Premillennialism
A System of Infidelity by
Wayne Jackson
A rash of paper-back books is
flooding the religious market these days advocating the well-worn theory of premillenniaalism. One such production is
entitled, The Late Great Planet Earth. It is authored by Hal Lindsey, a graaduate of the School of Theology at the Dallas Theological Seminary. The thrust of the book is two fold:
(1) To espouse the premillennial theory of Christ's second
coming, and: (2) To interpret present world political trends as signs of the
imminent return of Jesus Christ.
The premillennial
concept is the result of a gross literalizing of a few symbolic verses in the Book of Revelation, cooupled with a complete disregard for
scores of Bible verses of clearest import. The word
"premillennial" itself is derived of two components: (a)
PRE-meaning "before;' and, (b) MILLENNIUM-denoting a period of 1,000 years. It thus suggests that Christ will
return to the earth just prior to a 1,000 year reign. The premillennial theory
contains several facets and for that reason, the following quotations
are introduced to bring the main points into focus.
"It is held that the OT prophets
predicted the re-establishment of David's kingdom and that Christ himself intended to bring this about. It is alleged,
however, that because the Jews refused his person and work
he postponed the establishment of his kingdom until
the time of his return. Meanwhile, it is argued, the Lord gathered together
'the church' as a kind of interim measure;' (Ernest F. Kevan, Baker's Dictionary of Theology,
Generally,
premillennialists believe that shortly before the second coming the world will be marked by extraordinarry tribulation and evil and the
appearance of the Anti-Christ. At his coming, Christ will
destroy this anti-Christ and believers will be raised from the dead. There will
then follow a millennium of peace and order over which
Christ will reign with his saints. At the close of this time, Satan will be loosed and the forces of evvil will once again be rampant. The
wicked will then be raised, and a final judgment will
take place in which Satan and all evil ones will be
consigned to eternal punishment!' (Van A. Harvey, A Handbook of Theological Terms, p. 151.)
"For centuries
the Jews have been scattered among many nations. In preparation for the return of Christ and tthe beginning of the millennium, they
are being gathered back to their own land, according to
prophecy, in a national restoration. David's throne will
be re-established at Jerusalem, and through these restored people as a nucleus
Christ will reign with his immortal saints over the whole world!' (James A. Nichols, Jr., Christian Doctriine — A Presentation of Biblical
Theology, p. 279.)
To summarize, the
premillennial view asserts that Christ came to this earth for the purpose of setting up his kingddom. He was, however, surprisingly
rejected by the Jews. Hence, he postponed the kingdom plans,
and set up the church instead, as sort of an emergency
measure. When he returns, he will allegedly raise only the righteous dead, restore
national Israel, sit upon David's literal throne in Jerusalem and then reign for a span of 1,000 years, after which
comes the resurrection of the wicked and the judgment. It is truly
difficult to imagine how a view could contain more errors than is inherent in
this doctrine.
The basic fallacy
of the premillennial concept is a materialistic view of the reign of Christ. This same false notion wwas entertained by the ancient Jews,
and actually, was responsible for their rejection and crucifixion of the
Messiah. The fact is, this mistaken
Jewish expectation of a literal, physical kingdom spawned the millennial
doctrine that was taught in the early post-apostolic age. As one historian
observed:
"The idea of
a millennial reign proceeded from Judiasm, for among the Jews the
representation was current, that the Messiah would reign a thousand years on
earth, and then bring to a close the present terrestrial system. This
calculation was arrived at, by a literal interpretation of
Psalm 110:4, A thousand years are in thy sight as one day!
It was further argued that as the World was created in six days, so it would last six thousand yearss, the seventh thousand would be a
period of repose, a sabbath on Earth to be followed by
the destruction of the World." (Neander's History
of Christian Dogmas, Vol. 1, p. 248.)
The necessary
implications of the premillennial doctrine are grave indeed. This heresy strikes treacherously at numeerous facets of Biblical truth. In
reality, it is a subtle form of infidelity which must be vigorously opposed.
