PAST-Millennialism

[3 Resurrections]

The categories of Pre, Post, and Amillennialism need to step aside for another category - PAST-millennialism. A literal thousand years. With a date which "expired" and was "finished" at the First Resurrection of Christ in AD 33, and which began long ago with the foundation stone of Solomon's temple being laid down in 968/967 BC. A literal thousand years of a physical temple worship system.

This millennium period of a stationary, physical temple worship system was only a precursor to the more glorious reality of Christ becoming the "chief cornerstone" of the spiritual temple not made with human hands. With His finished sacrifice and His resurrection and ascension establishing the New Covenant, Christ became the only temple foundation stone needed from then onward. The Old Covenant and the physical temple became obsolete at that point. With Christ as the foundation stone, we believers as "living stones" are being built up into a holy temple in the Lord which can never be destroyed or replaced.

During that thousand-year period initiated with Solomon's temple foundation stone being laid down, Satan's deception of the nations was bound by the knowledge of the God of Israel going abroad throughout the nations. The Queen of Sheba was only one example. Ignorance of the God of Israel had been one of Satan's main tools of deception of the nations before then. After that millennium's beginning, the nations could no longer claim ignorance of the God of Israel as an excuse. They may have continued to practice idolatry, but at the very least they were doing so with an awareness of Israel's God.

The conditions of the millennium have often been mistakenly exaggerated into a utopian-style environment. The only description we are given about the millennium conditions is that Satan's deception of the nations was to be bound for that period of time which would expire at the point when the First Resurrection occurred. This mistaken impression of millennium conditions has led to all sorts of suppositions that can be readily cleared up when we look at the Revelation scriptures themselves.

It is quite simple to pin down when the millennium "expired" by comparing two texts in Revelation. Those two texts are Revelation 12:12 and Revelation 20:3&7.

Satan was to be loosed to deceive the nations again for a "little season" at the point when the millennium expired (Rev. 20:3&7).
Satan was stated as having already been loosed for that "short time" on earth in Revelation 12:12. In this verse, John warned the believers that "the Devil has come down unto you having great wrath because he knows that he hath but a short time". This means the beginning of Satan's "short time" and "little season" of being loosed at the end of the millennium had already happened before John was writing Revelation. The rest of Revelation 20 aligns with this.

 

[Earburner]

Interesting perspective.
As an Amil believer, I have come to understand that the 144,000, are a symbolic number of those OC. saints who were "under the altar", who had died in faith, waiting for "the Promise to come".
We see them as being those that were written in "a book of remembrance" in Malachi 3:16. But then we see them again in Rev. 6:9-11, but this time, they were being given the Gift of the permanent indwelling of God's Holy Spirit, because prior to the shedding of Christ's blood, the Holy Spirit was not yet given permanently to anyone, who lived and died under the OC. John 7:39.

 

[ewq1938]

The categories of Pre, Post, and Amillennialism need to step aside for another category - PAST-millennialism. A literal thousand years. With a date which "expired" and was "finished" at the First Resurrection of Christ in AD 33, and which began long ago with the foundation stone of Solomon's temple being laid down in 968/967 BC. A literal thousand years of a physical temple worship system.

This cannot work with rthe Millennium of Rev 20 because of the language used.


Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.



The one and only Millennium can only happen after the tribulation because these saints were killed for refusing to worship or take the mark of the beast and those things are mentioned in Rev 13, the 42 month trib where the worship and mark originate. Those things have not happened yet, so the Millennium cannot have happened.


At no time in history did a man leading a ten kingdomed government rule the world, force people to make an image which later came to life, nor receive a mark to control who could buy or sell, nor did they kill two prophets, and see them 3.5 days later resurrect from the dead and ascend into heaven while everyone watched. The same hour was a major earthquake and then the second coming which includes the resurrection of all the saved people from human history, and the rapture. None of that has happened proving the thousand years of Rev 20 can't have happened either. The only position that matches the language used is Premill.

 

[WPM]

The categories of Pre, Post, and Amillennialism need to step aside for another category - PAST-millennialism. A literal thousand years. With a date which "expired" and was "finished" at the First Resurrection of Christ in AD 33, and which began long ago with the foundation stone of Solomon's temple being laid down in 968/967 BC. A literal thousand years of a physical temple worship system.

