Can someone explain me from a post and amillennium view why we should not hold to a literal 1000 year millennium ?

__________________
* Ralph Wilms (7-10-1974)
* Church : Christengemeente Roermond (The Netherlands)
* Credobaptist who hold towards Covenant Theology
* Husband of Reena & father of Naomie and Gideon
* 1729 Goat Yard Declaration of Faith
* 1646 & 1689 Baptist Confession of faith
* 1595 The Lambeth Articles
* 1618-1619 The Canons of Dordt

Here's a short explanation:

Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and of peace
there will be no end,
on the throne of David and over his kingdom,
to establish it and to uphold it
with justice and with righteousness
from this time forth and forevermore.

Ralph, this prophecy indicates that the Kingdom is established at the incarnation and it is established 'from this time forth and forevermore'.

A literal 1000 years has no meaning when we consider that Christ's kingdom has no end. Hence the 1000 years of Rev 20 should be understood in the same manner that we understand that God owns the cattle on a thousand hills. Doesn't he own them all?

[Edited on 4-7-2006 by BobVigneault]

__________________
Bob Vigneault (Bawb Vēēn-yo)
"We are God's children and He's the Father of all fathers and we need to obey him." Jean-Baptiste Vigneault (5)

The Heartbeat of Heaven (blog) MySpace (Music), MySpace (Personal)
Member of Christ Presbyterian Church, Janesville, WI OPC www.christ-opc.org

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Dear Bob,

Thank you so much for the explanation, and it really makes sense!
Do you know more reasons why pre-millennium believers are using to defend there believe, and how you would go against there literal 1000 year millennium ?

Ralph, I gave you the short explanation because it's all I have time for right now. Pastor Gene Cook of The Narrow Mind has been dedicating some of his podcasts to this topic. If you have a way to listen to mp3s you can listen to the show he did on The Narrow Mind on 2/07/2006

http://podcast.unchainedradio.com/po...nm02072006.mp3

He gave quite a few verses with commentary.

There are other broadcasts listed here:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/UnchainedRadioPodcast

I'm sure other PBers will lend more information to this thread soon.

I've only looked at it from the amillenial and dispensational perspectives, so right now the amillenial view makes the most sense to me. Having said that, for me its not quite that obvious that the 1000 years of Revelation should be understood the same way that the passage in Psalms is understood.

If I take the 1000 years to represent Christ's reign, established at His incarnation, and never ending, then its difficult to account for the time element in the Revelation 20 passage:

Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.

Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison...

__________________
Bob Howes
Framingham, MA

A reoccurring thought:

Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Thanks Bob, you went right to the weakest part of my argument. Way to go. With the psalms we have poetic writing and with the revelation we have symbolic writing and it is difficult to synthesize the two.

I believe that Rev 20 and 2 Thess 2 are referring to the same events just prior to the 2nd coming.

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Satan is bound now so that he cannot deceive the nations. In other words, go into all the world preaching and baptizing because Christ has removed Satan's ability to delude the nations. Hence, we find the gospel being preached everywhere.

Before the 2nd coming Christ will remove this hobbling of Satan and Satan will make it hard to spread the gospel. It will be a struggle to get the message out. Then Jesus will return and destroy Satan with his word.

The 1000 years is a specific period of time that only the Father knows, but it's not a literal 1000 years.

With regards to verse 5 if "œThis"� is referring to the 1000 years (which I believe it does), then the 1000 years would be the time of when the first resurrection occurs. The first resurrection believed by us amils is regeneration. Christ said, "œI assure you: Anyone who hears My word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not come under judgment but has passed from death to life"� (John 5:24). These are the ones that the "œsecond death has no power over."� However, there are various views on the start of the 1000 years (the incarnation, the cross, the resurrection, and the ascension).

__________________
Joshua Parker
Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Totally Reformed - My Blog
MDiv. Student at Whitefield
Cambridge, MA
"Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! The second death has no power over these, but they will be priests of God and the Messiah, and they will reign with Him for 1,000 years." - Revelation 20:6

One of the most irritating things for me when talking with dispensationalists is the claim that those who don't hold to their view are 'spiritualizing' the scriptures. Taken by itself, this would be a good example to substantiate their claim, and I think they might be justified in that claim...unless, or course, a person does what you did and builds a case by bringing in other scriptures.

I've never studied the postmillenial view, but I've heard that a good number of the puritans held to this view. If I understand it correctly, doesn't that view hold to a literal 1000 year period of time, at the end of the 'church age', just before judgement day? I guess when trying to decide between the amillenial and the postmillenial, its real important to nail down the starting point of the 1000 year period. (and this is just when comparing those 2 views - don't want to sound like I'm ruling out the partial preterist view)

As the guy on Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In would say, "Very Interesting". I've never heard that before.

...[pondering]...

The First Resurrection

Just so you don't think I pulled that out of the air :bigsmile: click on the above link.

Amazing! Are you a mind reader? (jk)

Interesting article.

Just wondering what your thoughts are on verse 7?