CHRIST'S REJECTION
BY THE JEWS — The premillennial view implies that the Jewish rejection of Christ was an unexpected miscarriage in the
plans of God. Whereas, the truth is, that
rejection was plainly foretold by the OT prophets. Isaiah had
prophetically said: "Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm
of the Lord revealed?" (Isa. 53:1) In
the NT, when describing the rebellion of the Jews, John wrote: "But though he had done so many
signs before them, yet they believed not on him: that the word of Isaiah
the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our
report? And to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" (Jn. 12:37, 38) Agaain, it was prophesied: "The
stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:' (Psa.
118:22; Cf. Mt. 21:33-46) Having been
foretold centuries before, the Jewish rejection of Christ was therefore no
surprise!
THE KINGDOM — Nothing in the
Scriptures is any clearer than the fact that the kingdom of God was
established shortly after the death of Christ. Note the following.
(1) The prophet Daniel declared:
"And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shaall never be destroyed ..'.' (Dan.
2:44) The "those kings" of the prophecy were Roman kings (the fourth
part of the image of Nebuchadnezzar's dream,
Dan. 2:31ff). Now the Roman empire came into dominance in 63 B.C. and it
fell in 476 A.D., hence, it follows that the kingdom of God WAS established, sometime between those two dates, or
else Daniel was a false prophet! The
premillennial assertion that the kingdom was not set up in the first century,
but is yet to come, strikes at the very heart of the inspiration of the
prophets, and is, therefore, infidelic in
substance!
(2) John the Baptizer, Jesus himself,
and the twelve disciples, all preached that the kingdom was "at hand;'
literally meaning, "is come near!' (Mt. 3:2; 4:17; 10:7) (Compare Lk. 21:30 for the meaning of "at
hand!') Thus, they preached the nearness of the kingdom of God, and such
can scarcely be harmonized with the notion that it hasn't come!
(3) Christ exclaimed, "Verily I say unto you, There are some here
of them that stand by, who shall in no wise taste of
death, till they see the kingdom of God come with power!'
(Mk. 9:1) Either the kingdom came within the lifetime of those to whom he referred, or
they are getting very old! Observe, please -
a Jesus promised that the kingdom would
come with power. (Mk. 9:1)
h But that power would accompany the
reception of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 1:8)
Thus the kingdom would come with the arrival of the Spirit, d But the Holy Spirit came on the day of
Pentecost (some 50 days after Christ's death).
(Acts 2:4) e Therefore, the
kingdom was at that time established!
(4) On the day of
Pentecost, the apostle Peter preached the inaugural discourse and thereby used one of "the keeys of the kingdom" (Mt. 16:19),
to admit the obedient into the church. If Peter used the
kingdom's key to open the church, when they were not the same institution, he
stands convicted of burglarizing the church of the Lord!
(5) Shortly before his death, the Savior promised his
disciples, "... ye may eat and drink at
my table in my kingdom ..'.' (L,. 22:30) The Lord's table was placed
within the kingdom. If one can find
disciples partaking of that table, it will be a demonstration of the
kingdom's existence. Now notice; when Paul wrote to "the church ... at Corinth" (1 Cor. 1:2), he rebuked them for
their perversion in partaking of the "table of the Lord" (1 Cor. 10:12), aand so it is quite evident that the
Corinthian Christians were in the kingdom.
(6) When Paul wrote to the
Colossians, he affirmed that God "delivered us out of the power of
darkness and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love ..!' (1:13) The term "translated" (Gr. methistemi)
means to "remove from one place to another!' (Arndt & Gingrich,, Greek Lexicon, p. 500). The
tense of the verb reveals that their
entrance into the kingdom had already occurred at some point in the past.
(7) When John
wrote to "the seven churches that are in Asia" (Rev. 1:4), he stated that Christ had
loosed them from their sins by his blood and made them "to be a kingdom!' (1:6) Further, he was a
"partaker" with them in that kingdom. (1:9) How could such
have been, if the kingdom had been postponed?
(8) The existence of God's kingdom on
earth is further demonstrated by the fact that the same
process which moves one into the kingdom also puts him into the church. Jesus taught that the "new birrth" consisting of being born of
"water and the Spirit!' enables one to "enter the kingdom" (Jn. 3:5).
This is simply receiving the Spirit's message
(the gospel) and being baptized in water — the very thing which puts one into the "one body" (1 Cor. 12:13),
which is "the church" (Col. 1:18). Hence, to enter the church
is equal to becoming a citizen of the kingdom. Thus, the doctrine that the kingdom was postponed because of the Jews'
rejection of Christ is totally false.