This millennium period of a stationary, physical temple worship system was only a precursor to the more glorious reality of Christ becoming the "chief cornerstone" of the spiritual temple not made with human hands. With His finished sacrifice and His resurrection and ascension establishing the New Covenant, Christ became the only temple foundation stone needed from then onward. The Old Covenant and the physical temple became obsolete at that point. With Christ as the foundation stone, we believers as "living stones" are being built up into a holy temple in the Lord which can never be destroyed or replaced.

During that thousand-year period initiated with Solomon's temple foundation stone being laid down, Satan's deception of the nations was bound by the knowledge of the God of Israel going abroad throughout the nations. The Queen of Sheba was only one example. Ignorance of the God of Israel had been one of Satan's main tools of deception of the nations before then. After that millennium's beginning, the nations could no longer claim ignorance of the God of Israel as an excuse. They may have continued to practice idolatry, but at the very least they were doing so with an awareness of Israel's God.

The conditions of the millennium have often been mistakenly exaggerated into a utopian-style environment. The only description we are given about the millennium conditions is that Satan's deception of the nations was to be bound for that period of time which would expire at the point when the First Resurrection occurred. This mistaken impression of millennium conditions has led to all sorts of suppositions that can be readily cleared up when we look at the Revelation scriptures themselves.

It is quite simple to pin down when the millennium "expired" by comparing two texts in Revelation. Those two texts are Revelation 12:12 and Revelation 20:3&7.

Satan was to be loosed to deceive the nations again for a "little season" at the point when the millennium expired (Rev. 20:3&7).
Satan was stated as having already been loosed for that "short time" on earth in Revelation 12:12. In this verse, John warned the believers that "the Devil has come down unto you having great wrath because he knows that he hath but a short time". This means the beginning of Satan's "short time" and "little season" of being loosed at the end of the millennium had already happened before John was writing Revelation. The rest of Revelation 20 aligns with this.

This doesn't make sense. How could people be reigning with Christ before His First Advent and before He defeated sin, death and the grave? The redeemed dead were confined to Abraham's bosom before the cross. Christ was the first to defeat death and ascend up to heaven. How could the first resurrection occur 1000 years before the first resurrection of Christ? That is nonsensical. Satan was not bound until Jesus come and defeated him. You have that occurring 1000 years before Jesus did that. You render the mission and ministry of Christ irrelevant and ineffective. This is Full Preterism. As far as I know, that is banned here.

 

[3 Resurrections]

As an Amil believer, I have come to understand that the 144,000, are a symbolic number of those OC. saints who were "under the altar", who had died in faith, waiting for "the Promise to come".

Hi there, I see you are from my home state SC. My Christian education here in local schools from childhood upward was firmly Premil Disp., but more than twelve years ago, my eschatology studies had finally led me in a different direction.

As for the 144,000, these individuals coming from those twelve designated tribes of Israel were called "Firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb" (Rev. 14:4) . Because Christ's resurrection is also called the "First-fruits" (1 Cor. 15:20 & 23), this tells us that all of these 144,000 shared that same "First resurrection" event in AD 33 along with Christ. That means the 144,000 were the many Matthew 27:52-53 saints raised from those graves around Jerusalem on the same day that Christ arose. In other words, the Matthew 27:52-53's physical bodies were "redeemed from the earth" (Rev. 14:3). They were also called "virgins" in Rev. 14:4 because there is no marriage or giving in marriage in the bodily-resurrected state (Luke 20:35). There is no reason why this 144,000 cannot be a literal number of saints as well as a highly symbolic number as well.

And yes, I agree with you that the 144,000 were also the ones under the altar in Rev. 6:9-11. These were all given white robes of resurrected righteousness and told to wait for a "little season" until the rest of their brethren (who were about to be martyred just like them) had also been killed. I believe the Matthew 27:52-53 saints lived and remained on earth as evangelistic laborers in God's harvest (those who were "alive and remained" in 1 Thess.4:15 & 17), waiting during that "little season" for the next bodily resurrection event to come. At that time, they would be raptured to heaven along with all the other newly-resurrected saints, meeting the Lord together in the air.

 

[3 Resurrections]

This cannot work with rthe Millennium of Rev 20 because of the language used.

Sure it can.

