Poll: Views on the Millennial Reign of Christ

If anyone wants to "spiritualize" away the FACT of Israel and the miracle of being regathered in the land, go right ahead. No argument will make any difference to you. God is not done with Israel yet, just wait and see.

You might read the newspapers and see how Ge. 12:3 has played out in the last few years especially. Those that bless Israel will be blessed and those that curse Israel will be cursed. In the past 10 years you can find example after example right on the front page of the New York Times and USA Today as to what that means. Do just a little research and you'll see.
Now, just so you know where I am coming from, I'm not saying the United States has been totally wonderful to Israel because that is not the case. Even going back 10-15 years and the continued insistence, and threats to Israel to give back some of their covenant land for peace is enough to demonstrate that. And the US by insisting on that absurd proposal has suffered, and will continue to suffer for that stance. God will not be mocked. God promised Israel land, and the land they will have. Period!!!

On another note, I read that about a 1,000,000 Muslims are gathering in Mecca for a Holy Day or days. I wonder how many security guards are on duty to protect them from all the Christian terrorists. I bet the thought never entered their heads or anyone else's head in the West. Which religion is peace-loving?
James2

[ February 26, 2002, 01:22 AM: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

 

James, James, James, here we go again ...

Non-dispensationalists do not all believe that "God is done with Israel". Quite the contrary, salvation comes through Israel. The question is, "Who is Israel?" All are not Israel who are of Israel. Read Rom 11 with the dispy blinders off. True Israel is the elect of God; disbelieving Jews have been cut off from the tree of salvation, and belieiving Gentiles grafted in.

Romans 11:17-27(ESV)
But if some of the branches were broken off [ethnic Israel], and you [Gentiles], although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others [True Israel] and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, [18] do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. [19] Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." [20] That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. [21] For if God did not spare the natural branches [Isarel], neither will he spare you. [22] Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. [23] And even they, [Israel] if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, [to True Israel] for God has the power to graft them in again. [24] For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, [Israel] be grafted back into their own olive tree. [True Israel]
[25] Lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon [natural]Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.[to True Israel] [26] And in this way all Israel will be saved, [The elect of every tribe and tongue and nation] as it is written,
"The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob";
[27] "and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins."

TRUE ISRAEL inherits the land when Christ returns, i.e., the New Heavens and the New Earth.

 

Amen Bro. Chris!

 

I would like to show that the Millenimum was prophecied under the former covenant. A few passages will portray the idea. In Ezekiel 37:22 the prophet tells the people that in the future there will be ‘ . . . one nation in the land on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all . . . ' In 1948 Israel became a nation for the first time in mega years. The two nations of Judah and Israel will in the future become ‘ . . . one stick.' [Ezekiel 37:19] Ezekiel tells the people and us today that during the 1,000 reign in the Kingdom era there will be one King and His Name will be Christ [Note Micah 5:2; Zechariah 14:1-21 especially verses 9 & 16].

Ezekiel 37 points clearly to the fact that God is going to restore national Israel. [Romans 11:23] The natural branches will be again grafted into their own Olive tree. [Romans 11:24c,d] The Valley of Dry Bones will be made alive by the Spirit. No where under the Old Covenant did the people--the laity receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is one of the phenomenon of the ‘ . . . better covenant' [Hebrews 8:6 & Hebrews 8:8] ‘ . . . I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah.' During this Kingdom reign of Christ as documented in Revelation 20 all of the people of God, Israelite and Gentiles will enjoy the Presence of the Spirit of God. This is also documented in Ezekiel 36:27 & 37:14.

In the latter years of history [Ezekiel 38:8] the people will live in the land of Israel enjoying the Messianic Temple [Ezekiel 37:26] The land of Israel will be divided among the twelve tribes of Israel as noted in Ezekiel 48:29]. Some Gentiles will live among the Israelites says the Prophet Ezekiel. [Ezekiel 47:21-23]. These Gentiles will be people who survived the terror of the Great Tribulation after the rapture and will live in their human bodies until their death. The martyred saints both Israelite and Gentiles will have a spiritual body like our Lord's and will dwell in the land of Israel.