THE CHURCH — The claim that the church
was set up as an "interim measure" due to
Christ's postponement of the kingdom, actually suggests the idea that the
church is but an accident which was no part of
God's original plan. One could scarcely over-exaggerate
the error here. The Bible clearly teaches that "the manifold wisdom of
God" is made known "through the church!' and this is
"according to the eternal purpose (plan)
which he purposed in Christ Jesus!' (Eph. 3:10, 11) Hence, the church was in God's plan from eternity. Further, the death of
Christ was known before the foundation
of the world (1 Pet. 1: 19:20; Rev. 13:8), and the shed blood of that death
"purchased the church!' (Acts 20:28) If the death of Christ was
thus known for ages, it is certain that the result
of the death was likewise known, namely the establishment of the church.
Actually, the church is simply a body of baptized believers who have been saved from their past sins. (Acts 2:38; 1
Cor. 12:13) The church is the saved! (Eph. 5:23) If the church is but an accident, that
implies an accidental salvation! That the
church was a part of God's original plan for human redemption is
further seen in the types of the Mosaic
age. The tabernacle (specifically the
holy place) and subsequently the temple, were types of the church (1
Cor. 3:16; Eph. 2:21; Heb. 9:9), and therefore
pictured its future establishment and its integral part in the plan of Jehovah.
The doctrine of premillennialism
dogmatically asserts that God unconditionally promised
Canaan's land to the descendants of Abraham. Further, it is contended that the promise has never been completeely granted, hence, the claim is made
that the Jews will eventually be restored to Palestine in
order that the Abrahamic covenant might be fulfilled. Indeed, some are
declaring without hesitation that, with the establishment of Israel as an independent govvernment in 1948, the Jewish
restoration has begun, and this is a signal of the imminent
return of Jesus Christ. The antiscriptural errors involved in this
are plenteous and pathetic.
THE PROMISE TO ABRAHAM — Concerning Canaan, Jehovah
promised Abraham, "Unto thy seed will I
give this land!' (Gen. 12:7) This land covenant with the patriarch involved all that land "from
the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates!' (Gen. 15:18), andd it was pledged to his seed
"forever!' (Gen. 13:15) Two
questions are of great concern here: (1) Was the promise ever totally
fulfilled? (2) Was the promise in any sense conditional? An
understanding of these queries devastates
the premillennial theory.
First of all, when the Law of Moses was given, provision
was made for the establishment of cities of
refuge where the manslayer who had killed without premeditation might flee for the preservation of his life.
Initially, three cities were to be set aside for this purpose. Moses declared, hoowever, that "if Jehovah thy God
enlarge thy border, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, and give thee all
the land which he promised to give unto
thy fathers; if thou shalt keep all this commandment to do it, which I command
thee this day, to love Jehovah thy God, and to walk ever in his ways; then
shalt thou add three cities more for thee, besides these three ..!' (Dt.
19:7-9) Thus, SIX cities of refuge would be
evidence of the fulfillment of the land promise to Abraham's seed. A reading of
Joshua 20:7, 8 reveals that the cities of Kedesh, Shechem, Hebron, Bezer, Ramoth and Golan were assigned as havens
of refuge — SIX cities — thus, "all the land" had been given;
the land covenant has been fulfilled! This is further demonstrated by Joshua
21:43, "So Jehovah gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein!'
Additionally, it is specifically stated of Solomon's time: "And
Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the River unto the land of the
Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt
..!' (1 Kgs. 4:21; II Chron. 9:26) Finally, Nehemiah rehearses the fact that
God brought Abraham from Ur of Chaldees to give him the land of Canaan,
and says he, thou "hast performed thy words: for thou art righteous!'
(Neh. 9:7, 8) It would appear that the premillennial heresy implies the exact opposite!
Premillennialists
contend however, that Palestine was promised to Israel "for ever!' (Gen. 13:15). This fails to recogniize, of course, that the term
"for ever" is not always used in the Bible in a completely unlimited
sense. For instance, circumcision was an "everlasting
covenant!' (Gen. 17:13); the passover was an ordinance "for ever!' (Ex. 12:15), and the Levitical system hadd an "everlasting priesthood!'
(Num. 25:13). These OT institutions, however, passed away with the abrogation
of the Law, thus demonstrating that "for ever" sometimes has a
temporary significance.
