Coming Soon… Take the Resurrection Challenge Win a Free Book!

Friends,

Skeptics claim there’s no evidence for the Christian faith. That is simply not true. I fell like it’s time for me to do my small part to help set the record straight on the issue of central importance. And I would love for you to join in. I have been working on mastering the historical evidence for the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus. I would like to suggest to you the book, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona. I believe that the position one takes on this particular matter has eternal ramifications. Because I genuinely care about people, believers and skeptics alike, I feel called to present the evidence so people can make an informed decision.

Many people are not aware of the factual historical case for the literal resurrection Of Jesus Christ. This was the pivotal event of all human history. The evidence is astonishingly good considering the extreme antiquity. To stimulate the conversation I will be giving away two brand new books for the best response videos from Christians and skeptics alike.



Just keep your eye out for a new video which will be posted here on this website and on my YT channel by Tuesday August 24th called the “Resurrection Challenge – Can You Account for the Evidence?” Christians should respond with arguments and evidence supporting my presentation and skeptics must posit an alternate scenario that still accounts for the accepted data. I will make a decision at the end of September and mail prizes to the winners.  I will be posting videos all through the month with my research supporting the resurrection. I hope you will follow the evidence where it leads!

In Christ,

Cris

I Am the Resurrection and the Life

We love our conveniences and because they can be largely attributed to scientific progress, science has become the new priesthood. Yet their prevailing consensus for man’s destiny is a bleak one, death is final. The Bible tells a different story. Jesus Christ conquered death.  John’s gospel is unique in its theological discourse on the deity of Jesus Christ. Seven times Jesus is recorded as saying “I am” attached to a metaphor (Jn. 6:35, 8:12, 10:9, 10:11, 11:25, 14:6, 15:5). These seven statements provide a unique window in which to view the person of Jesus. The words “I am”, ego eimi in Greek, had an unambiguous connotation to Jesus’ first century Jewish audience. When Moses first encountered Yahweh in the burning bush, he was given a mission to bring his people out of Egypt. Moses balked asking God, “who he would say had sent him?” God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you’ ” (Ex 3:14).  The “I am” statements by Jesus are nothing short of a claim to be that voice in the bush. Fortunately, whenever modern higher criticism casts doubt upon Jesus’ claim to divinity, the Pharisees faithfully come to the rescue. For they had no doubts that Jesus was claiming to be the “I am” of the Torah. This is beyond question as they subsequently attempt to stone him for blasphemy (Jn. 5:17-18, 8:58-59). Of the famous seven “I am” statements found in the gospel of John, I believe the fifth, “I am the resurrection and the life” is the most explicit proclamation of Jesus’ power and deity.

The context of this astonishing statement is last of the great sign miracles discussed in the fourth gospel, near the end of Jesus public ministry. We learn that Jesus friend Lazarus is ill. The home of Lazarus was in Bethany, near Jerusalem (Jn. 11:1, 30; 12:1), located south east of the Mount of Olives.[1] Jesus was a close friend of the family. Mary, the sister of Lazarus, is identified as the one who anointed the Lord and wiped his feet with her hair (cf. Jn.12:3). This unforgettable act will be retold in eternity as both Mark (Mk.14:9) and Matthew (Mat.26:13) immortalize.[2] In fact, Jesus was likely a frequent guest (Matt. 21:17; Lk. 10:38–41; Jn. 11:17). The sister’s message, “Lord, he whom you love is ill” also reveals the close relationship. It employed the word phileo meaning “to love as friend.”[3] His personal affection for the family was shared, evidenced when speaking to the disciples Jesus also called Lazarus “our friend” (Jn.11:11).

In light of Jesus close relationship and the urgency of the request, Jesus’ response seems all the more perplexing at first. They were at least a day’s journey from Bethany and the disciples, like the sisters, were afraid that Lazarus might die. Dr. Towns thinks that perhaps Lazarus had already expired by the time Jesus received the message.[4] The sequence of events does make it likely.  Jesus foreshadows the imminent miracle when he replies that the end result would not be what it appeared. He said, “This sickness will not end in death”, rather that God would “be glorified” (Jn. 11:4). This seems alien to our human experience because of our temporal perspective. We are bound in time. In contrast, God as an eternal omniscient spirit has providentially ordained events and circumstances apart from our ability to perceive or conceive. Pointing to this reality, Jesus had made a similar comment concerning the blind man he previously healed.  When he was asked whose sin had caused the man’s disability, Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him” (Jn 9:3). Indeed, it seems as if at times God wants to remove all plausible deniability to a sign miracle. For instance, before calling down fire from heaven, Elijah had the priests of Baal pour water on the firewood (1 Ki. 18:33).  For this reason, instead of rushing to Lazarus’ side, Jesus stayed where he was for two days longer.