Another Messianic Kingdom passage is found in Isaiah 2:1-4. The word of the Lord and His law will go forth from the city of Jerusalem. [vs. 3]. During the Millinimum there will be freedom to either worship Christ or to disobey Him, but at a price. [Zechariah 14:16-18] Notice the plague that will smite Egypt because they are, for the most part the product of another world religion, namely, Islam.

In the New Heaven and throughout all eternity there will be no sinners or anyone who will disobey the Lord.

Now I want to make a quote from Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer from his Systematic Theology Volume I --Preface xvii.

‘The great events predicted for the close of the present age include the Day of Christ when the Church will be taken to be forever with the Lord--some by resurrection and some by translation [I Cor. 15:35-53; I Thess. 4:13-17]---, and the Day of the Lord when Israel will be regathered, judged and privileged to experience the fulfillment of all her earthy covenants in the land which has been given to her by the oath of Jehovah, which oath cannot be broken [Deut. 30:3-5; II Sam. 7:16; Ps. 89:34-37; Jeremiah 23:5,6; 31:35-37; 33:25,26]. This reference is my insertion. In the New Testament we notice Romans 9:1-5.

In the coming kingdom of Messiah the distinction between Israel and the Church is still more obvious. Israel, as a nation, is seen through prophetic vision to be on the earth as subjects of the Kingdom and in her Kingdom glory, while the Church is said to be coreigning with Christ [Rev. 20:6]. As His Bride and Consort, it is the rightful place of the Church to share in His reign.'

Perhaps God knowing the difficulty of eschatology re-emphasized the 1,000 year Kingdom reign six times from Revelation 20:2-7, so that Christians might understand aright.

These are but a sampling of the Kingdom age prophecied via God to His Old and New Covenant servants.

Respectfully,

Ray Berrian Th.D.

 

Back to the original question, "What position do you hold concerning the millennial reign of Christ?," I would have to say that I am a Dispensational Pre-Trib rapturist Pre-Millennialist.

The pre-mil vs. other camps has to do with the reading of Revelation 20; is the 1000 years really 1000 years or is this a figurative expression of time? The plain reading of the text would indicate that the 1000 years is literal. However, even as a "dispy" pre-mil, I know that scripture often uses figurative speach... like "word pictures"... to convey spiritual truths. So the question becomes much deeper and involves basic principles of hermenutics and interpretation. Were the covenants God made with Abraham (for example) literal or not? Is the body of believers today, the Church, a separate body from Israel (as Chris Temple in an earlier post alludes to). A-mils and post-mils "spiritualize" the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham in the Church and use verses like Romans 11:17-27 to show that the Church and the "true" Israel are one and the same... well, in THIS dispensation, they are... all "messianic" Jews who believe in Christ are the "true" Israel today and are part of the body of Christ which includes the "natural branches" and the "wild branches".

But, getting back to Revelation and the outline of time that is conveyed in Rev 19 & 20, I have some questions for the a-mils and post-mils (please present your answers so they can be fitted in a logical timeline):

If the Church is synonymous with the millennial kingdom then which coming of Christ is referred to in Rev 19? The first comming? Is the marriage of the Lamb come?

What, when, and where is the millenial reign of Christ?

If the kingdom = the Church = the elect of all ages = true Israel, then is the millennial kingdom happening NOW in a figurative sense in the Church? (Most a-mils, I believe, would say, "yes")

When is Satan judged according to Rev 20:7,10?

But, in Rev 20, Satan is bound BEFORE the millennial kingdom is created. Does this mean that Satan is bound now?

The beast and false prophet of Revelation 19:19-21... who or what are they?

When are the beast and false prophet punished according to Rev 19:20?

