|















Search chap/verse
Search word: Retrieve verses, illustrations, etc |

| |
|
COLLECTIONS
Commentaries, Word
Studies, Devotionals, Sermons, Illustrations
Old and New Testament. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
THE
MILLENNIUM |
| Millennium
is a term derived from the Latin
mille meaning "a thousand". The term "Millennium"
per se
is not found in the Scriptures but is used by many evangelicals to identify
the period of "one thousand years" which John mentions six
times in
Revelation 20.
Other synonyms for "Millennium" include "Millennial Kingdom", "Messianic Kingdom", "1000 Year Reign of
Christ", "Messianic Age" and “literalistic
chiliasm”. As outlined below, the characteristics of the "Millennium"
are described in
considerable detail in the Old Testament, albeit this period is never specifically
defined as 1000 years in the OT text.
It is interesting to read the
definition of "Millennium" from Webster's dictionary...
Millennium (Mil*len"ni*um) n. [LL., fr.
L. mille a thousand + annus a year] the thousand years
mentioned in Revelation 20 during which holiness is to prevail and Christ is
to reign on earth
In simple terms there are 3 basic
approaches to interpretation of "1000 years" in Revelation 20 summarized
as:
1) Pre-millennial: Christ will
return before the 1000 years
2) Post-millennial: Christ will
return after the 1000 years. This view holds that the gospel will triumph
over evil and not the visible second coming of Jesus Christ.
3) Amillennial: No literal,
visible millennium on earth. This view holds that Satan is bound and the
church is experiencing the millennium now.
In fairness, it should be noted that
this summary is meant to be a generalization and does not seek to go into
the various arguments or permutations of belief of the post- and
a-millennial views. One is referred to other websites and resources for
that exercise.
It should also be stated at the outset of
this website does not espouse a single specific
theological approach to eschatology including, including even Dispensationalism which
also strongly supports a
literal millennium. Instead the approach is to seek to adhere as best as is
humanly possible to a literal interpretation of the Biblical text. As a
chemistry major at the University of Texas and later as a medical doctor
trained in the practice of observation of literal tissue samples
(specifically as a pathologist analyzing various tissues and cells of the
human body under a microscope) I take the approach that
if the plain sense of the Biblical
text makes good sense in context, then one should seek to make no
other sense out of the inspired text for fear that the conclusion may
end up as sheer nonsense.
And so it follows,
especially if you are new to the study of
prophecy, that one of the most important rules for accurate interpretation is
to allow the Scripture to speak for itself, reading the text for the
normal, plain sense, as long as the context allows (see discussion on
Reading the Scripture Literally).
Utilizing this admittedly simple and even somewhat simple minded approach,
it is difficult to overlook John's declaration that there is a 1000 year period
in which Jesus Christ will reign and rule on earth as Lord of lords and
King of kings.
In fairness, it
should be acknowledged that there are many good and godly people
who disagree with the
literal interpretation
of
Revelation 20
which leaves the non-literal interpretation as their only option.
By default, they must resort to allegorical, spiritual or symbolic
interpretation. A non-literal interpretative approach opens one to the
vulnerability of fallen man's ingenuity and imagination. In other words,
how far does one control the limits of their spiritualizing? What is the
plumb line that determines the accuracy of their non-literal assessment?
The inherent dangers
of non-literal interpretation should be readily apparent. I firmly
believe that the difficulty of defining when an interpretation is too
allegorical, too spiritualized, too symbolic, too mystical, etc is one of the major reasons there are
so many conflicting and confusing interpretations on the book of the
Revelation and specifically on this short section of Scripture in
Revelation 20.
And is it possible, that the Old Serpent, Satan, the liar, the devil, the
diabolos (literally one who throws between or comes between and so one who
divides!) has had no small part in orchestrating the confusion the
interpretation of the Revelation of Jesus Christ which clearly defines our
Lord's triumph and Satan's utter and final defeat? How often I hear
Christians say they have never even read the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
When I ask "Why not?", the most common answers are "I'm afraid to read
it", "There are two many interpretations, so how can you know who is
correct", or "It simply cannot be understood." I beg to disagree, dear
Christian brother or sister. If you are born from above, your body is a
temple of the Holy Spirit, Who lives in you as your resident Teacher, Whom
Jesus said
"will teach you all things" (John 14:26) and will "guide you into all the
truth...and... will disclose to you what is to come." (John 16:13)
In his first
epistle, John reminds us that...
