Postmillennialism misconstrues the primary purpose of God for the Era of Gospel Proclamation, which is not to Christianize the Domain of Darkness, but rather to rescue a chosen people out of it, and to transfer them into the Kingdom of his beloved Son…[and] distorts the believer’s Blessed Hope, focusing it upon an illusory stage of Church history, rather than upon the true signs of the times and the Consummation at Christ’s return (Titus 2:13; 1 Peter 1:13).

This article is an extract from my book, The Great End Time Debate: Issues, Options and Amillennial Answers. Because a number of contemporary postmillennarians also embrace Partial Preterism, you may also wish to read my article on Preterism, available here.
Here is a key to some of the abbreviations you will encounter as you read:
GETD = Great End Time DebateDNT = Didactic New Testament (i.e., the teaching portions of the gospels, the book of Acts, and the epistles)OTKP = OT Kingdom Prophecy (OT prophecies of the coming Kingdom of God)NCH = New Covenant Hermeneutic (the NT method for interpreting the OT in general, and OTKP in particular)
Exposition
(To view a timeline for Postmillennialism, please click here)
The word postmillennialism means after the millennium. Thus, like Amillennialism, Postmillennialism teaches that Christ will come again after the “1000 years” of Revelation 20. Nevertheless, the two schools differ, primarily because postmillennarians are highly optimistic about the progress and societal impact of the Gospel during the Era of Proclamation. The seeds of this persuasion were first planted by Augustine, who was quite confident about the redemptive power and future growth of the City of God (i.e., the Church). In Reformation times certain Dutch theologians modified his view, asserting that the thousand years symbolize a later portion of the Era of Proclamation, during which time large numbers of Jews will be converted and the world will become largely Christian.
Though hardly the majority report of the Church, Postmillennialism has had some astute defenders. Most of the American Puritans were postmillennarians. They believed that God would use the American experiment in a special way to advance his universal Kingdom. More recent postmillennarians include Charles Hodge, Benjamin Warfield, Lorraine Boettner, John Jefferson Davis, Jeff Durbin, Marcellus Kik, Keith Mathison, James White, and Doug Wilson. The disciples of Rousas Rushdoony—the founder of a theological school called Christian Reconstructionism—are also postmillennial. They include Greg Bahnsen, Ken Gentry, Gary North, and Martin Selbrede.
Very briefly, here is the postmillennarian position on the four underlying issues of the GETD.
The Kingdom of God
Postmillennarians agree with their amillennarian brothers that the Kingdom of God is a direct spiritual reign of the triune God, and that it enters history in two fundamental stages: the purely spiritual Kingdom of the Son, followed by the spiritual and physical Kingdom of the Father. But again, some postmillennarians think of the Millennium as a distinct phase of the Kingdom of Son, in which Christ suddenly binds Satan and then triumphantly extends his spiritual reign over the face of the whole earth. Thus, for these interpreters, postmillennialism is not really a species of present-millennialism, since here the Millennium is present with some, but not all, Christians who live in the Era of Proclamation.
The Interpretation of OTKP
Once again postmillennarians agree with their amillennarian brethren in interpreting OTKPs typologically and figuratively, as being fulfilled under the New Covenant and among its people, the Church. There is, however, a crucial difference: In OT texts where amillennarians find the prophets speaking of the World to Come, most postmillennarians find them speaking of the triumphs of the Era of Gospel Proclamation. More on this in a moment.
The Meaning of the Millennium
On this issue postmillennarians differ among themselves. Some identify the 1000 years of Revelation 20 with the entire Era of Proclamation, others with its final thousand years, still others with a season of indeterminate length situated towards the end of the present evil age. In the latter case, this season is held to commence with a special, latter-day binding of Satan, possibly leading to the conversion of ethnic Israel at large (the view I have pictured in the time-line above). All agree, however, that the basic trajectory of Church history, despite occasional setbacks, is one of Gospel triumph.