When Rev. 20:4 speaks of martyrdom, this is not an experience that would only happen once. Throughout the process of human history, the righteous have always been persecuted by the wicked. Prophets and servants of God who foretold "the coming of the Just One" (the "witness of Jesus") had been killed long before Acts 7:52 when Stephen accused the Jewish fathers of doing this to the prophets from old time.

As for those in Rev. 20:4 who had not worshipped the Sea Beast, this Sea Beast entity had existed ever since Nebuchadnezzar had deported Daniel and the first group of Jewish nobility from Jerusalem back in 607 BC (666 years before John wrote Revelation in AD 59 / 60). This Sea Beast existed within the literal thousand-year millennium period I wrote about above (from 968/967 BC until AD 33).

Each of the 4 pagan empires which made up the Sea Beast demanded homage in one way or another. For example, none of Daniel's three friends gave worship by bowing to Nebuchadnezzar's golden image during the Babylonian phase of the Sea Beast. Daniel deliberately disobeyed the Medo-Persian order by Darius not to pray to his God, and was also included in the Rev. 20:4 number who did not give homage to the Sea Beast. Esther's uncle Mordecai was another example who refused to bow. Those who remained faithful under the persecution by Antiochus Epiphanes IV of the Greek empire phase of the Sea Beast were also noted for their faithfulness in Hebrews 11, even unto death. And during the Roman phase of the Sea Beast, the Jewish high priesthood started demanding the use of the Tyrian shekel "mark" giving homage to the Roman phase of the Sea Beast. This Tyrian shekel copy minted in Jerusalem was required for temple sales and purchases by every worshipper from any nation coming to Jerusalem's temple. The money-changers charged an onerous fee when trading any other foreign currency for the required Tyrian shekel "mark" for temple transactions and for Jews paying the annual Temple tax. That Tyrian shekel "mark" giving homage to the Roman phase of the Sea Beast was required from 19 BC until AD 66 (which also overlaps the literal millennium period ending in AD 33).

Scripture never says that the "mark" imposed by the (Judean) Beast from the Land in homage of the Sea Beast would begin with the 42 months period of Rev. 13:5. (In fact, the Roman phase of the Sea Beast never required the mark: it was the Judean Land Beast of Rev. 13 which was guilty of this charge). That 42 months was characterized by the Roman phase of the Sea Beast "making war" against the saints. This emperor Nero did to the Christians from late AD 64 until just before his death in AD 68. This amounted to a total of 42 months when God gave the saints into Nero's hands to "overcome" them by persecution and butchery. But the millennium period had already "expired" by that point, as John said in writing Revelation (based on comparing those two texts I submitted above - Rev. 12:12 and Rev. 20:3 & 7).

 

[3 Resurrections]

This doesn't make sense. How could people be reigning with Christ before His First Advent and before He defeated sin, death and the grave? The redeemed dead were confined to Abraham's bosom before the cross. Christ was the first to defeat death and ascend up to heaven. How could the first resurrection occur 1000 years before the first resurrection of Christ? That is nonsensical. Satan was not bound until Jesus come and defeated him. You have that occurring 1000 years before Jesus did that. You render the mission and ministry of Christ irrelevant and ineffective. This is Full Preterism. As far as I know, that is banned here.

A good question. How could saints "reign with Christ" even before Christ was born, or before He was resurrected and entered into His kingdom at His ascension?

I agree with you that the spirits of the dead were not allowed access to God's presence in heaven before the cross and Christ's resurrection and ascension. Christ was the "First-begotten" one of the group of "First-fruits" to ascend bodily to heaven after His resurrection, opening up the way for the spirits of the righteous to follow upon their death. "From henceforth" for the spirits of the dead in Christ, it was "to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord", as Paul taught. A blessing while they awaited the later redemption of their physical bodies in a bodily-resurrection process.

But I never said the "First resurrection" occurred a thousand years before the First Resurrection of Christ. Christ's resurrection in AD 33 WAS the only "First resurrection" mentioned in Revelation 20. That "remnant of the dead which lived again" at the end of the millennium WAS the many Matthew 27:52-53 group of saints raised the same day as Christ in AD 33. This WAS the "First resurrection". The First Resurrection of Christ and the Matthew 27:52-53 saints was the same as the ending point of the literal millennium - in AD 33.