"...the anointing (which alludes to the teaching ministry of the
indwelling Holy Spirit) which you received from Him abides in you, and you
have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you
about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught
you, you abide in Him. (1John 2:27)
From other NT
passages, we know that John is not saying you never need a teacher, but
that you must understand that you as a believer already possess in the
Spirit's anointing the best Teacher you will ever have and One Who will
help discern whether your human teachers are speaking truth or error.
Before you go any further and are
biased even more by the interpretative comments on this page, you might take a
moment and lay aside all you preconceived notions, your denominational
trappings, your favorite prophecy teacher's interpretation, etc, and
come to
Revelation 19-22
as if you have never read this section
before. Ask your Teacher the Holy Spirit to lead you into all the truth.
Come with a heart that is tender and that trembles at His Word (Isaiah
66:5) seeking the plain
sense of what God has declared about the end times. Remember that "God is
not a God of confusion"! (1 Corinthians 14:33)
As you read these
amazing passages, you might make a simple list of the major
events from Revelation 19:11-21:3. You might also want to try to group the
major events together and number each group. Then armed with what the
Scripture clearly states, you will be better prepared to evaluate what the
commentaries (including the one you are reading) have to say about these
passages. As I always like to say
"It's amazing how much light the
Scriptures will shed on the commentaries!"
Now ask yourself as you simply
wrote down the events in
Revelation 19:11-21:3,
does a literal reading suggest a logical
sequence of the events? Again, try to put aside anything and everything
you have ever been told about prophecy in general and the Revelation in
particular, so that you might arrive at the most
objective interpretation possible. May God's Spirit grant you His amazing
grace to do so. Amen.
|
|
The
Millennium |
|
If you observe
Revelation 19:11-21:3
literally, independent of any teaching on prophecy you may have heard or specific theological
viewpoint, you will be able to come up with a literal timeline of
the end time events similar to the one below. As you look over this
outline ask yourself "Does this sequence of events seem logical and
orderly?" If so, why would one need to allegorize the 1000 years? Is 1000
years not compatible with God's plan for the end of time? Why not? Is it
because you were taught by someone you respected who simply did not
believe the 1000 years was literal? Or is it because you have read several
commentaries that don't interpret "1000" as "one thousand"? Even if you
did not know that there were literally dozens of Old Testament Scriptures
that perfectly paralleled this period of "one thousand years", can you not
see how the literal interpretation fits so well into the flow of events in
these last chapters? Notice I am not espousing any particular theological
viewpoint (dispensational or otherwise) but only a simple minded literal
reading of the Scripture.
(1) The Second Coming of Christ:
And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a
white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in
righteousness He judges and wages war. And His eyes are a flame of fire,
and upon His head are many diadems; and He has a name written upon Him
which no one knows except Himself. And He is clothed with a robe dipped in
blood; and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies which are in
heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on
white horses. And from His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He
may smite the nations; and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He
treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. And on His
robe and on His thigh He has a name written, "KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF
LORDS." (Revelation 19:16)
(2) The defeat and fate of the
Antichrist and the false prophet
"And the beast (the "antichrist", cf
1John 2:18)
was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his
presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the
beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into
the lake of fire which burns with brimstone. And the rest were killed with
the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat upon the horse, and all
the birds were filled with their flesh." (Revelation 19:20-21)
(3) The binding of Satan for 1000
years
"And I saw an angel coming down
from heaven, having the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and
Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so
that he should not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand
years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short
time." (Revelation
20:1-3)
(4) The reign of Christ and His
saints for 1000 years
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon
them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had
been beheaded because of the 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 upon their forehead and upon 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. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the
one who has a part in the first resurrection (these are the saints, the
genuine believers, of all ages); over these the second death has no power,
but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for
a thousand years. (Revelation
20:1-3)
(5) Satan's final defeat and
eternal demise in the lake of fire
And when the thousand years are
completed (notice how this time phrase indicates a sequence or an order in
the events), Satan will be released from his prison, and will come out to
deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and
Magog, to gather them together for the war; the number of them is like the
sand of the seashore. And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and
surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down
from heaven and devoured them. And the devil who deceived them was thrown
into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet
are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. (Revelation
20:1-3)
(6) The Final Judgment of all
Unbelievers at the Great White Throne
And I saw a great white throne and Him
who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no
place was found for them (this appears to describe a time in eternity
future when there is no heaven and no earth, old or new). And I saw the
dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were
opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the
dead were judged from the things which were written in the books,
according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it,
and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were
judged, every one of them according to their deeds. And death and Hades
were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of
fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he
was thrown into the lake of fire. (Revelation
20:1-3)
(7) The New Heaven and New Earth
and "Immanuel" God With Us Forever
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth;
for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no
longer any sea. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of
heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband. And I
heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, the tabernacle of God
is among men, and He shall dwell among them, and they shall be His people,
and God Himself shall be among them (Revelation
21:1-3)
A simple reading of
the plain text, and listing of the events, leads to the objective
conclusion that there is a period between Christ's defeat of
the Antichrist and time of the Great White throne judgment which is separated by 1000 years,
the period many have referred to as the "Millennium."
|
|
Some have claimed
that belief in a literal "Millennium" is the product of twentieth century
evangelical interpretation but there is ample evidence that this view was
also held by the early church, one source recording that...