The truth of the matter is, the OT clearly indicates that Israel's
possession of Palestine was conditioned upon their faithfulness to God — a
condition which they repeatedly violated, hence, it was foretold: "When ye
transgress the covenant of Jehovah your
God, which he commanded you, and go and serve other gods, and bow down
yourselves to them; then will the anger of Jehovah be kindled against you, and ye shall perish quickly from off the good land
which he hath given unto you." (Josh. 23:16) That time
eventually came and the Jews lost their "deed" to the Promised Land!
JEREMIAH'S VISUAL AID — In the 19th chapter of his book,
the prophet Jeremiah is instructed of Jehovah, "Go, and buy a potter's
earthen bottle!' Subsequently, he is told
to go to the valley of Hinnom and to prophesy to the inhabitants of
Jerusalem concerning their sins and their eventual destruction. As a symbol of this promised punishment, Jeremiah is commanded
to "break the bottle" and to proclaim its meaning, "Even
so will I break this people and this city, as one breaketh a potter's vessel that cannot be made whole
again ..." (Jer. 19:10-11). This prophecy was partially fulfilled with a siege of the
Babylonians in 586 B.C., (II Kgs. 25), but was completely and ultimately fulfiilled with the destruction of
national Israel by the Romans in 70 A.D. (See Clarke's Commentary, Vol.
IV, p. 305) After the Jewish nation was
destroyed, it was so permanently scattered by the providence of God that it CANNOT BE MADE WHOLE AGAIN! Irregardless of the
fact that some Jews are migrating
back to Palestine again, they will never be restored as GOD'S NATION!
THE PRONOUNCEMENT OF CHRIST — Further
confirmation of the above evidence that national Israel will never be restored is the
plain teaching of Christ himself. In Matthew
21, Jesus told the parable of the wicked husbandmen, the design of which was to emphasize how wretchedly the Jews
had treated God’s prophets, such rebellion
reaching its zenith with the crucifixion of Christ. Because of their rejection of
Jehovah's precious stone, the Lord said to the Jews, "Therefore say I unto
you, the kingdom of God (i.e., their reign
as God's special people) shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing
forth the fruits thereof!' (Mt. 21:43) The inspired apostle Peter unquestionablly declares that the
"nation" to be henceforth so blessed,
is God's "holy nation" the church. (See 1 Pet. 2:7-10) The Bible is
exceedingly clear; Christians are the
seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:26-29), the "Israel of God!' (Gal. 6:16).
RESTORATION 'PROOF
TEXTS' — The premillennialist purports to have a whole repertoire of proof texts
to substantiate his claim of Israel's restoration. An examination of several of these willl reveal a characteristic deceitful
handling of the Word of God.
1. Isaiah 2:2-4
— It is argued that this passage will be fulfilled with the establishment of the Millennial Kingdom. Acttually, it is a prophecy of the
establishment of the church, which is the "house"
under consideration (see 1 Tim. 3:15). This was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), wwhich was the beginning of the
"last days!' (Acts 2:16, 17) The truth is, if there is a
dispensation yet to come, namely the Millennium, then Peter
was wrong, and we are not in the "last days" but in the
"next-to-the-last-days". Isaiah 2:4 does not predict
a time of universal world peace, rather, it characterizes the peaceful disposition of those fformerly hostile nations which
"flow unto" the house of God.
2. Isaiah 11:1-16 — This is a
prophecy regarding Christ (1-5), and the establishment of his divine government in thee church. Again, the peaceful
atmosphere thereof is beautifully described (6-9), as being in God's "holy
mountain" which is the church. (Dan. 2:35, 44) And
to cinch the matter, verse 10 is quoted in the NT (Rom. 15:12) by an inspired
writer and shown to be applicable to the reception of the Gentile nations into
the church. To suggest that it applies to some future age is totally to
disregard the inspired interpretation of the
prophecy and to reflect upon the credibility of a NT penman!
