A Literal Millennium – Continued
Views of the Millennium
Although the language of Revelation 20 is among the simplest words in the book of Revelation, some still confuse the subject of the Millennium, and henceforth give us several views to consider. I will mention a couple of these views briefly.
POSTMILLENNIALISM
“Post,” meaning “after,” and “millennial,” meaning “the millennium,” we understand postmillennialism to mean “after the Millennium.” Those who believe this teaching believe that Christ will return to earth AFTER the Millennium. While adherents to this teaching believe in a literal Millennium, they are faulty in placing it before Christ comes to earth again.
There are basically two schools of thought regarding postmillennialism. Some who hold to this view believe a literal Millennium of peace has already occurred. Some say that the Millennium began in the fourth century, around the time of Constantine, and lasted for 1,000 years. This is entirely impossible, considering that the Millennium is to be a time of complete peace (as I will show later) with no wars whatsoever. The eleventh century is stained with blood from the Crusades. The Millennium is not in the past; it is in the future.
Others who hold to the postmillennial view say that the Millennium will not be ushered in by the coming of Jesus Christ to this earth. They rather believe that the Millennium will come gradually by the efforts and technology of man. They believe that the world will get better and better until Christ comes to a perfect utopia. I will not comment on this view further; anyone will two working eyes in their head can examine the truth that the world is not getting better and better by anyone’s standard except the devil’s. Furthermore, Christ will not come to a world of peace; it is Christ’s presence, rather, that brings peace to this world!
AMILLENNIALISM
The Latin “a” means simply, “without.” The word “amillennial” therefore simply means “without a Millennium.” Those who hold to this view simply believe that there is no literal Millennium whatsoever. They teach that the aforementioned passage, Revelation 20:1-6, should be taken figuratively, not literally.
So, here’s how they “spiritualize” Revelation 20:1-6:
The Bible says in Revelation 20 that while Christ reigns for 1,000 years with those who take part in the first resurrection, the devil is bound at that time. Then, at the end of the 1,000 years, the devil is loosed for a season. He deceives the nations one last time. He is then destroyed and cast into the lake of fire.
First, they say that the time period of 1,000 years mentioned five times is not literal. They say that, instead of meaning 1,000 years, it just means “a long time.” They teach that the thousand-year period is just the church age. It is the time between Christ’s ascension and His return. Then, they say that during the church age, the devil is bound and Christ is reigning. The church age is now. So, they teach that right now, the devil is bound and Christ is reigning. Then, the short time that the devil is loosed is the tribulation period. Then, after Satan deceives the nations, there is a final battle, which they say is just the same battle as found in Revelation 19, where Christ destroys the beast and his armies.
There is so much wrong with that interpretation. First, why would the Bible say “1,000 years” if it is not? There is no sensible reason to deny that “1,000 years” in this passage would mean anything other than “1,000 years.” Secondly, the thousand-year period is NOT THE CHURCH AGE! In the thousand-year period mentioned in this passage, the devil is bound and Christ is reigning. The devil is NOT BOUND! I agree with the preacher who said, “If the devil is chained, he’s on an awful long chain!” Those who hold to this view say, “Christ is reigning right now IN OUR HEARTS.” Christ may indeed reign in the hearts of His people, but this passage is not talking about Christ ruling in the hearts of His people; this passage is talking about Christ ruling AMONG THE NATIONS! When the devil is bound, it is stated in Revelation 20 that he will not deceive the nations any longer! I know that Satan is not restricted from deceiving the nations because the nations are being deceived! Thirdly, the belief that the loosing of Satan after the thousand-years is the tribulation, and the battle after Satan is loosed is just a restatement of the battle in Revelation 19 doesn’t hold up. Notice:
Revelation 19:19, 20 – “And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.”
Notice, in the battle in the above verses which takes place after the tribulation, the beast (or, Antichrist) and the false prophet were both cast into the lake of fire. The devil WAS NOT cast into the lake of fire. In Revelation 20, in the battle after Satan is loosed following the Millennium, THE DEVIL is thrown into the lake of fire. We are told that the beast and the false prophet are already there! Notice:
Revelation 20:7-10 – “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”
At the end of the Millennium, when the devil is loosed for a little season, the devil is cast into the lake of fire. Amillennialists say that the “little season” is just the tribulation. But in Revelation 19, when Christ returns after the tribulation, the devil IS NOT cast into the lake of fire. The beast and the false prophet are. So the battle after the tribulation in Revelation 19 IS NOT THE SAME BATTLE as the battle at the end of the “little season” when the devil is loosed after the Millennium. Amillennialism does not hold up.