Many of the early fathers, including
Papias (c. 60–c. 130), Justin (c. 100–c. 165), Irenaeus, Tertullian,
Victorinus of Pettau (d. c. 304) and Lactantius (c. 240–c. 320), were
premillennialists, i.e. they expected the personal coming of Christ in
glory to inaugurate a millennial reign on earth before the last judgment.
This belief was not only an interpretation of Rev. 20, but also a
continuation of Jewish apocalyptic expectation of an interim messianic
kingdom. The framework of Rev. 20 was filled with content derived from
Jewish apocalyptic and especially from OT prophecies, with the result that
the millennium was understood primarily as a restoration of paradise. Amid
the abundant fruitfulness of the renewed earth and peace between the
animals, the resurrected saints would enjoy 1,000 years of paradisal life
on earth before being translated to eternal life in heaven. The 1,000
years were explained either as the originally intended span of human life
on earth or as the world’s sabbath rest at the end of a 7,000-years’
‘week’ of history. It was the materialistic nature of this millennialism
which made it objectionable to others of the fathers, including Augustine,
whose highly influential rejection of it led to the virtual disappearance
of premillennialism until the 17th century. (Ferguson, S. B., & Packer, J.
New Dictionary of Theology. Page 428. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press)
Of the Early
Church Fathers we read in more detail that...
"Papias, who had personal
contact with those taught by Christ and His apostles and may well have
been a disciple of the apostle John, asserted that “the Lord used to teach
concerning those [end] times” that “there will be a period of a thousand
years after the resurrection of the dead and the kingdom of Christ will be
set up in material form on this very earth” (cited in Eusebius HE
iii.39.12; Irenaeus Adv. haer v.33.3f).... (Papias') account is a weighty
testimony to primitive Christian eschatological beliefs...Justin Martyr,
“the most important of the Greek apologists of the second century”
(Quasten, I, 196), while granting that “many who belong to the pure and
pious faith and are true Christians think otherwise” than he on the
millennial issue, explicitly declared: “I and others are right-minded
Christians in all points and 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” (Dial. 80f; cf. J. Daniélou, VC, 2 [1948], 1–16)....
In taking a millennial viewpoint, these fathers ranged themselves on the
side of orthodoxy in two particulars: they supported the apostolicity and
canonicity of Revelation (against those who combined a denial of its
authenticity with amillennialism, e.g., Dionysius of Alexandria, as cited
in Eusebius HE vii.14.1–3; 24.6–8); and they opposed both the Gnostics,
whose dualistic spiritualizing of Christian doctrine completely wiped out
eschatological hope, and Christian Platonists such as Origen (De
prin. ii.11.2), whose rejection of a literal millennium stemmed from an
idealistic depreciation of matter and a highly dangerous allegorical
(Ed note: Figurative, symbolic and specifically having deeper or
hidden spiritual meaning that transcends the literal sense of a sacred
text! It is a method of interpreting a text in which the characters,
events or places signify “deeper” meanings than their literal meaning. The
allegorical method was especially employed with difficult texts. Even
opponents of a literal millennial interpretation can clearly discern the
potential pitfalls and dangers of the allegorical approach to the Word of
Truth.) hermeneutic (Ed note: hermeneutics is the
"science" or study of the methodological principles of interpretation, in
this case of the Scripture)". (A. C. McGiffert, History of Christian
Thought, I [1932], 227f)." (Bromiley, G. W. The International
Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised. Vol. 3, Page 357-358. Wm. B.
Eerdmans) (Bolding added)
If the early
church believed in the Millennium, what happened to relegate this view to
obscurity for most of the "Middle Ages"? The answer is probably far
more complex, but the short answer is based upon fact that the influential
theologian Augustine interpreted who initially interpreted "1000 years"
literally. Augustine however later recanted being driven away from that
position by the “immoderate, carnal” extremism of some of its advocates (Civ.
