge one all-embracing commonwealth – the world. We renounce all your spectacles.”“For what difference is there between provoker and provoked? The only difference is that the former was the first to do evil, but the latter did evil afterwards. Each one stands condemned in the eyes of the Lord for hurting a man. For God both prohibits and condemns every wickedness. In evil doing, there is no account taken of the order… the commandment is absolute: evil is not to be repaid with evil.”- Tertullian

Christ is the Rock by which, and on which, the Church is founded. And thus it is overcome by no traces of maddened men. Therefore they are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years; who think, that is to say, with the heretic Cerinthus. For the kingdom of Christ is now eternal in the saints, although the glory of the saints shall be manifested after the resurrection. – Victorinus