So, to answer your question - how could saints "reign with Christ" during the thousand year period from 968/967 BC until AD 33, if that was the millennium period? Because God has always reigned from of old - "His throne is from everlasting". There has never been a time when God has not reigned over His creation. Consequently, the righteous during their lifetime on earth have always reigned with Him vicariously. Now, that reign has been manifested in different ways over time, (such as Christ becoming a high priest King at His ascension), but that doesn't impose a time limitation on God's reign. The only entity which had a thousand-year limitation put upon him was Satan when his deception was on hold for the thousand years until AD 33 when Satan's "little season" and "short time" began.

We have Paul stating in Romans 5:17 that those who were given grace and righteousness "reign in life by one, Jesus Christ". This is the very same as the Rev. 20:4 saints who "lived and reigned with Christ" during their natural lifetime on earth at varying points of the thousand years duration. And just when did God consider the saints to be "IN CHRIST"? According to Ephesians 1:4, God "hath chosen us IN HIM before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love". In other words, those given the gift of grace and righteousness at any point in human history from creation forward are considered to be included "IN CHRIST", and they "reign in life" by one Christ Jesus at whatever point on the timeline they occupy. The literal millennium period included.

 

[WPM]

A good question. How could saints "reign with Christ" even before Christ was born, or before He was resurrected and entered into His kingdom at His ascension?

I agree with you that the spirits of the dead were not allowed access to God's presence in heaven before the cross and Christ's resurrection and ascension. Christ was the "First-begotten" one of the group of "First-fruits" to ascend bodily to heaven after His resurrection, opening up the way for the spirits of the righteous to follow upon their death. "From henceforth" for the spirits of the dead in Christ, it was "to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord", as Paul taught. A blessing while they awaited the later redemption of their physical bodies in a bodily-resurrection process.

But I never said the "First resurrection" occurred a thousand years before the First Resurrection of Christ. Christ's resurrection in AD 33 WAS the only "First resurrection" mentioned in Revelation 20. That "remnant of the dead which lived again" at the end of the millennium WAS the many Matthew 27:52-53 group of saints raised the same day as Christ in AD 33. This WAS the "First resurrection". The First Resurrection of Christ and the Matthew 27:52-53 saints was the same as the ending point of the literal millennium - in AD 33.

So, to answer your question - how could saints "reign with Christ" during the thousand year period from 968/967 BC until AD 33, if that was the millennium period? Because God has always reigned from of old - "His throne is from everlasting". There has never been a time when God has not reigned over His creation. Consequently, the righteous during their lifetime on earth have always reigned with Him vicariously. Now, that reign has been manifested in different ways over time, (such as Christ becoming a high priest King at His ascension), but that doesn't impose a time limitation on God's reign. The only entity which had a thousand-year limitation put upon him was Satan when his deception was on hold for the thousand years until AD 33 when Satan's "little season" and "short time" began.

We have Paul stating in Romans 5:17 that those who were given grace and righteousness "reign in life by one, Jesus Christ". This is the very same as the Rev. 20:4 saints who "lived and reigned with Christ" during their natural lifetime on earth at varying points of the thousand years duration. And just when did God consider the saints to be "IN CHRIST"? According to Ephesians 1:4, God "hath chosen us IN HIM before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love". In other words, those given the gift of grace and righteousness at any point in human history from creation forward are considered to be included "IN CHRIST", and they "reign in life" by one Christ Jesus at whatever point on the timeline they occupy. The literal millennium period included.

This is all gibberish. It is convoluted. It doesn't make sense. It sounds like you are making it up as you go.

I have no interest in unravelling your teaching.

 

[3 Resurrections]

This is all gibberish. It is convoluted. It doesn't make sense. It sounds like you are making it up as you go.

I have no interest in unravelling your teaching.

That's quite alright. What you personally are not interested in, the next person down the line might be.

But the millennium having "expired" back in AD 33 with Christ and that "First resurrection" event is not "convoluted" at all. John is quite clear. The millennium had ended even before John was putting pen to parchment to write Revelation, because Satan's "short time" of release at the end of the millennium had already started by then. Those two Revelation texts of Rev. 12:12 and Rev. 20:3 & 7 compared with each other are simple enough to understand.

The Revelation 20 millennium ended long, long ago.

 

[ewq1938]

That's quite alright. What you personally are not interested in, the next person down the line might be.

