We are not talking about that. We are talking about eschatology. You know that!
Yes I do know that. But I wished to point out that eschatology cannot alone be considered the criteria by which orthodoxy can be determined. You wish to make a single, reasonable element in eschatology a heresy by surrounding it with peripheral ideas that you wish to compare to heretics. You wish to make belief in a literal Millennium corrupt because some of those who did so had some corrupt ideas that went along with it.
Their heretical beliefs not only made them heretics, but they also tainted their eschatology, which non-heretical Chiliasts did not adhere to. Not even modern Dispensationalists hold to those corrupted eschatological beliefs. In other words, the heretics and the Chiliasts may have had Premillennial beliefs in common, but that does not mean their Premillennial beliefs were the same.
The point I'm making is that not only is it reasonable to believe in a literal Millennium, but no matter how much the peripheral ideas around that belief may seem similar to heretics, the important thing was whether they were really orthodox in doctrine, eg in their Christology or in their beliefs about God. When that is understood, we may more easily see that the comparison of these peripheral ideas are "political" in nature, intended to distort and defame beliefs that were not really like the things heretics believed at all.
First, Premillennialism is not and never was viewed as heretical, except at times of extreme political bias. The ecumenical councils apparently did not condemn it, contrary to what we hear.
Cerinthus, Marcion, and Apollinaris may have had Chiliast notions, but their beliefs in other areas were what made them heretical--not their eschatology! Associating other, more orthodox Chiliasts with them is then just a political maneuver by Amils, who wished to distance themselves from both Chiliasm and the heretical views they thought accompanied it.
Second, Cerinthus' belief that Christ was strictly human bears no relation to his belief in Chiliasm. We don't have direct info from Cerinthus, but we have noted that his beliefs about the Millennium did appear to be worldly. And Chiliasm, in itself, does not necessarily equate to that. The idea of a continuing material world past the 2nd Coming does not necessarily reflect widespread ungodliness and unrestrained moral filth.
Marcion separated the old and new testaments as being the product of 2 separate gods! Marcion had a kind of Gnostic spiritualism transcending the material world. This is not how typical Chiliasts would view the Millennial world. It is not a materialism of excess and luxury, but rather a materialism of discipline and order.
His view concerning the Kingdom of God, or Chiliasm, does not reflect on his belief about God. It was his belief that the NT God is very different from the OT God that renders his belief in the Millennium very different from typical Chiliasts. The Jews would have their Kingdom, and Christians would have an entirely different spiritual Kingdom. In other words, Chiliasm does not, of necessity, produce belief in the kind of Millennium Marcion believed in.
Most Chiliasts do not, like Marcion, believe in the superiority of the Jewish inheritance of God's Kingdom--perhaps its prominence, but not its superiority. Modern Premillennialists do not separate Jews and Christians in the Kingdom of God, except in the way all nations are divided today. They are not separated as Marcion believes as if they have 2 separate gods! Dispensationalists merely claim that God's promise to each nation, including the Jewish nation, must have their own fulfillment in a single Kingdom of God.
Apollinaris may have been more of an actual Christian than unbeliever Cerinthus or Gnostic Marcion. But his belief that Christ was not fully human was clearly in error. It does not in any way reflect on his Chiliastic eschatology.
Christ's glorious reign according to early Chiliasts and modern Amils is not on this current corrupt earth, as you and the ancient heretics believe[d], where you have more of the same-old same-old. It is a newly perfected earth free of all the bondage of corruption (as the Bible teaches).
No. In the Kingdom of God, the glorious Church, together with Christ, will rule over a still-infected world so that peace reigns throughout the thousand years, and Christian nations rise and stand fast. This is not the world you describe that Premils believe in, with sickness, misery, and vile behaviors. The glorious Church does not rule over a perfect world, but only over a world that requires judgment.
The "perfection" existing at that time will be in Christ himself, and in his glorious Church who will by then have received immortality. The earth, even though still infected with sin, will be tame compared to this present age of unbridled sin.
Even in the present age, however, there are times of relative tranquility and success with God's Kingdom. The new age will be much better.
The Gospel is preached to all creation because the earth will ultimately be liberated from all of its problems. But it must begin with the Millennial Age, with the restoration of godly nations, in preparation for the new creation.
Associating this belief falsely as materialistic excess and sinful luxury is not conducive to good communications on this subject since it is "political" in nature, and certainly not true. At best, it is jaded.
What is even worse is your false association of either Chiliasm or Modern Premillennialism with ancient heretics, whose beliefs were influenced by non-Christian, heretical ideas that did not exist in either the Chiliasts or in Modern Dispensationalists/ Premillennialists.
I hasten to say that not all of Modern Premillennialism is Dispensational. I am not Dispensational.