3. Hosea
2:14-23; 3:5 — Hosea's prophecies are frequently said to point to Israel's restoration in the Millennium. Againn, however, an inspired NT writer
says otherwise. Paul quotes Hosea 2:23 and 1:10 in his
letter to the Romans (9:25, 26), and thereby shows that
the restoration foretold by Hosea was of a spiritual nature, including
both Jews and Gentiles. And such is accomplished in the
church. Hosea 3:5 speaks of Israel returning and
seeking Jehovah and "David their king" (certainly not David
literally) "in the latter days!' This is another
indication that the Christian era, the reign of Christ, is in view. (Cf. Lk. 1:32, 33; Acts 2:30-36; 2:16-17) (See Laetsch, Minor
Prophets, p. 40.)
4. Amos 9:11-15 — This is a
favorite of the premillennialists, but to no avail. It is argued that
the rebuilding of national Judaism in the Millennium, at which time Solomon's temple will literally be rebuilt and
the Jewish economy reinstated. In Acts 15
a question was raised among the early disciples as to whether Gentiles were
obligated to circumcision. Peter, who had preached first to the
Gentiles, denied such. James utters an inspired oracle corroborating Peter, and
in connection, he cites the words of Amos concerning the rebuilding of the
tabernacle of David. The rebuilding of David's
tabernacle was the enthronement of Christ and the establishment of his church! And
a part of this design was that the Gentiles might have the privilege of seeking
the Lord. It would thus follow, if the tabernacle of David is yet in the
future, as premillennialists contend, then all
Gentiles are still lost! (Acts 15:16, 17) Also, the claim that Judiasm will someday be restored, in view of
the books of Galatians and Hebrews, is
absolutely incredible!
5. There are, of course, many additional prophecies which,
according to the premillennialists, predict
Israel's restoration; but none of these demonstrates a restoration of national Israel in a future millennium.
It may be suggested in summation that the
OT prophecies which speak of a restoration for Israel pertain either to: (1) A
return to Palestine from the confines
of the Babylonian Captivity (605-536 B.C.), in the time of Cyrus of Persia. (See II Chron. 36:23, 23) For
example, a number of passages in the
books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel are of this nature. Or, (2) The restoration of
Israel to Jehovah's favor spiritually
through the church. Peter affirmed that a major thrust of OT prophecy was concerning salvation, which
"the prophets sought and searched diligently!'
and which has now been announced through the preaching of the gospel. (1 Pet. 1:9-12) thus, the premillennial doctrine
virtually ignores the spiritual emphasis of OT prophecy. Actually, it is
crassly materialistic in character. It must be utterly rejected!
The theory of premillennialism holds that Christ will
return to this earth to be seated on the
literal throne of David in Jerusalem. The underlying fallacy of this view is its materialistic approach to the reign of
Christ. The Lord's kingdom is not a worldly, political economy, as was David's, for Jesus plainly said: "My
kingdom is not of this world!' (Jn.
18:36) Remarkably the Premillennialists contend that it will be!
THE THRONE OF DAVID — Isaiah prophesied that Christ would be heir
to the throne of David. Says he, "Of
the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon
the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with
righteousness from henceforth even for ever!' (Isa. 9:7) Additionally, the angel Gabriel informed Mary concerning her
expected Son, "He shall be
great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father
David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdomm there shall be no end." (Lk.
1:32, 33) The question is not
whether Christ was to sit on the throne of David; the controversy is concerning the nature of that throne, that
is, is it the physical throne? Or is it the spiritual throne of David?
That Christ's reign on the throne of David is of a
heavenly, spiritual nature is manifestly
evident from the following considerations.
1. The last king to reign on the Davidic throne of the OT
era was Jehoiachin (also known as Jeconiah,
or abbreviated, Coniah). In Jeremiah 22:24-30 it was prophesied that he and his seed (Judah) would be
delivered into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar
and cast into a foreign land (Babylon). Specifically concerning Coniah it was
said: "Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in
his days; for no more shall a man of his
seed prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling in Judah!' The issue is clear — no descendant of Coniah
would ever again prosper, ruling from the
literal throne of David. Now the fact is, Christ WAS of the
"seed" of Jechoniah, both
from a legal standpoint through Joseph (Mt. 1:12, 16) and from a
physical consideration through
Mary (via Shealtiel). (Lk. 3:27) It thus follows that Christ could never
reign on David's earthly throne and prosper!