Rev 20:7
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

It sounds like its talking about a time period, whether literal or figurative, that ends and something happens afterwards. I'm wondering if this follows:

And when regeneration has expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison

Would you say its talking about the close of the church age when God stops regenerating people - ie., the last of the elect have been saved.

True, but I would say it more like "after He has gathered His elect from the four corners of the earth." How long will satan be loosed? Don't know, but I do know it is not 1000 years because the verse before says that this will happen after "the thousand years are expired."

[Edited on 4-10-2006 by youthevang]

The Millenium formally inaugurated itself at the end of the Tribulation period i.e the Destruction of Jerusalem in A.D 70. "Hereby you shall see the Son of Man, coming in the clouds". This corresponds with the enthronement scene in the Book of Daniel, where the Son of Man, "Our Lord Jesus", was officially coronated, when He was brought before the "Ancient of Days".

But in actuality, I would say that the Millenium started in when Jesus was born in the manger. "The Kingdom is like a seed, very small, but grows into a big oak, where the fowls of the air flock in its branches/. Or a leaven, that enters into the mixture and swells ..........". (paraphrase).

Fact is the Kingdom seems to start off small and grows and fills the whole earth.

__________________
~Keon Garraway~ Brooklyn, NY Member of Franklin Square OPC

Love for God demonstrated by the love for our children in giving them a God centered education is the only hope for our country. by David Morrow
Pslam 71:20 [Thou], which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and shalt bring me up again from the depths of the earth.

Interesting thoughts.

How about letting someone who takes the clear meaning at face value get a word in? What hermeneutical principles are you implementing in order to change the clear and simple meaning of 1000 years? Do you use these principles across the board? If you use different principles for prophecy, how do you determine when to switch methods in portions of Scripture that are both prophetic and narrative, or even propositional?

So, are there truly "SEVEN" lampstands? Jesus makes it clear what they represent in this book. If 1000 years is allegorical, then why isn't that clear. How about the original audience of Revelation? Do you actually think they would have thought 1000 years here began in their life times?

There are holes in every perspective, but there has to be a consistent hermeneutic regardless of what position you take. If you can't articulate your hermeneutic and conistently interpret according to it then all claims are merely speculations.

Let's see who's hand I played into.

By the way, don't assume my position. I'm defending 1000 years only, not the whole system and scheme of modern eschatological sensationalism. Normally, it's about this time that ad hominem and straw man arguments come out and play. Please keep it simple (as if the millenium were simple ).


[Edited on 4-21-2006 by Wannabee]

__________________
For the Glory of our King,
Joe Johnson
Slave of Christ, husband, father, Preacherboy at Cornerstone Community Church, Escanaba, MI. and TMS graduate. Personal website - SoundLife.org

I do not know, and I do not say, that a person cannot believe in Revelation and in evolution, too, for a man may believe that which is infinitely wise and also that which is only asinine. ~ CHS

I'm interested in hearing responses to your post also. I shed my dispensational trappings within the last few years. Unfortunately I am eschatoglogically naked at the present time! As a default position I hold to a literal 1000 year millenial reign but not a rapture. I am all ears.

__________________
Bill Brown
Elder
Grace Baptist Church
Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
Visit my BLOG Theology for the Rest of Us

probably the same reason we aren't to suppose that an Angel literally took a chain, and bound satan, and literally threw him into a bottomless pit. If gravity is 9.81m per sec, and we multiply (1000 yrs x 365 days x 24 hrs x 60 minutes x 60sec) x 9.81m, satan would have effectively fallen 309,368,160,000 Metres in the bottomless pit.

After satan is released we have him going up to the camp of the Saints and encompassing it. Now where is this camp of the Saints? It can not be a specific locality, since believers are spread all over the world. Or are we to believe that all believers got visas and went to Israel, whilst the rest of the globe remained godless and barren.

Acceleration due to gravity at sea level is 9.8m/s^2, not 9.8m/s. Assuming that acceleration is unchanging in this bottomless pit, no air resistance, and Newtonian physics, the correct equation is .5 * 9.8m/s^2 *(1000y * 365d/y * 24h/d * 60min/h * 60s/min) ^ 2 = 4.9 * 10^21 m.

__________________
Scott Roper
Member, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA): "A bunch of hippie Calvinists"
Winston-Salem, NC

Thanks Scott,

That was really bothering me. :P



Slippery,
Your name is fitting in this case. There are obvious idioms in all of Scripture. I know of nobody who denies that. My questions were straight forward and clear. The challenge is clear. Exegesis, not eisegesis.

Bottomless pit could mean anything, including another dimension. I simply don't know the implications of this. Also it doesn't say that Satan fell for 1000 years, but that he was cast. As long as he's behind the seal then the task is accomplished. I would take this to mean that there is no way out. The pit is non navigable.

You assume too much in regard to the camp of the saints. Perhaps this is what Zechariah refers to in ch. 14. Furthermore, if there is an all out battle between the followers of Satan and the followers of Christ it would be natural for the saints to flock to the holy city. Not pretending to have all the answers, but these challenges are readily answerable.