What is the "first resurrection" of Rev 20:5? The new birth? If so, could you please give one example where the term "resurrection" ever refers to anything other than a physical resurrection when relating to people?

Rev 20:10 indicates that at the end of the millenial kingdom, Satan is thrown into the "lake of fire" where the "beast" and the "false prophet" ARE... they were thrown in there BEFORE the kingdom began and still are being tormented at the end of the kingdom when Satan is thrown in there with them. Again... who are these beings that Jesus personally disposed of before the millennial reign?

Present a meaningful synopsis of the timeline of Rev 19 & 20 explaining what the events of Rev 19 & 20 are in a logical progression from the crucifixion of Christ to the culmination of the final judgement. The first paragraph would cover the oldest event/explanation... the next paragraph the next event/explanation... etc.

 

Mostly right: the question is, does one chapter in an apocalyptic-visionary prophecy trump the clear teaching of the apostles and Christ, who taught one return of Christ at the end of all time?

The greater underlying reason for pretrib, premill is the unbiblical, perennial distinction between the Church and True Israel.

 

Chris, I agree that one chapter does not undo other clear teachings... IF it were true that there were very clear teachings on this issue. But what we have on both sides are interpretations of verses. Both sides rely on the Bible to present their case. Revelation 20 does spell out the 1000 years duration of the earthly kingdom phase but the idea of an earthly kingdom is repeated many times in the Old Testament (if the text is read "plainly"). So the idea of the earthly kingdom in NOT limited to "one chapter" as you would imply and seek to set up a straw-man argument.

I would also like to say that your comment that we dispensationalists teach that there is more than one second coming of Christ to earth is also a straw-man argument. We teach that Christ will come for His Church (which is a subset of the elect IMO) at any moment... he does NOT come to earth for this. When Christ returns physically to the earth, His feet will touch down on the Mount of Olives just as prophesied in the OT and He will destroy the army raised up against Him and then He will begin the judgment of the nations... Matt 25:31-46... the separation of the "sheep" from the "goats" based on how they treated a THIRD class of people referred to by Christ as "these my brethren" (not part of the sheep). But we can touch on that in a later discussion, as it seems to be diverting attention from the main discussion here.

I notice you didn't try to answer the questions I asked or propose a time line with commentary on the events of Rev 19 & 20.

I have 2 older brothers that are ordained Baptist ministers and are a-mil and I have read a lot of a-mil, post-mil, preterist literature but have not seen anything that makes sense of the issues I have raised. I do not claim to be infallible on this issue and I am certainly willing to listen but simply declaring that the pre-mil, pre-trib position is unbiblical is nothing short of a display of ignorance on your part. I can very well show this position IS supported by Bible verses just as you can support your position... whether or not this is the correct interpretation is the question and we should not forget that this is a secondary issue, not an essential doctrine. So, I may disagree with your position and you with mine but if this starts turning into something where terms of "unbiblical" start becoming "heretical" this conversation will be over as far as I'm concerned. This is not an issue that should divide the brethren.

Blessings in Christ.

 

Dear Chris,

You wrote…

In response to a statement:

<The pre-mil vs. other camps has to do with the reading of Revelation 20; >

<<Mostly right: the question is, does one chapter in an apocalyptic-visionary prophecy trump the clear teaching of the apostles and Christ, who taught one return of Christ at the end of all time? >>

Agreed,

Then you said…

<<The greater underlying reason for pretrib, premill is the unbiblical, perennial distinction between the Church and True Israel. >>

Chris, if you mean "True Israel" to be those true believers before Christ First Coming, what words would you use to illustrate the "distinction" between the Church and True Israel in terms of the mosaic law. For instance why do we eat pork and shellfish. Why don't we keep the Sabbath (7th day-Saturday), etc?

Doesn't the Law make the biggest scriptural distinction between these two entities?

