The Man of Sin

The "man of sin," whom St. Paul described as active and ready to overtake the Jewish Holy Temple in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8, was the Zealot Messiah Menahem, who in AD 66 overtook the Roman Fortress of Masada, used the weapons to launch a Revolt against Rome from the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, and executed the Jewish High Priest Ananias. This Great Revolt against Rome is known to history as the Roman Jewish War, which culminated in the destruction of the Jewish nation and Temple at AD 70.

Menahem was the grandson of Judas the Galilean, who had led an anti-Roman revolt in 6 CE; two of his relatives had been crucified after a similar disturbance. The group of Menahem was called Sicarians ('dagger men'). The Sicarii Zealots hailed their leader as king of the Jews and went to Jerusalem, where they laid siege to the remaining Roman garrison. In September AD 66, the Roman leaders occupying Jerusalem surrendered and were lynched.

This Temple takeover, which help launched the Great Revolt, was the event that St. Paul instructed the Thessalonian believers to mark as the time for Christ's judgment to begin upon Israel. And indeed it was the beginning of God's judgment, for immediately following this the Romans, led by Cestius Gallus, marched to the rebellious province, liberated the pro-Roman capital of Galilee (Sepphoris), and continued to Jerusalem. When they appeared at Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians fled the city according to Christ's instructions (Luke 21:20-23) and were spared the horrible events that followed. Cestius Gallus was temporarily halted at Jerusalem by the Zealot revolutionaries, and this temporary halt permitted the Christians to escape the great city. The Romans quickly sent reinforcements and promptly sealed off all of Jerusalem, leaving millions of Jews from all over the empire trapped inside (Luke 19:40-44), where they went through civil war, plague, famine, and final slaughter by the Romans at AD 70. The Temple was taken down stone-by-stone as Christ prophesied (Matt 24:1-3). For those were the days of vengeance, that all things written might be fulfilled (Luke 21:20-22). More on 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8.

Millennial Heresy, Origins of

The Millennium doctrine started in an ungodly heretic by the name of Cerinthus, who lived in the first century. It is true that the Jews generally believed that the Messiah would establish a literal or earthly kingdom. And even some of them believed that Messiah's reign would last a thousand years. We here give an extract from Neander's History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. 1, Page 248.

"The idea of a Millennial reign proceeded from Judaism; for among the Jews the representation was current that the Messiah would reign a thousand years upon earth. . . . Such products of Jewish imagination passed over into Christianity."

As before stated, Cerinthus was the first to attempt to introduce this doctrine under Christianity. Let history speak. In Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, Book III, Chapter 28, is preserved a fragment from the writings of Caius, who lived about the close of the second century, which gives us the following account of Cerinthus's heresy:

"But Cerinthus, too, through revelations written, as he would have us believe, by a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things, which he pretends were shown him by angels; alleging that after the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is to be on earth, and that the flesh dwelling in Jerusalem is again to be subject to desires and pleasures. And being an enemy to the scriptures of God, wishing to deceive men, he says that there is to be space of a thousand years for marriage festivities." "One of the doctrines he taught was, that Christ would have an earthly kingdom."

This is the true origin of the Millennium theory. The reader will observe how lightly our author speaks of Cerinthus's idea of the kingdom of Christ being set up on earth after the resurrection. He says this doctrine was "something which he [Cerinthus] pretends was shown to him by angels." Caius must therefore have believed the orthodox teachings of the scriptures, that Christ's kingdom was set up at his first coming. Observe also that Caius calls Cerinthus "an enemy to the scriptures of God," and one who was "wishing to deceive men." This language he uses with special reference to the one thousand years Cerinthus claimed would be spent in sensuality. Notice also that Cerinthus believed in an earthly kingdom.

Cerinthus lived in the days of the apostle John. We will now call your attention to the attitude of the beloved apostle toward this Millennial teacher. Irenaeus, who was born about 120 A. D. and was acquainted with Polycarp, the disciple of John, [Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., V. 24], states that while John was at Ephesus, he entered a bath to wash and found that Cerinthus was within, and refused to bathe in the same bath house, but left the building, and exhorted those with him to do the same, saying, "Let us flee, lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, that enemy of the truth, is within." (Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., III. 28).

Let this be a rebuke to modern Millennial advocates. They claim their doctrine is well founded in the Apocalypse of John. But John called the founder of their theory "that enemy of the truth."