But the millennium having "expired" back in AD 33 with Christ and that "First resurrection" event is not "convoluted" at all. John is quite clear. The millennium had ended even before John was putting pen to parchment to write Revelation, because Satan's "short time" of release at the end of the millennium had already started by then. Those two Revelation texts of Rev. 12:12 and Rev. 20:3 & 7 compared with each other are simple enough to understand.

The Revelation 20 millennium ended long, long ago.

The dead have not resurrected, which happens before the Mill even begins. The Millennium has not started yet. There is also a short season of time after the Mill and the resurrection of the "rest of the dead" for the GWTJ so another fact that proves the Mill hasn't even happened. Preterist in all forms is demonic theology which seeks to hide and mask the coming of the AC.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The dead have not resurrected, which happens before the Mill even begins

That is not what Revelation 20:5 says. The remnant of the dead which came to life again at the end of the millennium WAS the "First resurrection". The "First resurrection" was of Christ the "First-fruits" in AD 33. That means the millennium was "finished" when that First resurrection of Christ occurred.

This was not meant to be rocket science. John's first-century readers knew exactly when the "First resurrection" of Christ and the Matthew 27:52-53 saints had occurred because those resurrected saints had been seen of many. They had no problem understanding this statement about the millennium having ended in their days.

(And the Antichrist / Man of Lawlessness which Paul said was "NOW" being restrained in his own days is long dead by now - back in AD 66 to be exact.)

 

[ewq1938]

That is not what Revelation 20:5 says. The remnant of the dead which came to life again at the end of the millennium WAS the "First resurrection".

No, the first resurrection takes place BEFORE the MIll starts. You are referring to "the rest of the dead" who DID NOT resurrect in the first group.

The "First resurrection" was of Christ the "First-fruits" in AD 33.

No, the FR is the first of two groups of the dead who come back to life. It happens at the Coming.

That means the millennium was "finished" when that First resurrection of Christ occurred.

This was not meant to be rocket science. John's first-century readers knew exactly when the "First resurrection" of Christ and the Matthew 27:52-53 saints had occurred because those resurrected saints had been seen of many. They had no problem understanding this statement about the millennium having ended in their days.

(And the Antichrist / Man of Lawlessness which Paul said was "NOW" being restrained in his own days is long dead by now - back in AD 66 to be exact.)

Nonsense of Preterism.

 

[3 Resurrections]

No, the first resurrection takes place BEFORE the MIll starts. You are referring to "the rest of the dead" who DID NOT resurrect in the first group.

Again, this is NOT what Revelation 20:5 says. John wrote that the event when "The remnant of the dead" who came to life again at the end of the millennium "IS the "First Resurrection". This "loipoi" remnant of dead individuals was raised to life again when the millennium was finished. There is no other resurrection at all mentioned in Revelation 20:4-5: just this one, which was the FIRST.

Paul was also quite clear that Christ's resurrection as the "Firstfruits" was the very first in chronological order of the resurrection events. Why would you want to dismiss 1 Corinthians 15:20 & 23? "But every man in his own order: CHRIST THE FIRSTFRUITS : AFTERWARD they that are Christ's at His coming." The word "order" here in Greek is very significant. "Tagmati" is a military-type term, referring to an ordered rank of soldiers arranged in succession to each other, just like the ranked succession of resurrection events.

Why would you also want to dismiss the many Matthew 27:52-53 saints being resurrected that same day as Christ? This was witnessed by many in Jerusalem. It was such a notable event that it also became the reason why Hymenaeus and Philetus began teaching that doctrinal error that the resurrection was already past. They presumed that the AD 33 resurrection of Christ and those many Matthew 27:52-53 saints was the only resurrection that would ever occur. Of course they were wrong. It had only been the FIRST-fruits of harvesting all the physical bodies of the saints out of the grave. There would be others that would be resurrected "AFTERWARD" at Christ's coming.

As you are probably aware, the term "First-fruits" is a Jewish agricultural term, based on the ancient order of the various yearly harvests in Israel. The religious festivals under Mosaic law centered around these three harvest seasons in Israel - Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles. And the bodily resurrection events of the saints' bodies being "harvested" out of the ground was going to mirror those three events at those same points of the year.

Christ's resurrection and that of the Matthew 27:52-53 saints was connected with the Passover, of course. In the OT (Leviticus 23:10-12), a wave sheaf handful of the "First-fruits" of the barley harvest was offered in the temple, along with a single he-lamb without blemish. The wave sheaf handful of First-fruits grain was a type of the Matthew 27:52-53 saints, and the single he-lamb without blemish offered with that wave sheaf was a type of Christ Jesus, also part of the First-fruits.