HankD

 

Hank:

Is the law still in existence for believers? The law makes a distinction between true believers (Spiritual Israel) and false believers (pagans and Judaizers). If anyone practices the law, they are condemned (Gal 1:8-9). The law was our tutor to point to Christ (Gal 3:23-25). "For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.'" Galatians 3:10 (ESV)

Galatians 3:7-9 (ESV)
Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. [8] And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all the nations be blessed." [9] So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

Scripture makes it clear that there are two bodies of people: the saved (elect Jew and Gentile, saved by grace, justified by faith) and the lost (Jew and Gentile enslaved to the elementary principles of this world, Gal 4:1-8).

That's the only distinction the NT makes.

 

No straw man. There is certainly an earthly kingdom spoken of throughout Scripture - but it occurs in the new heavens and new earth. Paradise restored, New Jerusalem descended. Can you point to any CLEAR Scripture which says that Christ returns invisibly for the church, and then returns again (3rd time, no matter how dispys deny it) at the end of 1000 years?

This is the standard argument by the disp.; non disps either don't understand disp. or they misrepresent it.

Where is this clearly taught in Scripture?

WHERE oh where does Scripture teach a third class of people?? There are two classes fo peoples: the elect and the reprobate. That is the only distinction in the NT.

Galatians 3:26-29 (ESV)
for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. [27] For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. [28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. [29] And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

 

Chris,

OK, I see your point.

HankD

 

Brethren,

I am going to address two quotes previously stated by some on this topic.

First of all, I do not use the New York Times to interpret scripture.


(John 5:25) Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

JOhn 5:25 is not referring to physically dead people, but spiritually dead people. John 5:28-29 are referring to physically dead people.

(John 5:28-29) Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, (29) And shall come forth; they that have done good, unt in the graves to the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

*Notice John 5:29 only makes reference to one resurrection of both the believing and unbelieving.*

To God be the glory, Christopher

 

< {John 5:28-29} Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, {29} And shall come forth; they that have done good, unt in the graves to the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

*Notice John 5:29 only makes reference to one resurrection of both the believing and unbelieving.* >

Revelation 6:14, 15a-- Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed.

Which passage then do you think is a lie?

 

It seems that there is not one single a-mil or post-mil on this board willing to answer my original questions and propose a timeline for the events of Rev 19 & 20. I have been asking these questions for years and have gotten the same dodges. Instead of facing up to their inability to deal with the issues raised, the non-dispies wish to try to turn the tables by bickering about this verse and that verse which will go on and on incessantly without any real resolution because ALL the major eschatological positions are self-consistant (mostly) and ALL positions have problems (including mine). However, I beleive that the dispensational view is the most consistant view overall with the Bible of all the views or I would not hold to it. I see a real problem with Rev. 19 & 20 for those who spiritualize or allegorize the prophecies of the Bible and I really would like to see that timeline with commentary as to what the events and personages described in Rev 19 & 20 are. Perhaps this is more than can be handled in one post... so break it up and make several.

In the meantime I will try to answer the questions raised against my position as I have time (which will probably not be today).

Blessings to all in Christ.

 

Maybe it is because they do not wish to be buy into how you have even framed your question.

You are asking for a timeline. That is silly and rediculous.

 

Agreed. Since God has not given us a continuous timeline in Revelation, I don't think we can either.

('Cept we are in the "millennium" now )

 

May I ask a few questions about your interpretation of Rev 19?

1. Do you think all the saints will wear literal gowns of fine linen?
2. Do you think we will sit at a table and eat a literal wedding dinner?
3. Do you think Christ will appear on a literal white horse?
4. Does Christ have literal eyes of fire?
5. Will Christ' clothes be literally dipped in blood?
6. Will the armies of heaven ride literal white horses?
7. Does Christ have a literal sharp sword in his mouth to strike down the nations?
8. Will Christ literally rule the nations with a rod of iron?
9. Will Christ literally tread a winepress of the fury?
10. Does Christ literally have written on his robe and on his thigh a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords?

If no to any of these questions, why not?

 

May I ask a few questions about your interpretation of Rev 19?