"Cerinthus required his followers to worship the supreme God.... He promised them a resurrection of their bodies, which would be succeeded by exquisite delights in the Millenary reign of Christ.... For Cerinthus supposed that Christ would hereafter return . . . and would reign with his followers a thousand years in Palestine." (Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., Page 50)

"Cerinthus required his followers to retain part of the Mosaical law, but to regulate their lives by the example of Christ: and taught that after the resurrection Christ would reign upon earth, with his faithful disciples, a thousand years, which would be spent in the highest sensual indulgences. This mixture of Judaism and Oriental philosophy was calculated to make many converts, and this sect soon became very numerous. They admitted a part of St. Matthew's Gospel but rejected the rest, and held the epistles of St. Paul in great abhorrence." (Gregory and Ruter's Church History., Page 30)

"Even though the floods of the nations and the vain superstitions of heretics should revolt against their true faith, they are overcome, and shall be dissolved as the foam, because Christ is the rock by which, and on which, the church is founded. And thus it is overcome by no [16] 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 his saints." (From a commentary on the Apocalypse, by Victorinus, Ante-Nicene Fathers)

Thank God for the united testimony of history. Observe how closely the modern Millennium teachers cling to the doctrines of their founder. Cerinthus taught that "Christ will have an earthly kingdom." "After the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is to be on earth." "The resurrection would be followed by exquisite delights in the Millenary reign of Christ." " That Christ would hereafter return, and would reign with his followers a thousand years in Palestine." The only difference is that his modern followers have dropped the idea of sensuality. But how did the early church regard the doctrine of Cerinthus? The apostle John called Cerinthus "that enemy of the truth." They taught that "they are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years."

What was the doctrine of the early church according to history? "Christ is the rock on which, and by which the church is founded." "The kingdom of Christ is now eternal in his saints." "It was the universal feeling among primitive Christians that they were living in the last period of the world's history." (Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. VIII.. Page 534). The reason they believed this was because the New Testament was their faith, and this is the doctrine of the New Testament throughout. No wonder Cerinthus and his followers "rejected part of St. Matthew's Gospel, and held the epistles of Paul in great abhorrence." Just so do modern Millennium teachers dwell very little in the plain Gospels and Epistles to prove their doctrines, but speculate in prophecy and revelation.

Having seen that Cerinthus and his false doctrine were rejected by God's church we will now come to its next chief advocate, Papias, who lived in the first half of the second century. Eusebius, under the heading "The Writings of Papias," says of him:

"The same historian also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise some strange parables of our Lord, and of his doctrine, and some other matters rather too fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain Millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses." (Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., Book m, Chap. 39, Page 115).

Historians generally tell us that Papias was a very zealous advocate of this imaginary reign of Christ on earth. "The first distinguished opponent of this doctrine was Origen, who attacked it with great earnestness and ingenuity, and seems, in spite of some opposition to have thrown it into general discredit." (Wadington's History, Page 56). "This obscure doctrine was probably known to but very few except the Fathers of the church, and is very sparingly mentioned by them during the first two centuries; and there is reason to believe that it scarcely attained much notoriety even among the learned Christians, until it was made a matter of controversy by Origen, and then rejected by the great majority. In fact we find Origen himself asserting that it was confined to those of the simpler sort."(Wadington's History, Page 56).

Next among the advocates of this doctrine was Nepos, a bishop in Egypt. He advocated the doctrine about A. D. 255. We here insert the following from Eusebius's History, Book VII, Chapter 23, under the heading "Nepos, and His Schism."

"He taught that the promises given to holy men in the scriptures should be understood more as the Jews understood them, and supposed that there would be a certain Millennium of sensual luxury on this earth: thinking, therefore, that he could establish his own opinion by the Revelation of John . . . He (Nepos) asserts that there will be an earthly reign of Christ." "Though Millennialism had been suppressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Dr. Schaff's History, Page 299). "

Nowhere in the discourses of Jesus is there a hint of a limited duration of the Messianic kingdom. The apostolic epistles are equally free from any trace of Chiliasm."(Encyclopedia Brittanica--Articles on Millennium).

To sum up the uniform voice of history, the theory of a literal kingdom and reign on the earth was gathered from Jewish fabulous "apocalypse," "unwritten tradition," "carnal misapprehensions," "pretended visions," "suppositions," and "superstitious imaginations." Its advocates were said to be "very limited in their understanding," and "of the simple sort." Millennialism had the worst heretic in the first century for its founder, and its chief advocates thereafter were rejected by the early church. From time to time it was revived by "heretical sects." The vain worldly expectation that the Messiah would establish a literal kingdom caused the Jews to reject him, and his spiritual kingdom. They only wanted an earthly kingdom; hence rejected and crucified the Son of God. As soon as the church began to apostatize, and lost the glory of his spiritual kingdom, vain ambitions awakened the old Jewish desire for a literal kingdom. And so it has come to pass that we have at this time of dead formality a multitude of men teaching the same abominable lie and false hope which crucified Christ nearly nineteen hundred years ago; namely, a literal kingdom of Christ.