What you've done is attempt to make me defend a 1000 year millennium. The point is, that's exactly what the text says. My question remains the same...

[/quote]

that would be stretching it, because the Book of Hebrews clearly shows, that we have no eternal abode on this earth. And in Galatians we see the following," Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."

There is no earthly city of refuge for Christians, since the Holy City in and of itself is the Church, with Christ as the head. The Church of God is Universal, and without physicality. The only thing physical as per se, are its human members.

Many of our dispy brethren like to make the camp of the Saints, "earthly Jerusalem", but this is false. Earthly Jerusalem is the dwelling place of every unclean bird. "Rev 18:2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird."

It is also called Sodom, Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies [shall lie] in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.


We see the battle throughout scripture between the physical Jerusalem and the spiritual Jerusalem. God used the physical Jerusalem as a type and symbol of the heavenly Jerusalem, but carnal Jews and erroneous evangelicals still cling to the theory that physical Jerusalem is the apotheosis, thus to be clinged to.

But I will repeat the scripture from Galatians, "Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."

From the above, it is easy to see that, "The Camp of the Saints", is not to be taken as a literal camp a la the Israelites during the Exodus but only in a figurative sense; it is to be taken within the context, that Christians are sojourners on earth, hence this present earth is not their eternal home. (Hbr 11:38 (Of whom the world was not worthy they wandered in deserts, and [in] mountains, and [in] dens and caves of the earth.) They are on a journey to somewhere else, just like the desert was not the permanent home of the Israelites, but they were on a journey to the promise land.

As long as we Christians are on this earth, we are in a camp. We are not at home. Our true home is when our redemption meets its consumation.

Now as to your question as to what hermenuetics am I using and should it be justified to take away 1000 years from being literal to figurative, when in preceding verses 3.5 years meant exactly 3.5 years. I would simply say that within the context that the 1000 years was being used, it warrants a figurative interpretation. I mean look at it this way. "Chains around satan in a bottomless pit for a 1000 years". That context screams figuration.

"Live and reign with Christ 1000 years". Which person ever lived 1000 years? How about this, "He that believes on me shall never die". And of course Stephen died and Paul then Saul killed a lot more.


Forgive me, I cannot express concisely what I mean, but I hope my passion makes up for this.

And Scott, thank you for revealing my impoverished grasp of physics.

Thanks Keon,

Good post.

One thread that continues through your reasoning is equating the eternal state with the Millennium. If the Millennium is a literal 1000 years, then this is obviously a poor comparison. This also deals with the comments in regard to the eternality of the heavenly city, for there are two Jerusalems in Scripture: one on earth and one that is the City of God. One is eternal, one temporal. As for the 3.5 years and 3.5 years, this would be the tribulation period in the typical dispensationalist interpretation, and preceed the Millennium. I'm not going to argue for the tribulation though, I just wanted to point out that your observation is able to be dealt with quite easily.

Some of your other observations are more difficult, especially in regard to Jerusalem. Here are some questions for you:
Walk through these verses and describe where each of these places is. The list may seem a bit redundant, but it is organized thematically. You'll also notice that there is a division, and that the themes are recurring in each division, in order. It may help to put the two division side by side.

• Ezekiel 42:15-20
  Ez 48:15-17
  Is 60:10
  Ez 40:5
  Is 60:11-12
  Ez 48:5-42:20
  Ez 45 (and 48)
  Zech 14:8
  Is 65:20
  Ez 47:1
  Ez 47:7
  Is 30:26
  
  Rev 21:16
  Rev 21:17-20
  Rev 21:21
  Rev 21:25-26
  Rev 21:12-14
  Rev 21:22
  Rev 21:1
  Rev 21:4
  Rev 22:1
  Rev 22:2
  Is 60:19-20
  Rev 21:22

As you go through these, remember that there is not a Temple in the Heavenly Jerusalem.

You also seem to be saying that Babylon is Jerusalem. Please explain. This seems like a leap.

For clarity, I completely agree that earth is not our eternal home; at least not as we know it. However, that doesn't mean that it is not the home of Millennial saints. To make that claim is to read too much into it.

In regard to the chains and Satan: I agree that it seems allegorical. However, the meaning is clear. Not so with 1000 years. One is obviously to be bound. One is obviously 1000 years. The clear and simple meaning of each is obvious with only a cursory reading.

As for living 1000 years, all we have to do is look to the time before the flood. Remember, if one understands a literal Millennial reign then one undersands that Is 35:20 is refering to people during the Millennium. This cannot mean the eternal state for there is no death in the eternal state.


I appreciate the effort at showing the contextual reasons that an allegorical hermeneutic is appropriate in regard to 1000 years. There is much allegory throughout Revelation. But this doesn't work here. Other areas are obvious and shown to be allegorical with words such as "like" or "as." This passage reveals the Millennium as a forseen fact, not a kind or type or allegory.

[Edited on 4-22-2006 by Wannabee]

Hey J,

Simply put...read the entire chapter, in context, resisting to project onto it anything other than what it says...

Back up and notice:

Rev. 20:4

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand yea