2. The prophet Zechariah prophesied
regarding the Christ thusly: "Behold, the man whose name is the Branch:
and he shall grow up out of his place; and he shall build the temple of Jehovah; even hee shall build the temple of Jehovah;
and he shall bear the glory, and he shall sit and rule
upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne; and the counsel of
peace shall be between them both!' (Zech. 6:12, 13) This passage positively affirms thaat Christ will function as priest and
reign as king on his throne
simultaneously. According to Hebrews 8:4 Christ could not act as a priest while on the earth for he was not descended from
the priestly tribe (Heb. 7:14). Since the Lord could not be a priest on
earth, and since he is priest and king jointly, it necessarily follows that his reign aas king cannot be earthly in nature.
Rather it is heavenly. The heavenly
nature of the reign of Christ is readily apparent in that narrative known as the parable of the pounds recorded in Luke
19:11-27. The parable involves a certain nobleman (Christ) who went into a ffar country (heaven) to receive a
kingdom, and to return. Some
citizens, however, sent a message to him, saying, "We will not have that this man reign over us!' Finally, having received
the kingdom, the nobleman returns to render judgment. From the account it is
perfectly clear that: (1) the kingdom was received in heaven (not on earth); (2) the reign was from heaven (not
from Jerusalem); (3) the return of the nobleman was after the reception
of the kingdom (not prior to it). All of these facts are strikingly at variance
with the premillennial concept.
3. King David was informed by the
prophet Nathan: "When thy days are fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fatherrs, I will set up thy seed after
thee, that shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will
establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the thhrone of his kingdom for ever!' ((II
Sam. 7:12, 13). That this is a prediction of the reign of
Christ upon David's throne is beyond question. In view of this promise David was told:
"thy throne shall be established for ever!' (II Sam. 7:16) (Note the applicationn of this context to Christ by an
inspired NT writer in Hebrews 1:5) It is extremely significant to note
in this connection that Christ is to be
seated on David's throne over his kingdom while this illustrious OT king is
still asleep with the fathers (i.e., in the grave)! In glaring contrast to this
is the Premillennial notion which
contends that Christ will sit upon David's throne after the resurrection
of all the righteous (including David)!
4. In harmony with the foregoing is
Peter's declaration: "Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding
the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is
with us to this day. And so, because he was a prophet, and knew that God had
sworn to him with an oath to seat one
of his descendants upon his throne, he looked ahead and spoke of the
resurrection of the Christ ..!' (N.A.S.V.) Of
special importance here is the infinitive "to seat' suggesting the design
of Christ's resurrection. As N.B. Hardeman so wonderfully expressed it:
"grammatically, 'to sit' is an infinitive with the construction of
an adverb, carrying the idea of purpose equivalent
to the following expanded form, viz.; He raised up Christ that He should sit, that He might sit, for the purpose of
sitting upon David's throne. If Christ is not on David's throne, the
resurrection might have been deferred until this good hour, or for ages to come!' (Tabernacle Sermons, III, p.
37.)
5. The reign of
Christ on David's throne is not an event awaiting future fulfillment. The Son of God has been reigniing over his kingdom since the day of
Pentecost. Hear his promise to early saints: "He
that overcometh, I will give to him to sit down with me in
my throne, as I also overcame, and sat down with my Father in his throne!' (Rev. 3:21)
Notice the past tense "sat down!' Clearly, Christ is now on the throne. It
be contended that this passage speaks of Christ on the Father's throne and not
David's, it need only be replied that the Father's throne and David's are
biblically the same. Solomon sat upon the
throne of David (I Kings. 2:12), which was in reality Jehovah's throne (I Chron. 29:23). Hence, when
Christ sat down on the Father's throne, he was on the throne of David! He iss presently reigning and will
continue such until all his enemies are destroyed, the last of which
will be death. (I Cor. 15:25, 26).
Thus, to speak of Christ on David's throne is simply to
affirm that our Lord has "all authority;" that to him has been given
"all rule, and authority, and power, and
dominion" Eph. 1:21), indeed, that he exercises a regal reign
characteristic of the great King that he is. (Compare Matthew 23:1 where the
authority of the scribes and Pharisees who taught the Law is said to be
sitting on "Moses' seat!').