Source: H. M. Riggle, "History of the Millennium," The Kingdom of God, 1899.

Millennium - No Literal Thousand Years

Despite all the millennial hysteria, there is only one solitary passage in scripture pertaining to some "thousand years" (Rev 20:1-9). Zero mentions of a millennium may be found in the Old Testament, gospels, or epistles. The fact is, there is no historical thousand years. The bible writers leave no place on any timeline that accommodates the much ballyhooed millennium. Here's how we know the "thousand years" of Rev 20 is a symbol and cannot be a true time period of history:

(1) Premillennialists divide the judgment of the living and dead into multiple events separated by a time period of one thousand years. Scripture, in contrast, says that Christ's judgment of the living and the dead occurs "at his coming" (2 Tim 4:1; Matt 25:31-46; Rev 11:15,17-18). Thus, premillennialism is false.

(2) Premillennialists divide the resurrection of the just and the resurrection of the unjust into multiple events separated by a time period of one thousand years. Scripture, in contrast, says that the resurrection of the dead occurs at his coming (1 Cor 15:22-23) and pertains to both the just and unjust together (John 5:27-29, Acts 24:15, Daniel 12:1-2). Thus, premillennialism is false.

(3) Premillennialists claim that the wicked are not judged and raised simultaneously with the righteous on "the last day." Scripture, in contrast, says that it is on "the last day" that Jesus both resurrects and judges the wicked (Jn 12:48; Jn 6:44,54). Thus, premillennialism is false.

(4) Premillennialists claim that the "Thief in the Night" (Matt 24:43) speaks of some "rapture away of christians" that takes place seven years prior to the Day of the Lord/coming of Christ; they also claim that the "new heavens and earth" comes one thousand years after that. St. Paul, in contrast, says the "Thief in the Night" event is the Day of the Lord (1 Thess 5:2-5). Interestingly, St. Peter teaches that this same "Day of the Lord/Thief in the Night" event is simultaneous with the "passing of heavens and Earth" (2 Peter 3:10). Therefore we see that the "Thief in the Night," the "Day of the Lord," and "the passing of heavens and earth" are simultaneous, leaving no room for a literal thousand years in between the events. Finally, we note that Jesus says the "Thief in the Night" event took place for the first-century church (Rev 3:2-3). No literal thousand years can be made to fit anywhere. The New Heavens/Earth and Second Coming are clearly simultaneous. Thus, premillennialism is false.

(5) Premillennialists claim that Christ's kingdom has been postponed and will begin at some future millennium. Scripture, in contrast, says that Christ's kingdom was established during his generation (Mark 1:14-15; Rev 1:5-6,9) and isn't limited to a thousand years. Christ's Kingdom is eternal (Isa 9:6-7), and Christ has been the King of Kings for twenty centuries now, as the only Sovereign of Heaven and Earth (Matt 28:18-19/Rev 1:5-6/1 Tim 6:15/1 Pet 3:22). We are not waiting for Christ to reign. He reigns, and the increase of his government has no end. Thus, premillennialism is false.

As we see, Premillennialists wrongly divide key events into many scattered events spread out over a long period of a thousand years, with some parts happening at some "rapture," some happening at the second coming, and some happening after the completion of a literal thousand years. That scheme clearly contradicts scripture. Scripture refutes premillennialism.

There is no literal-historical thousand years. Jesus, Daniel, and Paul are clear on this. St. John, who has many symbolic uses for the Book of Revelation, and who does not give a sequential pattern of events, should not be understood in the literal sense--his vision is a story that parallels God's cataclysmic judgment upon first-century Israel. It it obvious that the generation in view is St. John's then-contemporary generation (Rev 1:1,3; 22:6-7; 22:10-11). It is obvious that the cataclysmic judgment is the destruction of apostate Jerusalem and the Temple, which took place in John's time and about which Christ spoke at length.

Millennium - Rejection by Early Church Fathers

St. Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa (AD 336-395)

"Do we romance about three Resurrections? Do we promise the gluttony of the Millennium? Do we declare that the Jewish animal-sacrifices shall be restored? Do we lower men's hopes again to the Jerusalem below, imagining its rebuilding with stones of a more brilliant material? What charge like these can be brought against us, that our company should be reckoned a thing to be avoided?" (St. Gregory of Nyssa: Dogmatic Treatises, Etc.; Letter XVII.--To Eustathia, Ambrosia, and Basilissa; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 2, p. 199; P.Schaff)

St. Basil the Great (AD 329-379)

