Revelation resources -- Revelation and the millennium

Most recent revision May 26th, 2002

Back to TOC · Webmaster's home · Guestbook

Description: This page treats the enormous complicated, controversial and debated problem of the millennium. There is a flood of literature on this topic. To qualify for inclusion on this page, the work must be a scholarly treatment of the millennium, but it is not a requirement to argue for any one view. Every view is included, so far it is scholarly argued, which means that the treatment must include an analysis of the text and its relationship to the rest of Revelation along with a discussion with other scholars. Because of the enormous amount of literature, there will be no exception to this rule. (July 29th, 2000)


Clouse, R. G., ed. the meaning of the millennium: four views. With contributions by George Eldon Ladd, Herman A. Hoyt, Loraine Boettner, and Anthony A. Hoekema. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

The classic introduction featuring four articles (with responses) presenting historical premillennialism, dispensationalism, postmillennialism, and amillennialism. (28 Dec 1998)

Erickson, M. J. Contemporary Options in Eschatology: A Study of the Millennium. 1977. Reprint. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1980.

Another introductory book. (28 Dec 1998)

Exegetically (primarily)

Bietenhard, H.: Das tausendjährige Reich. Eine biblisch-theologische Studie. Zürich, 1955.

Bietenhard's study is the classical study on this topic arguing in favour of the premillennial interpretation. (2 Jan 1998)

Campbell, D. K., and J. T. Townsend. the coming millennial kingdom: a case for premillennial interpretation. Originally published as A case for premillennialism: a new consensus. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992. Reprint. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1997.

This book contains a number of articles dealing with the central "proof-texts" for premillennialism beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation 20. One of the articles, by Hoehner, gave rise to the response by R. F. White (see below) (28 Dec 1998)

Mealy, J. Webb: After the Thousand Years. Resurrection and Judgment in Revelation 20. (JSNT.SS 70). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992

Mealy's study is the first monography on Rev 20 since Bietenhard's from 1955. Mealy argues in favour of a premillennial position. Mealy proposes several new readings and points to some very important prima facie arguments which have not been recognised before Mealy. (2 Jan 1998)

Mealy's book is reviewed in Beale, G. K. "Review Article: J. W. Mealy After the Thousand Years." EvQ 66 (1994) 229-49.

White, R. F. "Reexamining the Evidence for Recapitulation in Rev 20:1-10." WTJ 51 (1989) 319-34.
White, R. F. "Making Sense of Rev 20:1-10? Harold Hoehner Versus Recapitulation." JETS 37 (1994) 539-51.

White's two articles argue that Revelation 20 must be understood on the background of a recapitulationist (amilllennial) interpretation. White is therefore able to explain the recurrent themes and at the same time to avoid the millennial interpretation of Rev 20.(28 Dec 1998)

Adamsen, G. S. "'De tusinde år': Et essay om den kronologiske udstrækning af 'de tusinde år' i Åb 20,2-7" ('The Thousand Years': An Essay About the Chronological Duration of the Thousand Years in Ap 20:2-7). Ichthys 25, no. 2 (1998) 67-83.

Adamsen concedes that the millennial interpretation is right in its insistence that Rev 20:1-10 must be understood as a yet future event and that the amillennial interpretation is correct that there cannot be a thousand-year interval between the parousia and the judgment. He therefore argues that the thousand year period is a symbolic term for the resurrection of all Christians on the Day of the judgment. The article is in Danish.(28 Dec 1998)

Kjær, T. "Responsum [to Adamsen's article above]." Ichthys 25 (1998) 129-32.
Adamsen, G. S. "Replik til Torben Kjærs responsum." Ichthys 25 (1988) 133-5.

These two items is a short discussion of Adamsen's major article on Rev 20. (28 Dec 1998)


Hill, C. E. Regnum caelorum: Patterns of Future Hope in Early Christianity. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.

Hill's book, a revised dissertation, argues convincingly that chiliasm (premillennialism) was not in fact the only orthodox eschatological position of the early church. The amillennial position was present from the very beginning. Hill argues that chiliasm was closely associated with a Jewish realistic-eschatological faith while amillennialism was associated with the belief that the dead went to heaven immediately. While Hill's argument has some force as regards the later early church, it is not as obvious that John or the other Biblical writers fit into his scheme. It seems likely that the NT writers maintain both a Jewish realistic eschatology as well as being amillennialists. Nevertheless, Hill's study is very important and should be studied carefully. (28 Dec 1998)

See also: Wainwright: Apocalypse (1993)
Back to TOC · Webmaster's home

© 1996-2001 Georg S. Adamsen Opdateret d. 26.5.2002