Dei xx.7), and began to interpret the "1000 years" as not an actual length
of time but as a "symbol", which in turn led to the pontification of the
teaching that there was no literal 1000 year reign of Christ upon earth, a
doctrine usually referred to as "Amillennialism". More
specifically, Augustine began to follow the symbolical-mystical
hermeneutic approach of the fourth-century donatist Tyconius (a schismatic
heretical Christian sect originating in N Africa in 311 AD, that
maintained that it alone constituted the true church and arose out
of the initial teaching of Donatus who sought to separate the “pure”
church from the “apostate,” or “fallen,” church) in arguing that
the "1000 years" of
Revelation 20 actually
designated the interval “from the first coming of Christ to the end of the
world, when He shall come the second time” (xx.8). Thus was “a new era in
prophetic interpretation” introduced, wherein Augustine’s conception of
the millennium as “spiritualized into a present politico-religious fact,
fastens itself upon the church for about thirteen long centuries” (Froom,
I, 479, with tabular summary of medieval views, 896f; see also R. C.
Petry, Christian Eschatology and Social Thought: A Historical Essay on the
Social Implications of Some Selected Aspects in Christian Eschatology to
a.d. 1500 [1956], pp. 312–336). (ibid)
The Protestant
Reformation brought about a renewed interest in the idea of "Sola
Scriptura" (the Scriptures alone) but did not completely reverse
Augustine's symbolic/mystical approach to interpretation of Revelation 20.
It seems that most of the Reformers...
"were so (legitimately) preoccupied
with correcting the Church’s soteriological (doctrines dealing with how a
person is genuinely saved or born again) errors that they could not give
high priority to eschatology (study of future events). But from the
pre-Reformers Wycliff and Huss to Luther, Calvin, and the doctrinal
affirmations of Protestant Orthodoxy, the papacy was identified with the
antichrist. This conviction led many Reformation Protestants to believe
that the end of the world was at hand (T. F. Torrance, SJT, Occasional
Papers 2, pp. 36–62; Vulliaud, pp. 127f). Had it not been for the outbreak
of chiliasm (believe in a literal 1000 years) in a particularly offensive
form at Münster (1534), early Church teaching on the millennium might have
been recovered along with other doctrines obscured in the medieval
synthesis. The speculations of radicals, however, as concretized in
Münzer’s “Zion,” were so offensive to all that this was rendered
impossible. The Augsburg Confession, art 17 (Lutheran) and the Helvetic
Confession, art 11 (Reformed) expressly rejected such “Jewish opinions”
(but, let it be noted, did not reject millennialism per se — cf.
Peters, Theocratic Kingdom, I, 531–34; M. Reu, Lutheran Dogmatics [1951],
pp. 483–87; and Saarnivaara, pp. 94f)." (ibid) (Bolding added)
It is interesting
that many of the Reformers interpreted the millennium to be a period of
1,000 years, but that this 1000 years was variously dated as in the past
time, during which the gospel flourished. They interpreted the release of
Satan from bondage after 1000 years as coinciding with the rise of the
medieval papacy (as alluded to the previous quote). Not all early
Protestants agreed with the predominant view of the Reformers as shown by
the return to a literal interpretation of Revelation 20 in the early 17th
century, especially under the influence of Joseph Mede (1586-1638). By the
1800's under the influence of J N Darby (1800-1882), founder of the
Plymouth Brethren movement, there was a rising interest in interpretation
of the "1000 years" as a literal "1000 years". The upshot is that for the
past 2000 years there have always been genuine believers who espoused a
literal interpretation of
Revelation 20. so that this
approach is not a "product" of modern day evangelicals, especially those
who hold to a dispensational approach to theology. (See also article on
The Millennial Position of Spurgeon by
Dennis Swanson)
Finally, let us
conclude these background comments on the "1000 years" by quoting an
honest, albeit liberal amillennialist, S. D. F. Salmond (in "Christian
Doctrine of Immortality" 2nd ed 1896) who admits that...
“The figurative interpretation, it must
be owned, cannot be made exegetically good even in its most plausible
applications... This remarkable paragraph in John’s Apocalypse speaks of a
real millennial reign of Christ on earth together with certain of His
saints, which comes in between a first resurrection and the final
judgment” (pp. 441f).(ibid, p360)
Does the Old
Testament support the idea of a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on the
earth? There is no specific
statement defining a 1000 year period of time in the OT. There are however
many passages that describe a period associated with the return of Christ
in which there are unique physical, spiritual and political
characteristics which are very compatible with the one thousand year reign
of Christ on the earth. As the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
states
"it is almost universally admitted, by
both opponents and advocates of millennialism, that the case for the
doctrine rests squarely on the exegesis of
Revelation 20. (ibid)
|
|