Based primarily upon a
misunderstanding of Revelation 20:1-6 (to be discussed later) Premillennialists
urge that there will be two resurrections of the dead. The first will occur at the time of Christ's coming and will consist of the
righteous only. Following this, it is contended, will be the
1,000 year reign of Christ on earth. Terminating this will be the second
resurrection (of the wicked) and the judgment. There is no real support for this view; in fact, it
contradicts numerous verses of clearest meaning. The Scriptures teach
that when the Lord Jesus comes: (a) time will end; (b) all of the dead will be raised at the same time; (c) the
judgment will occur; (d) eternity will commence.
THE END — In 1 Corinthians 15:23 Paul speaks of the
"coming" of Christ. With reference to that event, he says, "Then
cometh the end ..!' (24). It is obvious that the return of Christ is not to
begin an earthly reign; rather, it will bring an end to earthly affairs! Some contend thaat the adverb "then" (Grk. eitas)
demands an interval which
allows time for a millennium. Such is not the case, however. Note the use of eita in connection with eutheos (immediately)
in Mark 4:17. Noted scholar Wick Broomall
declares. "The usage of eita shows conclusively that the
premillennial view is erroneous!'
THE DAY — Jesus spoke of "the day"
in which he would be revealed (i.e., the day of his
coming). In presenting this truth,
the Lord referred to two divine destructions of former ages. (Lk.
17:26-30) Observe that on "the day" that Noah entered the ark, the antediluvian world was destroyed.
Further, in "the day" that Lot departed Sodom, the people of the
plain cities were destroyed. So, contends Christ "In like manner shall
it be in the day that the Son of man is revealed" The clear
implication of this passage is that
the wicked will be destroyed in "the day" of Christ's coming;
certainly there is no room for a 1,000 year interval here. (Compare Mt. 13:40,
49; 25:31-46; I! Thes. 1: 7-9).
THE HOUR — "Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh,
in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth;
they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have
done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment!' (Jn. 5:28, 29) This passage
thoroughly negates the "two resurrections" theory. Professor David Brown wrote,, "It is hardly possible to
conceive a plainer statement of the simultaneousness of the
resurrection of both classes!' (Christ's Second Coming, p. 190). See
also Acts 24:15 where Paul makes it clear that there "shall be a
resurrection (singular) both of the just and unjust!' Thus, a single
resurrection involving two classes.
Certainly there are contexts in which
only the resurrection of the righteous is under consideration (Cf. Jn. 6:54; II
Thes. 4:13-18 etc.), but these do not cancel the plain force of verses affirming
a general resurrection. Additionally, the symbolic language of the Book of
Revelation (20:1-6) must be brought into harmony with these literal NT
declarations of the coming of Christ, the resurrection and the judgment. It is
most definitely not a sound hermeneutical principle to force numerous obscure
verses into harmony with a solitary symbolic reference.
REVELATION TWENTY
The twentieth chapter of the Book of
Revelation, verses one through six, is the very
heart and soul of the theory of premillennialism. It is what George Murray
calls "the very citadel and
bulwark of premillennial eschatology!' (Millennial Studies, p. 175). Indeed
it may be said, were it not for these half dozen verses, the theory would not even have a semblance of suggestion in the New
Testament. As Albert Barnes observes: "It is admitted, on all
hands, that this doctrine, if contained in the Scriptures at all, is found in
this one passage only. It is not pretended that there is, in any other place, a
direct affirmation that this will literally occur, nor would the advocates for
that opinion undertake to show that it is fairly implied in any other part of
the Bible. But it is strange, not to say improbable, that the doctrine of the
literal resurrection of the righteous, a thousand years before the wicked,
should be announced in one passage only!' (Commentary on Revelation, pp.
428, 429.)
Earlier it was stressed that it is
foolish to attempt a forced harmony between the figurative elements of
Revelation 20:1-6 and the premillennial theory, the latter being contradicted
by so many plain passages of scripture. Making this very point with reference
to Revelation 20:1-6, noted scholar Charles Hodge wrote: "It is a sound
rule in the interpretation of Scripture that obscure passages should be so
explained as to make them agree with those that are plain. It is unreasonable
to make the symbolic and figurative language of prophecy and poetry the rule by
which to explain the simple didactic prose language of the Bible. It is no
less unreasonable that a multitude of passages should be taken out of their natural sense to make them accord with
a single passage of doubtful import!' (Systematic Theology, III, p. 842). Finally, note this significant quotation from Gleehardus Vos
concerning the relationship of the Book of Revelation to the
premillennial view. "In regard to a book so enigmatical, it were
presumptuous to speak with any degree of dogmatism, but the uniform absence of the idea of the millennium from the
eschatological teaching of the NT elsewhere ought to render the exegete
cautious before affirming its presence here!' (International Standard
Bible Encyclopedia, II, p. 987.)