The Consummation
Regarding the Consummation, postmillennarians concede that Revelation 20:7-10 does indeed anticipate a final, global rebellion against Christ and his faithful people (i.e., the Last Battle). This painful interlude—so out of character with the preceding years of triumph and blessing—will quickly lead to the Parousia, the several other elements of the Consummation, and the advent of the World to Come.
We find, then, that for most postmillennarians the true locus of Christ’s victory over the powers of evil is the Era of Proclamation itself, with Christ’s Second Coming serving largely as a glorious capstone upon all that he was able previously to accomplish through the faithful preaching of his Church and the activism of Christian citizens.
Does Scripture justify this optimistic scenario? Does the course of Church History to date confirm it? In the following critique we will seek to answer these important questions.
Critique
With the help of the time line above, let us critically examine the postmillennarian understanding of Salvation History, paying special attention to the four underlying issues we have just identified and discussed.
View of the Kingdom
Amillennarians divide the Kingdom of God into two simple stages: the temporary Kingdom of the Son, followed by the perfect and eternal Kingdom of the Father (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43; Col. 1:13). But as we have seen, most postmillennarians go on to divide the Kingdom of the Son into two sub-stages: an initial stage of real, difficult, and partial Gospel progress, followed by a millennial stage of enormous Gospel progress. Postmillennarian Ken Gentry speaks for many when he says of the Millennium: “The Kingdom will grow and develop until eventually it exercises a dominant and universal gracious influence in a long era of righteousness, peace, and prosperity on the earth and in history.”
But this view of the Kingdom of the Son is not supported in Scripture. Nowhere in the DNT do we find any suggestion that it is divided into two stages, or that it includes a long, future Golden Era. Quite to the contrary, we find both Christ and the apostles repeatedly girding the loins of the saints for constant opposition and persecution, though also for a real measure of success as God gathers together his little flock through the faithful preaching of the Gospel (Matt. 24:9-14; John 10:16; Rom. 8:30; 1 Thess. 2:2; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 4:12; 1 John 3:13, 5:19).
On this score, the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares is paradigmatic (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43). Here the Lord clearly assumes that throughout the entire Era of Proclamation the tares will grow up alongside the wheat. Indeed, so abundant are the tares that the angels regard them as a threat to the safety of God’s crop (Matt. 13:27-28). This is the template of all NT eschatology. Believers ever live and serve in the present evil age (Gal. 1:4). They constantly struggle against the world-forces of this present darkness (Eph. 6:12). To the very end, the world-system lies in the grip of the evil one (1 John 5:19). Always and everywhere the Church is a light shining in the deepening darkness of the world-system (Matt. 5:14; John 1:5; Phil. 2:15). Her ongoing experience is one of Great Tribulation (Rev. 7:14). She is constantly making a hard pilgrimage through the wilderness of a hostile world (Rev. 12:6, 13-17). The Last Battle is simply the final and most extreme engagement of this perennial war. Where, in all of this, is there room for a Golden Era of peace, righteousness, and prosperity?
View of OTKP
Postmillennarians argue that many OTKP’s predict a global triumph of the Gospel in the Era of Proclamation (see Psalms 72, 110; Is. 2:1-4, 45:2-3, 65:17-25; Mic. 4:1-3; Zech. 9:10, etc.). But here we encounter some serious confusion. Yes, postmillennarians are correct when they assert that these prophecies are fulfilled under the New Covenant, and that we must therefore interpret them typologically and figuratively. But they err when they assert that the prophecies are largely fulfilled in the Era of Proclamation, and not at all in the World to Come.
Read More
Related Posts:

During this season we wait in earnest for Christ’s second coming while we wonder in awe at his first coming. To be clear, the season is not about what we can do for Christ by our work or prayers or fasting; rather, it is about what he has done for us in his work and prayers and fasting—a work that began in his first coming in humility and which will conclude in his second coming in glory. 

A Future Orientation
As early as Eden, God’s people have been a waiting people. Following the fall of our first parents, God made a promise that permanently oriented his people toward the future. God told the serpent directly, and the guilty pair indirectly:
I will put enmity between you and the woman,and between your offspring and her offspring;he shall bruise your head,and you shall bruise his heel. (Gen. 3:15)
It was, in short, the promise of a coming, conquering son. The promise encapsulated every promise in the Old Testament and, as such, shaped God’s people into a waiting people. This anticipatory posture can be seen throughout the Old Testament, as men and women of faith look forward to what God would do in the future through a promised son. Lamech names his son Noah in the hope that he will rescue the chosen line from the curse of sin and death (Gen. 5:29), yet it is six hundred years before Noah enters the ark at the time of the flood (Gen. 7:6). God promises Abraham that he will make him into a great nation through a son from his own body (Gen. 12:2; Gen. 15:4; Gen. 17:16), but he has to wait twenty-five years for the birth of Isaac (Gen. 21:1–3). Isaac, in turn, has to wait twenty years for the birth of Esau and Jacob, his twin boys (Gen. 25:20, 26). Jacob works for seven years to get his wife Rachel, but in the end is deceived into marrying Leah (Gen. 29:20–30), from whom he receives Judah, the son of the promised line (Gen. 29:35; Gen. 49:10). Naomi has to wait to see if her line will continue, following the death of her husband and two sons. Even when her daughter-in-law Ruth faithfully follows her back to the promised land and pursues Boaz at the threshing floor, they both have to wait to see whether Boaz will be the kinsman to redeem Ruth (Ruth 3:12–18). Their godly patience allows Boaz to negotiate his way into marriage with Ruth, from whom comes Obed, the father of Jesse, the father of David (Ruth 4:18–22). It is only in Naomi’s old age that her life is restored (Ruth 4:15). Hannah has to endure years of barrenness, like the matriarchs preceding her, before the Lord opens her womb and gives her a son called Samuel (1 Sam. 1:1–20), the one who would anoint David as God’s chosen king (1 Sam. 16:1–3). However, David’s ascension to the throne does not come immediately. While he is anointed in his youth (1 Sam. 16:10–13), he has to go through several years of humiliation and suffering before his ascension to the throne at thirty years old (2 Sam. 5:4); and God’s subsequent promise to David that his son will sit on his throne forever (2 Sam. 7:12–16) is not ultimately fulfilled until the coming of his greater son, Jesus Christ—some one thousand years later. Indeed, adding up the ages in the biblical genealogies reveals that God’s promise in Eden of a coming, conquering son takes about four thousand years to become a reality.

For individuals and families, this 40-day liturgical devotional guides readers through Advent, Christmas, and Epiphany—helping Christians retain their focus on Jesus and meditate on the mystery of his incarnation.

Waiting. From the beginning of history, God calls his people to be a people waiting for the coming of his promised Son. New Testament writers capture the relief at Jesus’s arrival after the prolonged wait. Luke the evangelist describes Simeon as a righteous and devout man who has been “waiting for the consolation of Israel” (Luke 2:25). Taking Jesus in his arms, Simeon utters words that would become an integral part of Christian liturgy from the early centuries of the church—the Nunc Dimittis:
Lord, now you are letting your servant depart in peace,according to your word;for my eyes have seen your salvationthat you have prepared in the presence of all peoples,a light for revelation to the Gentiles,and for glory to your people Israel. (Luke 2:29–32)
The prophetess Anna has a similar experience on the same day, as she gazes upon the baby Jesus. Unable to contain her excitement, she speaks about Christ “to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem” (Luke 2:38).
Read More
Related Posts:

I call on all members of the National Partnership to repent publicly of insults, besmirching the church, and obstructing the work of the church councils. I call on you to relinquish your committee memberships. I hope that some of you will. But for those who don’t, I plead that you find another denomination more to your liking, rather than tear the church apart through the exercise of discipline.

