Must we then go back to the old doctrine of Papias, Irenaeus, Tertullian: and interpret the Millennium literally?
We have already said that, although many in the early Church accepted the belief in the Millennium as a part of orthodoxy, many did not. The historian Eusebius almost contemptuously dismisses Papias’ report. ‘I suppose he got those ideas’, he says, ‘through a misunderstanding of the apostolic records, not perceiving that the things said by them were said mystically in figures. For he seems to have been of very limited understanding’ William Barclay, Revelation of John, vol. 2, The New Daily Study Bible (Louisville, KY; London: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), 213–214. And Papias, of whom we are now speaking, confesses that he received the words of the apostles from those that followed them, but says that he was himself a hearer of Aristion and the presbyter John. At least he mentions them frequently by name, and gives their traditions in his writings. These things, we hope, have not been uselessly adduced by us. But it is fitting to subjoin to the words of Papias which have bee...