PURPOSE AND FORM — Preliminary to this
discussion should be a few observations concerning the purpose and form
of the Book of Revelation. The church of the apostolic age was being severely
persecuted, indeed, in subsequent years, it was subjected to a veritable
blood-bath. The design of Revelation is thus to show: (a) The relatively infant church would be heir to much
persecution and suffering; (b) The saints must persevere and by their faith oovercome these trials; (c) The Christ
would ultimately be victorious over all his enemies.
That the Book of
Revelation is highly symbolic is evidenced not only by its content, but also
by the introduction. Christ "signified" the message by his angel unto
John. (1:1) The question naturally arises as to why the Lord chose symbols to
be the vehicles of these truths. Symbolism frequently serves a two-fold
purpose, to reveal and to conceal. Occasionally, the Lord's parables functioned
in this capacity, that is, they
portrayed certain truths to the disciples, while withholding the same from
those who were spiritually dull. (Cf. Mt.
13:10-15) The message of victory within the Book of Revelation, much of
which was in the imagery that adorned the OT, with which Christians were
undoubtedly familiar, would be grasped by those early disciples. At the same
time, the defeat of the persecuting powers were veiled to those not discerning the figures. One can well
imagine, for example, how trials for the Christians might have been intensified
had they been discovered circulating a document which literally predicted
the overthrow of their persecutors. And so, as George Ladd points out: "In
the apocalypses, symbolism becomes the main stock in trade, particularly as a
technique for outlying the course of history without employing historical
names!' (Baker's Dictionary of Theology, p. 52.) It is thus a gross
error to literalize the Book of
Revelation, and this is precisely what the premillennialists have done with the
first six verses of chapter twenty.
SIGNIFICANT OMISSIONS — Perhaps this
context is more significantly devastating to
the premillennial theory for what it does not say, but which, if the theory be
true, it surely would have mentioned. Nothing is said of: (a) Christ's second
coming; (b) the establishment of a kingdom; (c) an earthly regime; (d) a
bodily reigning; (e) the throne of David;
or (f) the Jews being regathered to Palestine. Now all of these elements
are vitally important to the millennial view, yet they are conspicuously absent
from this narrative!
THE GIST OF THE NARRATIVE — Obvioussly the context of Revelation 20:1-6 is a part of the
design of the book as a whole. Many scholars believe that this section is a symbolic description of the revival of
Christianity from a period of bloody persecution. For example, note
that earlier (6:9-11) John had seen the "souls" of the martyrs
"Underneath the altar" crying, "How long, O Master, the holy and
true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the
earth?" Here, however, the apostle views the "souls" on
"thrones" reigning with Christ. For a while, Christianity appeared
to have been buried in tribulation, but ultimately, it emerged: it was, figuratively
speaking, resurrected. The Scripture speaks of figurative resurrections as well as literal ones. (See Isa. 26:18; Ezk.
37:12; Rom. 11:15) "It would, therefore, not be inconsistent with analogy
of prophecy if we should understand the Apostle as here predicting that
a new race of men were to arise filled with the spirit of the martyrs, and were to live
and reign with Christ a thousand years" (Hodge, op. cit., p. 842). That this "resurrection" alludes to the
triumphs of persecuted saints is further borne out by the fact that "the seconnd death hath no power" over
these reigning ones, which harmonizes perfectly with chapter 2, verse 11
— "He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death!' Thus, thhe "resurrection" of 20:6
is a figurative way of saying "overcome!' The one thousand years, of
course, would also be symbolic in scope, suggesting either that the victory oof God's cause as considered in this
context would be lengthy in span, or possibly the one thousand years may denote
the completeness of the saints' triumph. For the figurative usage of
numbers compare Exodus 20:6; Matthew 18:22;
Revelation 5:11, etc.
At any rate, it is certain that there is no
support for the theory of premillennialism — not in the Book of Revelation — not in
the whole Bible. It is a false heresy.
Previous Article Spring 2005 Front Page Next Article