You are missing the point of the three OT harvests symbolism.

 

[Davidpt]

What you personally are not interested in, the next person down the line might be.

Maybe someone like who fits the following. I can see them maybe being interested in what you are proposing.

2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Maybe someone like who fits the following. I can see them maybe being interested in what you are proposing.

2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Surely you know the difference between #1), a person looking for something doctrinally new just for novelty's sake and #2), an attempt to be a "more noble Berean" by checking daily whether the scriptures one has been taught are truth or not.

I've done more than twelve years of daily research into whether the Premil-Disp. teachings I received in my younger days was truth or not, and have found them lacking in many areas according to the scriptures themselves. And not just lacking, but totally invented in many cases also. I was taught fables in my youth, and consequently have done a lot of discarding.

 

[PinSeeker]

This is all gibberish. It is convoluted. It doesn't make sense. It sounds like you are making it up as you go.

I have no interest in unravelling your teaching.

Well, I wouldn't say it's gibberish or that it doesn't make sense, but that it is based on flawed premises. Among other things:

If we say of this "PAST-millennialism" that the millennium expired and was finished at the First Resurrection of Christ and that it began with Solomon's temple in 968/967 BC and that this is the literal thousand years, we turn on it's ear (so to speak) Jeremiah's prophecy of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31, where the LORD, in about 700 BC, speaks of a coming time ~ surely not a 200 to 300 year old time ~ when the LORD would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, when He would put His law within them (now us), and write it on their (now our) hearts, and He would be their (now our) God, and they (now we) shall be (are) His people, and they (now we) shall all (do all) know Him, from the least of them (us) to the greatest (says the LORD; Jeremiah 31:31-34). This is the present millennium, the time that God is building His temple, which is us, stone by stone ~ on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in Whom we Gentiles also, as well as Jews ~ all who are in Christ ~ are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit (Ephesians 2:11-22). This is the present millennium, which John is shown in the vision given Him in Revelation 20:1-6

Grace and peace to all.

 

[3 Resurrections]

If we say of this "PAST-millennialism" that the millennium expired and was finished at the First Resurrection of Christ and that it began with Solomon's temple in 968/967 BC and that this is the literal thousand years, we turn on it's ear (so to speak) Jeremiah's prophecy of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31, where the LORD, in about 700 BC, speaks of a coming time ~ surely not a 200 to 300 year old time ~ when the LORD would make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, when He would put His law within them (now us), and write it on their (now our) hearts, and He would be their (now our) God, and they (now we) shall be (are) His people, and they (now we) shall all (do all) know Him, from the least of them (us) to the greatest (says the LORD; Jeremiah 31:31-34). This is the present millennium, the time that God is building His temple, which is us, stone by stone ~ on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in Whom we Gentiles also, as well as Jews ~ all who are in Christ ~ are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit (Ephesians 2:11-22). This is the present millennium, which John is shown in the vision given Him in Revelation 20:1-6

The problem with linking Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant period with the Revelation 20 millennium is that nowhere in Revelation 20 does a statement about the New Covenant appear. The ONLY description of the character of the millennium period is that Satan's deception of the nations would be bound for the duration of this literal thousand-year period.

That's it, and that's all. The New Covenant in Christ's blood is what came at the very END of the millennium when it "expired" and was "finished" with the "First Resurrection" - the one with Christ along with "the remnant of the dead" - the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints living again at the end of that millennium.

 

[PinSeeker]

The problem with linking Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant period with the Revelation 20 millennium is that nowhere in Revelation 20 does a statement about the New Covenant appear.

It is what it is. The problem with not being able to link the two is not understanding God's millennium as a fullness or completeness of time ~ the full span of our time God has appointed to bring His Israel to completion ~ rather than a literal 1,000 year period.

The ONLY description of the character of the millennium period is that Satan's deception of the nations would be bound for the duration of this...

Well, that Satan would be bound, an appointed time in which the Gospel is spread to the nations, and people of every tongue, tribe, and people group receive God's call and thus become part of His Israel. And this is exactly what Jeremiah (and other prophets, like Isaiah) was prophesying in his day ~ again, of a coming and therefore then still a future time ~ over 200 years after the beginning of the millennium in this "Past Millennium" timeline.