"Next comes Apollinarius [of Laodicea], who is no less a cause of sorrow to the Churches. With his facility of writing, and a tongue ready to argue on any subject, he has filled the world with his works...What he writes on theology is not founded on Scripture, but on human reasonings. He has written about the resurrection, from a mythical, or rather Jewish, point of view; urging that we shall return again to the worship of the Law, be circumcised, keep the Sabbath, abstain from meats, offer sacrifices to God, worship in the Temple at Jerusalem, and be altogether turned from Christians into Jews. What could be more ridiculous? Or, rather, what could be more contrary to the doctrines of the Gospel?" (Letters and Select Works: Letter 263, 4 - To the Westerns)

Caius, Presbyter of Rome (early 200s AD)

We have understood that at this time Cerinthus, the author of another heresy, made his appearance. Caius, whose words we quoted above, in the Disputation which is ascribed to him, writes as follows concerning this man: "But Cerinthus also, by means of revelations which he pretends were written by a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things which he falsely claims were shown him by angels; and he says that after the resurrection the kingdom of Christ will be set up on earth, and that the flesh dwelling in Jerusalem will again be subject to desires and pleasures. And being an enemy of the Scriptures of God, he asserts, with the purpose of deceiving men, that there is to be a period of a thousand years for marriage festivals. (Caius: Disputation Against Proclus - quoted in Eusebius, Ecc. History; Book III, 28)

Epiphanius of Salamis (AD 315-403)

"There is indeed a millennium mentioned by St. John; but the most, and those pious men, look upon those words as true indeed, but to be taken in a spiritual sense." (Epiphanius, Panarion/"Against Heresies", 77:26.)

St. Gregory of Nazianzus (AD 325-389)

"They [Apolloinaris and his followers] who take away the Humanity and the Interior Image [of Christ] cleanse by their newly invented mask only our outside, and that which is seen; so far in conflict with themselves that at one time, for the sake of the flesh, they explain all the rest in a gross and carnal manner--for it is from hence that they have derived their second Judaism and their silly thousand years delight in paradise, and almost the idea that we shall resume again the same conditions after these same thousand years [Letters (Division I): Letters on the Apollinarian Controversy; Against Apollinarius; The Second Letter to Cledonius. (Ep. CII.)]

"There is a matter which is graver than these, a special point which it is necessary that I should not pass over. I would they were even cut off that trouble you, and would reintroduce a second Judaism, and a second circumcision, and a second system of sacrifices. For if this be done, what hinders Christ also being born again to set them aside, and again being betrayed by Judas, and crucified and buried, and rising again, that all may be fulfilled in the same order, like the Greek system of cycles, in which the same revolutions of the stars bring round the same events? " [Letters (Division I): Letters on the Apollinarian Controversy; To Cledonius the Priest Against Apollinarius (Ep. CI.)]

First Council of Nicaea (AD 325)

"He shall come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end." (Nicene Creed - Note: the creed places the final judgment and resurrection at the parousia of Christ, contrary to the millennialist heresy, which inserts a thousand years kingdom at that coming but not the final judgment and resurrection.)

The Athanasian Creed (500s AD)

He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved. (Note: this statement is a rebuke of millennialists, who reject that the judgment and resurrection occur at the coming of Christ).

St. Eusebius of Caesarea (263-339)

"But Papias himself in the preface to his discourses by no means declares that he was himself a hearer and eye-witness of the holy apostles, but he shows by the words which he uses that he received the doctrines of the faith from those who were their friends. He says: 'But I shall not hesitate also to put down for you along with my interpretations whatsoever things I have at any time learned carefully from the elders and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those that speak much, but in those that teach the truth; not in those that relate strange commandments, but in those that deliver the commandments given by the Lord to faith, and springing from the truth itself. If, then, any one came, who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him in regard to the words of the elders--what Andrew or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did not think that what was to be gotten from the books would profit me as much as what came from the living and abiding voice.'....The same writer gives also other accounts which he says came to him through unwritten tradition, certain strange parables and teachings of the Saviour, and some other more mythical things. To these belong his statement that there will be a period of some thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth. I suppose he got these ideas through a misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts, not perceiving that the things said by them were spoken mystically in figures. For he appears to have been of very limited understanding, as one can see from his discourses. But it was due to him that so many of the Church Fathers after him adopted a like opinion, urging in their own support the antiquity of the man; as for instance Irenaeus and any one else that may have proclaimed similar views." (Church History; Book III; Ch.39; 2-4, 11-13)

"Besides all these the two books on the Promises were prepared by him [by St. Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria]. The occasion of these was Nepos, a bishop in Egypt, who taught that the promises to the holy men in the Divine Scriptures should be understood in a more Jewish manner, and that there would be a certain millennium of bodily luxury upon this earth. As he thought that he could establish his private opinion by the Revelation of John, he wrote a book on this subject, entitled Refutation of Allegorists. Dionysius opposes this in his books on the Promises." (Church History; Book VII: Ch. 24, 1-3)

St. Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria (AD 200-265)

"But as they produce a certain composition by Nepos, on which they insist very strongly, as if it demonstrated incontestably that there will be a (temporal) reign of Christ upon the earth, I have to say, that in many other respects I accept the opinion of Nepos, and love him at once for his faith, and his laboriousness, and his patient study in the Scriptures, as also for his great efforts in psalmody,by which even now many of the brethren are delighted. I hold the man, too, in deep respect still more, inasmuch as he has gone to his rest before us. Nevertheless the truth is to be prized and reverenced above all things else. And while it is indeed proper to praise and approve ungrudgingly anything that is said aright, it is no less proper to examine and correct anything which may appear to have been written unsoundly. If he had been present then himself, and had been stating his opinions orally, it would have been sufficient to discuss the question together without the use of writing, and to endeavour to convince the opponents, and carry them along by interrogation and reply. But the work is published, and is, as it seems to some, of a very persuasive character; and there are unquestionably some teachers, who hold that the law and the prophets are of no importance, and who decline to follow the Gospels, and who depreciate the epistles of the apostles, and who have also made large promises regarding the doctrine of this composition, as though it were some great and hidden mystery, and who, at the same time, do not allow that our simpler brethren have any sublime and elevated conceptions either of our Lord's appearing in His glory and His true divinity, or of our own resurrection from the dead, and of our being gathered together to Him, and assimilated to Him, but, on the contrary, endeavour to lead them to hope for things which are trivial and corruptible, and only such as what we find at present in the kingdom of God. And since this is the case, it becomes necessary for us to discuss this subject with our brother Nepos just as if he were present.

After certain other matters, he adds the following statement:--Being then in the Arsinoitic prefecture--where, as you are aware, this doctrine was current long ago, and caused such division, that schisms and apostasies took place in whole churches--I called together the presbyters and the teachers among the brethren in the villages, and those of the brethren also who wished to attend were present. I exhorted them to make an investigation into that dogma in public. Accordingly, when they had brought this book before us, as though it were a kind of weapon or impregnable battlement, I sat with them for three days in succession from morning till evening, and attempted to set them right on the subjects propounded in the composition. Then, too, I was greatly gratified by observing the constancy of the brethren, and their love of the truth, and their docility and intelligence, as we proceeded, in an orderly method, and in a spirit of moderation, to deal with questions, and difficulties, and concessions. For we took care not to press, in every way and with jealous urgency, opinions which had once been adopted, even although they might appear to be correct Neither did we evade objections alleged by others; but we endeavoured as far as possible to keep by the subject in hand, and to establish the positions pertinent to it. Nor, again, were we ashamed to change our opinions, if reason convinced us, and to acknowledge the fact; but rather with a good conscience, and in all sincerity, and with open hearts before God, we accepted all that could be established by the demonstrations and teachings of the Holy Scriptures. And at last the author and introducer of this doctrine, whose name was Coracion, in the hearing of all the brethren present, made acknowledgment of his position, and engaged to us that he would no longer hold by his opinion, nor discuss it, nor mention it, nor teach it, as he had been completely convinced by the arguments of those opposed to it. The rest of the brethren, also, who were present, were delighted with the conference, and with the conciliatory spirit and the harmony exhibited by all.

Then, a little further on, he speaks of the Revelation of John as follows:--Now some before our time have set aside this book, and repudiated it entirely, criticising it chapter by chapter, and endeavouring to show it to be without either sense or reason. They have alleged also that its title is false; for they deny that John is the author. Nay, further, they hold that it can be no sort of revelation, because it is covered with so gross and dense a veil of ignorance. They affirm, therefore, that none of the apostles, nor indeed any of the saints, nor any person belonging to the Church, could be its author; but that Cerinthus and the heretical sect founded by him, and named after him the Cerinthian sect, being desirous of attaching the authority of a great name to the fiction propounded by him, prefixed that title to the book. For the doctrine inculcated by Cerinthus is this: that there will be an earthly reign of Christ; and as he was himself a man devoted to the pleasures of the body, and altogether carnal in his dispositions, he fancied that that kingdom would consist in those kinds of gratifications on which his own heart was set,--to wit, in the delights of the belly, and what comes beneath the belly, that is to say, in eating and drinking, and marrying, and in other things under the guise of which he thought he could indulge his appetites with a better grace, such as festivals, and sacrifices, and the slaying of victims. But I, for my part, could not venture to set this book aside, for there are many brethren who value it highly. Yet, having formed an idea of it as a composition exceeding my capacity of understanding, I regard it as containing a kind of hidden and wonderful intelligence on the several subjects which come under it. For though I cannot comprehend it, I still suspect that there is some deeper sense underlying the words. And I do not measure and judge its expressions by the standard of my own reason, but, making more allowance for faith, I have simply regarded them as too lofty for my comprehension; and I do not forthwith reject what I do not understand, but I am only the more filled with wonder at it, in that I have not been able to discern its import.