Like many within the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA), the National Partnership email trove has saddened, angered, and grieved me. I have read many articles regarding the emails, and they do not paint a pretty picture. Are those articles slanted? Is the picture that they paint accurate? I found out for myself by writing Natural Language Processing code to analyze the emails. And I remain saddened, angered, and grieved. This article delineates some of the more troubling passages I discovered. I have tried to provide larger quotes to demonstrate that the quotes are not out of context. My purpose is not to rehash what has already been published, but to call the National Partnership to repentance.
I am saddened by the use of personal insults. Consider the following email texts:
“Jun 28, 2019, 11:39:13 AM
…No one can stop us from becoming this kind of denomination. The denomination we were at the end of worship last night. No one. We are the majority, and if we gather around the Gospel there will be nothing to stop it. If we keep preaching to the dry bones.”
“Mar 26, 2013, 3:24:51 PM
…Finally: my greatest concern about the negative blogging we’ve seen this last week is the degree to which men are willing to engage in one-way conversation. The other person is by necessity diminished in these conversations. To me this is not just an ethical code violated but a grievous dishonor. Loving our enemies/opponents has to involve representing their character and beliefs charitably. Inquiries about the NP by one of these bloggers or PERSON 1, PERSON 2 or PERSON 3 would not only have served the public trust but would have dignified me and you by giving us a chance to define ourselves. Let’s not fall into the same soup by failing to pray for our opponents and represent them truthfully in every forum.”
“Jun 27, 2019, 9:49:14 AM
(This is important. Frank wicks is the board recommendation. Wiley is a harsh antagonist of the seminary. Why would we want him on the permanent board. Let’s defeat this)”
Dry bones. A reference to Ezekiel 37. Am I dry bones, dead, without the life of the Spirit because I do not agree with the author’s vision for the PCA? How can that not be the obvious conclusion when Paul tells us in Ephesians 2 that outside of Christ, we are spiritually dead?
While I appreciate the author’s concern for ethics and his prayers, I am astounded that he would refer to his opponents within the PCA as enemies. In Phil 1: 17-19, Paul refers to enemies of the cross as people “whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who set their minds on earthly things.”
I am saddened by the liberal use of harsh words to define those who do not agree with the NP.
“Feb 20, 2019, 12:52:42 PM
Are those who struggle with SSA not allowed in the fellowship of half-blind jackasses looking for the Glory of the Lord?”
Well, yes, they are allowed. They are just not allowed to be elders. We call upon all people everywhere to come to church, be a part of our fellowship, sit under the discipline of the Word of God, repent of their sin, and accept Jesus as Lord of their life. But once again, I am saddened by how easily a minister of the Gospel can dehumanize his co-workers in the Gospel.
I am saddened to an even greater degree by the insults to the church. There are many references to the PCA as unhealthy and ugly. No, you won’t find those words. But you see an earnest desire for the church to become healthy and beautiful, which implies it is currently not either of those things.
“Jan 30, 2019, 3:49:04 PM
My sense is that the next 3-5 years of assembly work will shape the next forty years of the PCA. If we are clear in advocating for greater health in the Presbyterian Church in America, we will all be part of a more beautiful, more orthodox denomination for Kingdom work around the world.”
“Jul 2, 2021, 8:34:46 AM (7 days ago)
…Perhaps the next way you’ll move things forward is on the floor of your presbyteries as you lead debate on overtures we passed. Or maybe it’s time for your presbytery to bring something to the Birmingham assembly that moves us in a healthier direction.”
“Jun 30, 2021, 9:39:46 AM (9 days ago)

Nominating Committee advice. Following the NC close of nominations we will send out a guide for those of you not always familiar with the candidates. In some cases we may not have a recommendation, but in others there may be a candidate whose experience and views would align more clearly with a healthy PCA. Thankfully in all those cases both men will be brothers in Christ and worthy of honor.”

“Jun 11, 2021, 6:33:46 AM
Many of you have heard about the letter drafted by PERSON 1and several other contributors. I was not one of the principal authors, but I am grateful to see it out in the world. I’d commend it to you as one way that we can help guide a healthier denomination.“
Was the church healthy when Elijah called out: 10 He said, “I have been very zealous for the Lord, the God of hosts; for the sons of Israel have forsaken Your covenant, torn down Your altars and killed Your prophets with the sword. And I alone am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.” (I Kings 19:10, NASB, 1995)
I think it was. God answered Elijah by saying: “18 Yet I will leave 7,000 in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal and every mouth that has not kissed him.” (I Kings 19:18, NASB 95)
I am saddened when we substitute our judgment for God’s. I think we should hold the church in high regard as in “The Church’s One Foundation”
1 The church’s one foundationis Jesus Christ, our Lord;we are a new creationby water and the Word.From heav’n he came and taught uswhat perfect love can be;through life and death he sought us,and rose to set us free.
4 Yet we on earth have unionwith God, the Three in One,and mystic, sweet communionwith those whose rest is won.Oh, happy ones and holy!God, give us grace that we,like them, the meek and lowly,may live eternally.
I am angered at the secrecy. Almost every email until June 23, 2021, contains a privacy banner like:

“Confidential: this information is not to be shared without permission of the sender”
“The following communication is confidential and may not be shared without the permission of the sender”
“Please do not share without the permission of the author”
“This communication is private, it is not to be shared without permission from the sender”

There are 66 references to “confidential” or “confidentiality” within the emails. Consider the following email texts.
Jun 26, 2019, 8:16:07 AM
He loves us, and we serve him before we serve committees or churches, or nefarious and clandestine secret PCA societies.
While it is admirable that the National Partnership serves the Lord before all else, why are clandestine secret PCA societies listed in the list of subservient loyalties? Given that the subject of the verse is “we”, the National Partnership, this is extremely dangerous.
Mar 20, 2013, 7:40:14 AM
National Partnership: A New Group in the PCA

The Aquila Report has picked up on our existence, which is not a problem. It was never our intent to exist as a secret society. In fact, I would prefer for the information to be disseminated now rather than right before the Assembly so that suspicions the minority might have about our aims can be dealt with now, rather than provoking prejudices (a secret faction!) that could derail our business at the Assembly.”
“Jun 25, 2021, 11:00:18 PM
We’ve always been about privacy here. Not secrecy, privacy. And why should we have privacy? Let me tell you why. Just today slander from a white supremacist website was spread about me in a PCA Facebook group because I dared to set the record straight about some of the untruths being said about the PCA and homosexuality. And it’s not the first time it’s happened to me.”
Despite the protestation that this is privacy, not secrecy, this has all the hallmarks of a secret society:

A hidden membership role
References to NP Presbyteries
Secret voting guidelines sent to members only

Jun 17, 2021, 9:01:05 AM

“Attached is the initial advice concerning overtures to the 48th GA.”

Jun 25, 2019, 10:46:16 PM

“UPCOMING:
Tomorrow AM: Wednesday’s schedule, important votes, etc.
Tomorrow PM: Final overtures advice
Thursday AM: Thursday’s schedule, important votes, etc.
Thursday AM: Nominations advice

June 07, 2018,

This is the first draft of the 2018 GA overtures advice book

References to “our” members on committees
Deleted websites like: thenationalpartnership.com
A member only National Partnership Facebook page
There are just under 250 references to the following words:

Vote
Voted
Voter
Voters
Votes

The email trove reveals an elite, secret society of ministers within the PCA seeking to thwart the rule of Christ over His church. You bet I’m angry. Christ is the head of the church. He rules through the Holy Spirit, working in the hearts of His elders. How is this anything over than an attempt by a minority to circumvent the majority?
I am angered at the mocking of those who seriously try to abide by the Word of God. I Peter 2 begins with a sober warning.
“2 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.”
A secret society that has an objective to force the acceptance of Revoice theology. Yes, I’m suspicious.
I’m angered at the arrogance. If Christ is the head of the church, and according to our theology, He is, then why do the members of the National Partnership assume He is not leading well.
“Jun 11, 2021, 6:33:46 AM
Many of you have heard about the letter drafted by Mike Khandjian and several other contributors. I was not one of the principal authors, but I am grateful to see it out in the world. I’d commend it to you as one way that we can help guide a healthier denomination.“
“Jul 2, 2021, 8:34:46 AM (7 days ago)
…Perhaps the next way you’ll move things forward is on the floor of your presbyteries as you lead debate on overtures we passed. Or maybe it’s time for your presbytery to bring something to the Birmingham assembly that moves us in a healthier direction.”
The flip side of these comments, as alluded to above, is that the PCA is unhealthy. That we do not listen to the Holy Spirit directing us in the courts of the church. These comments indicate that the National Partnership received a special revelation and authority.
I am angered by what appears to be a lack of integrity. A person with integrity is the same person in public and private. I thought the “Looking Forward Together” article was a thoughtful call for unity. I especially appreciated this passage.
“Be assured that our desire is not to vilify or attack those who disagree. When offered respectfully, we firmly believe that our internal challenges and those who disagree with us make us stronger. We all know that Satan, “the accuser of the brethren”(Revelation 12:10) would have no greater joy than for us to be divided as a denomination over matters that we should debate charitably and truthfully in order for iron to sharpen iron! We believe that sharpening of one another to labor together for Christ requires that we also be honest about some perspectives being advanced in recent months that we believe are not healthy for our church or for Christ’s mission.”
Then I saw the emails referring to non-National Partnership members of the PCA as opponents, enemies, dry bones, and jackasses. So which attitude is the real attitude of the National Partnership?
I am grieved by the coarse language in one email.
“Jun 22, 2021, 3:47:55 PM
When I started the HUE project, I very much expanded my world – praise the Lord, but also the flip side is WTF was I doing all this time.”
Paul, in Titus 2, says,
“6 Likewise urge the young men to be sensible; 7 in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, 8 sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.” (NASB, 1995)
Would any elder in the PCA use this language on the floor of the GA Assembly or in a sermon? Are we not called to be transformed rather than conformed? I work with brilliant, hard-working, and dedicated men who only have one word for expressing emotion. I expect better from elders in the PCA. Even more disappointing was the lack of correcting emails or an apology email,
I grieve over the missional sentiments that discount the relational work performed by the good people of the PCA every day. The authors of the NP emails operate with the assumption that PCA is not healthy or beautiful and that we are not welcoming. The “Beautiful Orthodoxy” conferences, which are promoted in the emails, have this goal:
“The goal of [Beautiful Orthodoxy] is to bless the work of the Kingdom in the PCA. We believe it is time to promote a declaration that we don’t have to choose between biblical/doctrinal fidelity and gospel beauty (love for the poor, joy, warm and welcoming churches, passion for justice, ethnic diversity and appreciation, utilization of the gifts of women, the church as a hospital for sinners, etc.).” (https://www.beautifulorthodoxypca.com/)
God’s people have never made that choice. To the best of our ability, we have carried out both aspects of the great commission, teaching and disciplining. Although I do not believe that the church as a hospital for sinners is an orthodox view of the church. Proponents of the missional church argue that unbelievers do not come to church, so they never hear the Gospel. That the church must somehow become more acceptable to the current culture to be heard. And yet, we’ve seen this story played out before. It’s a story with a sad ending.
People suffering in the bondage of sin are in a state of misery, no matter the age or the culture. They come to Christ as the Holy Spirit turns their heart of stone into a heart of flesh. And He often uses His people to draw them to the church where they hear the Gospel message. And they hear the discipline of the Word. They begin the process of sanctification and the mortification of their sin. Let’s celebrate the work done by His people rather than bemoaning the church and trying to find work arounds.
And I grieve over a lack of repentance after the publications of the emails. As far as I’m aware, no one from the National Partnership has stood up and publicly repented of creating a secret society that seeks to short circuit the presbyterian process. I find this disheartening. As elders who preach a Gospel of repentance, shouldn’t we be the first to repent?
I am hopeful. Evidently, the Lord pricked a conscience of an NP member who released the emails.
I am hopeful. The last GA rejected the machinations of the NP.
I am hopeful. The PCA is a true church that has remained faithful to the great commission. Our churches continue to preach, teach, and make disciples.
I am hopeful that the PCA continues as a true church and will practice discipline despite the pain and turmoil. I hope it does not come to this, but it needs to happen if public repentance is not forthcoming.
So I call on all members of the National Partnership to repent publicly of insults, besmirching the church, and obstructing the work of the church councils. I call on you to relinquish your committee memberships. I hope that some of you will. But for those who don’t, I plead that you find another denomination more to your liking, rather than tear the church apart through the exercise of discipline.
I am hopeful. Jesus still rules His church. We may have to break fellowship with those who secretly obstruct the church government and espouse Revoice theology, but the church will continue. I hope and pray that it does not come to that.
Al Taglieri is a Ruling Elder in the Providence Presbyterian Church in York, Penn.