It amazes me that critics of those that try to read the Bible plainly want to impose a literalness upon us that we do not impose upon ourselves. Believe it or not, we do recognize may literary forms and we do recognize symbols and types.

1. Do you think all the saints will wear literal gowns of fine linen?
The saints will be literally be clothed in glorified bodies. The righteousness of Christ is represented by gowns of fine linen as opposed to our own works which are like bloody menstrual garments. Is not the act of receiving glorified bodies literal? Or would you like to say Christ has merely a spiritual non-physical body?

2. Do you think we will sit at a table and eat a literal wedding dinner?
I'm not sure what kind of furniture there will literally be. We will have resurrected bodies. The picture presented is a relational one. Yes, I think there will be a celebration and "feasting" with the Lord as the Church and Christ celebrate their union and relationship together. We are literally going to be with Christ rejoicing.

3. Do you think Christ will appear on a literal white horse?
I don't see any reason why not... a horse does not have to be of flesh and blood in order to be seen... literal does not necessarily mean earthly. Yes, I believe that the people of the earth could very well see Christ ridding a white horse when He comes in glory. The white horse is the symbol of a conquering king and contrasts to the foal of a donkey Jesus road into Jerusalem on (which was also used by kings when they came in peace)... ooops... there's some symbology there... gosh, I guess Jesus didn't really ride into Jerusalem on a donkey after all... how could He... that would be mixing literal and symbolic together... we can't have that now, can we?

4. Does Christ have literal eyes of fire?
Even today if someone says you have "eyes of fire" they are speaking of seeing the emotion of "blazing" anger in your eyes. In the "spiritual" vision of John I believe he saw flames... but that does not mean there is a corresponding literal reality. Yes, John was seeing a heavenly vision and there are symbolic elements there... obviously... Christ is certainly the Lamb of God and John sees a Lamb slain before the foundation of the world... is there any question as to whom this is refering to? The fact that the expression is sybolic, howver, does not negate the fact that the symbol is referring to a literal being.

5. Will Christ' clothes be literally dipped in blood? John indicates that is the way Jesus appears... who am I to argue with that? The expression is used to indicate the war and slaughter that Jesus is about to embark on... yes, there is symbolic expression in all your questions... but there is also literal truth! Jesus IS going forth to kill those on the earth... that IS going to literally happen.

6. Will the armies of heaven ride literal white horses?
Just like Christ (see above).

7. Does Christ have a literal sharp sword in his mouth to strike down the nations?
In the spiritual vision (of which visions usually use symbology), yes, John literally sees Jesus with a sharp sword... is there literally a sharp sword in the physical world... no, we are told that the sword of God is His Word... and the Word incarnate is Christ... and by the power od His word judgement will fall upon the nations just as surely and as literally as the act of the Lord speaking His word the universe came into being.

Peter saw a vision of a sheet with the unclean animals and was told to eat... the vision was symbolic but it held the literal truth that the gospel was going to the gentiles.

8. Will Christ literally rule the nations with a rod of iron?
Will Christ literally have a rod of iron by His side... perhaps. The more important thought is that His rule will be absolute and righteous. Will He literally rule the nations? Yup... for a literal 1000 years.

9. Will Christ literally tread a winepress of the fury? Again... John saw this literally in his vision... again this is certainly sybolic of the judgement of God upon the earth... but this is also a literal judgement in the fact that God will judge the earth and His fury will be poured out upon it and those that opposed Christ and His saints will be "crushed".

10. Does Christ literally have written on his robe and on his thigh a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords? I think John saw this in his vision, yes. Yes, I think this is also a symbolic act of a literal truth. Is not Jesus King of kings and Lord of lords?

The fact that you wish to stoop to saying that dispensationalists don't take EVERYTHING literally therefore we shouldn't take anything literally is typical of the a-mil and post-mil crowd and shows how little they really understand the position of dispensationalists.

Now... please explain who the beast and the false prophet are? Are they future or past?

[ March 04, 2002, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]