Perhaps you will like to try to answer my question. I’ve placed it before several premils and so far have not gotten any response:
[Begin quote]
If we define a premillennialist as one who believe that Christ will physically reign on the earth for a thousand years after the second coming and resurrection, what specific evidence would you use to substantiate the premil position in the early church?
In reviewing some on the ancient writers who are listed as supporting the premillenarian position, I could not find anything that could identify with this modern definition.
E.g., in Justin Martyr, we read:
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. (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Chapter LXXX)You will note that in these two rather well-known “premillennial” statements there is absolutely no mention of Christ physically on the earth during the thousand years. One can certainly read one’s biases into the statement and come to that reading, but they do not literally teach what modern premillenarians teach.Now we have understood that the expression used among these words, ‘According to the days of the tree [of life] shall be the days of my people; the works of their toil shall abound’ obscurely predicts a thousand years. For as Adam was told that in the day he ate of the tree he would die, we know that he did not complete a thousand years. We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’ is connected with this subject. And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, ‘They shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.’ (Dialogue, Chapter LXXXI)
[End quote]
Just because Justin Martyr didn’t mention it doesn’t mean he didn’t hold the viewpoint. It is just a likely that Justin Martyr believed that it was such an obvious point that it didn’t need to be stated. It would go hand-in-hand with the “a thousand years in Jerusalem” statement and anyone reading it in context and contemporaneously would understand his viewpoint.
What I find interesting that the first person to outspokenly argue against a premillenial position was the heretic Marcion.