Albert Barnes, a commentator in the 19th century, comments on Revelation 20:4 where it reads, “…and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded…and they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.” Barnes says that because John saw the “souls” and not the “bodies,” that John could not have been referring to a literal, bodily resurrection. It sounds like a good point.
But, I turned to Acts 27, that great chapter that tells us about Paul’s shipwreck. How many people were on that ship? The Bible says in Acts 27:37 that there were “two hundred threescore and sixteen (276) souls.” Can you imagine that? After these people came to shore, here come 276 souls, and not a single one of them had a body!
You know that’s not right. When the Bible says there were 276 souls, he was not saying that there were no “bodies” present. Sometimes, the word “souls” in scripture just means “people.”
I sent a text message to a preacher some time ago. It read, “Man does not have a soul.” In about five seconds my phone rang. “What do you mean, man doesn’t have a soul?” he asked. My reply was this: “Man doesn’t have a soul; man is a soul.” Genesis 2:7 states, “And God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” When John said, “I saw the souls of them that were beheaded,” he was not teaching that they have no body of any kind. After all, John tells us that these “souls” had been resurrected. We know that John was referring to their physical DEATH when he says that they were beheaded. If you are beheaded, your head is taken off your body, not your soul! When they were beheaded, their body died, not their soul! So, when they are resurrected in the first resurrection, it will be their bodies that are resurrected. So, amillennialism just does not work.
At one time, I considered amillennialism, but I never believed it. One thing that made me consider the teaching was the fact that there are several verses in the Bible that refer to the Lord reigning FOR EVER. This made me consider doing away with a literal Millennium.
Some of these scriptures are Exodus 15:18; Psalm 146:10; Daniel 7:14; Daniel 7:27; Micah 4:7; Luke 1:33; Revelation 11:15; and Revelation 22:5. If Christ is going to reign FOR EVER, I considered, then He is not going to reign for a literal 1,000 years. But after studying the scriptures, it is clear to me that although Christ is going to reign for ever in the New Jerusalem in the new heaven and new earth, His eternal reign will begin with a literal Millennium upon this present, literal earth. It is the Biblical viewpoint that Jesus Christ is coming literally to this earth, and a literal, 1,000-year reign follows His coming. We call this PREMILLENNIALISM.
If the Millennium is not a Futuristic, Literal Kingdom…
Understanding that the Bible rejects both the postmillennial and amillennial viewpoints, let me speak hypothetically. If it were true that the Millennium is either something past; or something figurative, then there are some questions that must be answered.
First, what did Jesus mean when He told His apostles in Matthew 19:28 – “And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit upon the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” What does this mean, if it doesn’t mean that the apostles will sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel?
Secondly, in Matthew 20:20-23, I am told that the mother of James and John, Zebedee’s children, came to Jesus with a request. She asked if her two preacher boys could sit, one at Christ’s right hand and the other at His left, in the kingdom. Christ does not straighten her out. He does not tell her that there is no kingdom. He simply states that those positions are not His to give. This would have been a perfect time to correct her faulty thinking, if there is no literal kingdom. But Christ does not correct her. Concerning mansions in the Father’s house, Christ told His disciples, “If it were not so, I would have told you.” Don’t you think He would have told the mother of James and John differently when she expected a literal kingdom to come? Sure He would have…but He did not. There is a literal kingdom coming.
Thirdly, consider Acts 1:6-8. The disciples are told to go to Jerusalem. Something clicks in their minds. They remember the Old Testament prophecies that state that the Lord’s house would be established in the mountains of Jerusalem, and that all nations would flow to it. When Christ tells them to go to Jerusalem, they automatically think, “He’s about to set up His kingdom.” They know from the scriptures that the Christ would come to set up such a kingdom. So they ask the Lord this question: “Wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel.” This is another chance for the Lord to tell all of us that there is no literal kingdom. But again, He does not. He simply tells his disciples that the time of the coming kingdom is not their department. Their concern should be to get full of the Spirit of God and be witnesses – “The time of the kingdom is not in your power,” He tells them. “But ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, and ye shall be witnesses…”
There is a literal kingdom coming. But, until then, may we be full of the Holy Ghost and win the lost to Jesus Christ.
MORE TO COME…