After this, he examines the whole book of the Revelation; and having proved that it cannot possibly be understood according to the bald, literal sense, he proceeds thus:--When the prophet now has completed, so to speak, the whole prophecy, he pronounces those blessed who should observe it, and names himself, too, in the number of the same: "For blessed," says he, "is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book; and I John who saw and heard these things." That this person was called John, therefore, and that this was the writing of a John, I do not deny. And I admit further, that it was also the work of some holy and inspired man. But I could not so easily admit that this was the apostle, the son of Zebedee, the brother of James, and the same person with him who wrote the Gospel which bears the title according to John, and the catholic epistle. But from the character of both, and the forms of expression, and the whole disposition and execution of the book, I draw the conclusion that the authorship is not his. For the evangelist nowhere else subjoins his name, and he never proclaims himself either in the Gospel or in the epistle. And a little further on he adds:--John, moreover, nowhere gives us the name, whether as of himself directly (in the first person), or as of another (in the third person). But the writer of the Revelation puts himself forward at once in the very beginning, for he says: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which He gave to him to show to His servants quickly; and He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bare record of the Word of God, and of his testimony, and of all things that he saw." And then he writes also an epistle, in which he says: "John to the seven churches which are in Asia, grace be unto you, and peace." The evangelist, on the other hand, has not prefixed his name even to the catholic epistle; but without any circumlocution, he has commenced at once with the mystery of the divine revelation itself in these terms: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes. And on the ground of such a revelation as that the Lord pronounced Peter blessed, when He said: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." And again in the second epistle, which is ascribed to John, the apostle, and in the third, though they are indeed brief, John is not set before us by name; but we find simply the anonymous writing, "The elder." This other author, on the contrary, did not even deem it sufficient to name himself once, and then to proceed with his narrative; but he takes up his name again, and says: "I John, who also am your brother and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos for the Word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ." And likewise toward the end he speaks thus: "Blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book; and I John who saw these things and heard them." That it is a John, then, that writes these things we must believe, for he himself tells us.

What John this is, however, is uncertain. For he has not said, as he often does in the Gospel, that he is the disciple beloved by the Lord, or the one that leaned on His bosom, or the brother of James, or one that was privileged to see and hear the Lord. And surely he would have given us some of these indications if it had been his purpose to make himself clearly known. But of all this he offers us nothing; and he only calls himself our brother and companion, and the witness of Jesus, and one blessed with the seeing and hearing of these revelations. I am also of opinion that there were many persons of the same name with John the apostle, who by their love for him, and their admiration and emulation of him, and their desire to be loved by the Lord as he was loved, were induced to embrace also the same designation, just as we find many of the children of the faithful called by the names of Paul and Peter. There is, besides, another John mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, with the surname Mark, whom Barnabas and Paul attached to themselves as companion, and of whom again it is said: "And they had also John to their minister." But whether this is the one who wrote the Revelation, I could not say. For it is not written that he came with them into Asia. But the writer says: "Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John, departing from them, returned to Jerusalem." I think, therefore, that it was some other one of those who were in Asia. For it is said that there were two monuments in Ephesus, and that each of these bears the name of John.

And from the ideas, and the expressions, and the collocation of the same, it may be very reasonably conjectured that this one is distinct from that. For the Gospel and the Epistle agree with each other, and both commence in the same way. For the one opens thus, "In the beginning was the Word;" while the other opens thus, "That which was from the beginning." The one says: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father." The other says the same things, with a slight alteration: "That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life: and the life was manifested." For these things are introduced by way of prelude, and in opposition, as he has shown in the subsequent parts, to those who deny that the Lord is come in the flesh. For which reason he has also been careful to add these words: "And that which we have seen we testify, and show unto you that eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us: that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you." Thus he keeps to himself, and does not diverge inconsistently from his subjects, but goes through them all under the same heads and in the same phraseologies, some of which we shall briefly mention. Thus the attentive reader will find the phrases, "the life," "the light," occurring often in both; and also such expressions as fleeing from darkness, holding the truth, grace, joy, the flesh and the blood of the Lord, the judgment, the remission of sins, the love of God toward us, the commandment of love on our side toward each other; as also, that we ought to keep all the commandments, the conviction of the world, of the devil, of Antichrist, the promise of the Holy Spirit, the adoption of God, the faith required of us in all things, the Father and the Son, named as such everywhere. And altogether, through their whole course, it will be evident that the Gospel and the Epistle are distinguished by one and the same character of writing. But the Revelation is totally different, and altogether distinct from this; and I might almost say that it does not even come near it, or border upon it. Neither does it contain a syllable in common with these other books. Nay more, the Epistle--for I say nothing of the Gospel--does not make any mention or evince any notion of the Revelation and the Revelation, in like manner, gives no note of the Epistle. Whereas Paul gives some indication of his revelations in his epistles; which revelations, however, he has not recorded in writing by themselves.