...literal thousand-year period.

Not literally 1,000 years, in the same manner as:

• David quoting God as saying the cattle on a thousand hills are His (Psalm 50:10), which is really to say all cattle everywhere, and really all creatures...
• David's declaration that a day in God's courts is better than a thousand elsewhere (Psalm 84:10) ~ not literally slightly less than three years, which would be about 1,095 days, but rather any number of days...
• David's proclaiming that God remembers his covenant forever, the word that he commanded, for a thousand generations (Psalm 105:8) ~ all generations, in the sense that God's steadfast love endures forever and his faithfulness to all generations (Psalm 100:5).

The New Covenant in Christ's blood is what came at the very END of the millennium when it "expired" and was "finished" with the "First Resurrection"...

So the New Covenant, which is everlasting, ended about 2,000 years ago? That view puts you far, far outside orthodox Christian thought, 3 Resurrections. And the first resurrection is experienced by all of God's elect individually, each at his/her appointed time (Acts 13:48). It is our being raised (Ephesians 2:8) to newness of life in Christ, after having up to that time been dead in our sin.

- the one with Christ along with "the remnant of the dead" - the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints living again at the end of that millennium.

All the dead will be physically resurrected after the close of the millennium and just prior to the final Judgment.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The problem with not being able to link the two is not understanding God's millennium as a fullness or completeness of time ~ the full span of our time God has appointed to bring His Israel to completion ~ rather than a literal 1,000 year period.

The Revelation 20 millennium had a beginning point as well as a specific "expiration" date. This thousand years can have a symbolic sense in addition to being a literal number, just like the symbolic / literal number of the 144,000 First-fruits coming from those stipulated Jewish tribes.

If you want to speak in terms of the millennium representing "the full span of time", then God designed this millennium span of time for a stationary, physical temple worship system to function before it was outmoded by the New Covenant being launched in AD 33. The fame of which temple went abroad through all the nations of the known world as the place where God had set His name there.

I am well aware of scriptures' examples of "the thousand hills", "a thousand generations", etc. not being a specific number. But the word thousand in scripture also has very specific examples of numbered groups that include a literal thousand as well. Such as the numbered groups of a thousand from each tribe sent out to war in the OT, the chariots of God numbering twenty thousand, the feeding of the 5,000 and 4,000, the 3,000 who were added to the church at Pentecost, etc. These were quite literal thousands.

So the New Covenant, which is everlasting, ended about 2,000 years ago?

I'm afraid you are misunderstanding me. Apologies if I was not clear. The inauguration of the New Covenant was launched simultaneously with the ending of the millennium in AD 33. The New Covenant in Christ's blood (which has no end) brought the literal millennium years to an end. The literal millennium was only the precursor to the greater and more glorious reality under the New Covenant with Christ our deathless high priest.

And the first resurrection is experienced by all of God's elect individually, each at his/her appointed time (Acts 13:48). It is our being raised (Ephesians 2:8) to newness of life in Christ, after having up to that time been dead in our sin.

This is quite a typical opinion - the the "First resurrection" is the spiritual awakening to life for each saint. The only problem is that the "First resurrection" in Revelation 20:5 is said to be a specific, single point on the calendar when the "remnant of the dead" came to life again. John said this single event IS the First resurrection. Now, we as believers share in the benefits of that First resurrection event, surely. But we were not the ones raised bodily to life again at that single event in time. That was the Matthew 27:52-53 saints and Christ - all of them the First-fruits of the "harvests" to be bodily raised to life again.

All the dead will be physically resurrected after the close of the millennium and just prior to the final Judgment.

This physical resurrection already happened another time for the saints. On AD 70's day of Pentecost, to be exact - just as Daniel's very specific 1,335th day predicted the timing for this. You and I are awaiting the third resurrection "harvest" in the future at a time when the Feast of Tabernacles would have ordinarily been celebrated under the OC. It will not be soon.

 

[ewq1938]

Again, this is NOT what Revelation 20:5 says. John wrote that the event when "The remnant of the dead" who came to life again at the end of the millennium "IS the "First Resurrection".

Wrong. You don't understand the difference between the first and last resurrections.


Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

This is the people in verse 4, those who were killed then come back to life to reign a thousand years, just as it says.