And furthermore, on the ground of difference in diction, it is possible to prove a distinction between the Gospel and the Epistle on the one hand, and the Revelation on the other. For the former are written not only without actual error as regards the Greek language, but also with the greatest elegance, both in their expressions and in their reasonings, and in the whole structure of their style. They are very far indeed from betraying any barbarism or solecism, or any sort of vulgarism, in their diction. For, as might be presumed, the writer possessed the gift of both kinds of discourse the Lord having bestowed both these capacities upon him, viz., that of knowledge and that of expression. That the author of the latter, however, saw a revelation, and received knowledge and prophecy, I do not deny. Only I perceive that his dialect and language are not of the exact Greek type, and that he employs barbarous idioms, and in some places also solecisms. These, however, we are under no necessity of seeking out at present. And I would not have any one suppose that I have said these things in the spirit of ridicule; for I have done so only with the purpose of setting right this matter of the dissimilarity subsisting between these writings. (Dionysius; From the Two Books on the Promises; Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol 6 pp.81-84)

Justin Martyr (AD 100-165)

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. (Dialogue with Trypho, 80)

St. Jerome (AD 347-420)

St. Jerome opposed Chiliasm (millennialism) by writing against the chiliasm of Victorinus. He took an opportunity to respond to millennialism by rewriting the millennialist commentary of the Apocalypse by Victorinus. In the prologue to Jerome's rewriting of that commentary, Jerome says to his friend, Anatolius:

"Those crossing over the perilous seas find different dangers. If a storm of winds has become violent, it is a terror; if the moderate air has calmed the back of the elements, lying calm, they fear traps. Thus is seen in this book which you have sent to me, which is seen to contain the explanation of the Apocalypse by Victorinus. Also, it is dangerous, and opens to the barkings of detractors, to judge the short works of eminent men. For even earlier Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis, and Nepos, the bishop of parts of Egypt, perceived of the kingdom of the thousand years just as Victorinus. And because you are in your letters entreating me, I do not want to delay, but nor do I want to scorn praying. I immediately unwound the books of the greats, and what I found in their commentaries about the kingdom of the thousand years, I added to the little work of Victorinus, erasing from there those things which he perceived according to the letter. From the beginning of the book to the sign of the cross, we have corrected things which are the corruptions of inexperience of scribes. Know that from there to the end of the book is added. Now it is yours to judge, and to confirm what pleases. If our life will be made longer and the Lord will give health, for you, our most capable genius will sweat over this book, dearest Anatolius."

Jerome's ending to his version of Victorinus' commentary, which replaces Victorinus' material on chapters 20 and 21 of the Apocalypse, is as follows:

"For I have not considered the kingdom of the thousand years to be earthly: for, if it is being perceived thus, at the completion of the thousand years they cease to reign. But I will offer as my capacity for understanding has perceived. The number ten signifies the Decalogue, and one hundred shows the crown of virginity. For he who has preserved entire his resolution for virginity, and faithfully fulfilled the precepts of the Decalogue, and has overcome impure actions and impure thoughts among the chambers of the heart so that they do not rule him, this is truly a priest of Christ and entirely completes the millenary number, believed to rule with Christ, and rightly with Him the devil is bound. He who has been ensnared in the errors and dogmas of the heretics, in him the devil is released. But because he says he will be released at the completion of the thousand years, at the completion of the number of the perfect saints, in the bodies and hearts of whom virginity reigns, with the arrival of the coming of the hating one, many will be overthrown by him, seduced by earthly loves, and will likewise enter the lake with him. And after a little while, the ground returns the bodies of the saints which shortly before were resting: he shows that those receiving, with the eternal King, the immortal kingdom, which is not by virginity of the body alone, but also of language and thought, will rejoice with the Lamb.

Truly, the square city of which he speaks, of gold, and precious, shining stones, and a paved road and a river through the middle and the tree of life of either side, bearing twelve fruits throughout the twelve months and the light of the sun will not be there, because the Lamb is its light; and gates each of a single pearl, with three gates from the four sides, and they may not be closed: the square city shows the gathering of the multitude of the saints, among whom now nothing can make faith waver, as was commanded to Noah, that he would make the ark out of squared wood, so that it would be able to bear the force of the flood. Precious stones shows men strong during persecution, who are neither moved by the storm of the persecutors, nor are the forces of their floods able to loosen from the true faith. For this reason they are associated with pure gold, with whom the Great King decorates the city. Indeed, by the road are shown their hearts, cleansed of all stains, where the Lord walks. Truly, the river of life shows grace to flow in spiritual birth. The tree of life of either bank shows the coming of Christ according to the flesh, Who the Law predicted was to come and to suffer, and was shown clearly by the Gospel. Truly, by twelve fruits through each of the months are shown the diverse graces of the Twelve Apostles, which they receive from the single tree of the cross, satiating peoples consumed by hunger with the preaching of the Word of God.

And because he says in the city the sun will not be necessary, it plainly shows the immaculate Creator of lights to shine in its midst, Whose splendour no mind is able to contemplate, nor language to describe. He says from the four sides will be three gates, each formed of a single pearl: I think these are the four virtues: wisdom, strength, justice, temperance, which relate each one to another, and when mixed together they complete the number twelve.

Indeed, the twelve gates we believe to be the number of the Apostles, which by the four virtues as precious shining pearls are showing the way to the saints, by the light of their doctrines, for making entrance to the city of the saints, so that the chorus of angels might praise their way of life. By the gates may not be closed is plainly shown the doctrine of the Apostles will not be overcome by any storms of criticism, and even if the waves of the nations and the insane superstition of the heretics rage against the true faith; their overcome foam will be dissolved, because Christ is a rock, by Whom and through Whom the Church was founded, Who will not be overcome by any waves of insane men. Therefore, they are not to be listened to who affirm the kingdom of the thousand years is to be earthly, which they believe with the heretic Cerinthus. (St. Jerome's rewriting of Commentary on the Apocalypse by Victorinus - Chs 20-22)

Origen (AD 185-254)

"Certain persons, then, refusing the labour of thinking, and adopting a superficial view of the letter of the law, and yielding rather in some measure to the indulgence of their own desires and lusts, being disciples of the letter alone, are of opinion that the fulfilment of the promises of the future are to be looked for in bodily pleasure and luxury; and therefore they especially desire to have again, after the resurrection, such bodily structures as may never be without the power of eating, and drinking, and performing all the functions of flesh and blood, not following the opinion of the Apostle Paul regarding the resurrection of a spiritual body. And consequently they say, that after the resurrection there will be marriages, and the begetting of children, imagining to themselves that the earthly city of Jerusalem is to be rebuilt, its foundations laid in precious stones, and its walls constructed of jasper, and its battlements of crystal; that it is to have a wall composed of many precious stones, as jasper, and sapphire, and chalcedony, and emerald, and sardonyx, and onyx, and chrysolite, and chrysoprase, and jacinth, and amethyst. Moreover, they think that the natives of other countries are to be given them as the ministers of their pleasures, whom they are to employ either as tillers of the field or builders of walls, and by whom their ruined and fallen city is again to be raised up; and they think that they are to receive the wealth of the nations to live on, and that they will have control over their riches; that even the camels of Midian and Kedar will come, and bring to them gold, and incense, and precious stones. And these views they think to establish on the authority of the prophets by those promises which are written regarding Jerusalem; and by those passages also where it is said, that they who serve the Lord shall eat and drink, but that sinners shall hunger and thirst; that the righteous shall be joyful, but that sorrow shall possess the wicked. And from the New Testament also they quote the saying of the Saviour, in which He makes a promise to His disciples concerning the joy of wine, saying, "Henceforth I shall not drink of this cup, until I drink it with you new in My Father's kingdom." They add, moreover, that declaration, in which the Saviour calls those blessed who now hunger and thirst, promising them that they shall be satisfied; and many other scriptural illustrations are adduced by them, the meaning of which they do not perceive is to be taken figuratively. Then, again, agreeably to the form of things in this life, and according to the gradations of the dignities or ranks in this world, or the greatness of their powers, they think they are to be kings and princes, like those earthly monarchs who now exist; chiefly, as it appears, on account of that expression in the Gospel: "Have thou power over five cities." And to speak shortly, according to the manner of things in this life in all similar matters, do they desire the fulfilment of all things looked for in the promises, viz., that what now is should exist again. Such are the views of those who, while believing in Christ, understand the divine Scriptures in a sort of Jewish sense, drawing from them nothing worthy of the divine promises." (De Principiis 2.11.2)