Jesus then tells the disciples that Lazarus has merely fallen asleep and that he is going to waken him. Obtuse as ever, they reply, “he will recover” (Jn.11:12).  Finally Jesus drops the euphemism and tells them “plainly,” or “with boldness” (Greek parrēsia̧), that Lazarus is dead (Jn.11:15). Driving divine providence home, Jesus says he is actually glad he was not there so that they would believe. Death is the great unknown and arguably the primal fuel for all human anxiety. Morris writes, “As far as men were concerned, the position of Lazarus, who had been in the grave four days, was hopeless.”[5] Even more, Jesus wants to risk stoning by going the way of Jerusalem. I sometimes think that Thomas was the scientist of the group because he is famous for demanding to see the evidence for himself. In step with his skeptical predisposition, he speaks for the hopelessness of the natural man’s temperament when he laments, “Let us also go, that we may die with him” (Jn.11:16).

Jesus finally arrives only to find a scene of mourning and sorrow. I believe Jesus tears (Jn. 11:25) are really over the general state of unbelief he encounters even amongst his closest friends. By this point, it had been four days since Lazarus died. To bolster my argument that God seeks to dispel plausible deniability, I contend the four days were by skillful design:

There was a well-known Jewish belief (attested from about a.d. 200) that the soul of a dead person remained in the vicinity of the body “hoping to reenter it” for three days, but once decomposition set in, the soul departed. John wants us to know clearly that Lazarus is truly dead and that the miracle of Jesus cannot be construed as a resuscitation.[6]

Martha went out to meet Jesus and bemoaned his delayed arrival. When Jesus replied that Lazarus would rise, she acknowledges that she is a believer in the ultimate resurrection on the last day. This alludes to the fact the Jews really did not have a category for individual resurrections. The Jewish doctrine was largely based on the general resurrection of the dead in Daniel 12:2, which we now know occurs after the Parousia and is expounded on in Revelation chapter 20. It is at this point that Jesus delivers the great statement, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (Jn 11:25-26).  Dr. Towns writes that, “Martha had expressed her faith in the resurrection as a principle, but Jesus now reveals the resurrection as a person.”[7] Even more, Jesus is not only pointing to his own future resurrection but also to his deity, for he even claims to be life itself. Never disappointing, Jesus delivers Lazarus, grave clothes and all, providing evidence that death is not final. A truth he expands upon and confirms with his own triumph over the grave.

The hopeless absurdity of modern man is best encapsulated by the belief that death is the cessation of being. The scientific consensus is one of philosophical naturalism and materialistic reductionism. We humans are merely bodies and brains, the products of random unguided forces. If it’s true there is necessarily no real meaning or ultimate significance to life and certainly no final justice. Despite this pathetic flee from ultimate accountability, I believe most people intuitively know better. It is only by burying oneself under heaps of rationalistic denial and Darwinian obfuscations that one arrives at such a pitiful worldview. Our thought life and nightly excursions into the dream state speak to a deeper metaphysical truth, even to children. Science is still mystified by the life force albeit all of its fortuitous accomplishments. We have a sense of our immaterial self which is greater than unintentional chemical reactions. This is only adequately explained by the idea that we spiritual beings having a material experience. Genesis records, “then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature” (Ge 2:7).  Life is breathed by God. Jesus’ fifth “I am” statement is a claim to be one and the same.


[1]Moisés Silva and Merrill Chapin Tenney, The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume 3, H-L, (Grand Rapids, MI: The Zondervan Corporation, 2009), 1009.

[2]Gerald L. Borchert, vol. 25A, John 1-11, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1996), 349.

[3] Elmer Towns. The Gospel of John: Believe and Live. (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2002), 106.

[4] Towns, John, 106.

[5] Leon Morris. Jesus is the Christ: Studies in the Theology of John. (Grand Rapids MH: Eerdman’s Publishing Co., 1989), 38.

[6]Gary M. Burge, The NIV Application Commentary: John (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 315.

[7] Towns, John, 109.

Why Eschatology Matters Part IV: Premillennialism

continued from Why Eschatology Matters Part IV

I. Pre-millennial View: This is the view that the parousia (second coming) occurs at the conclusion of the Church age and Christ rules from Jerusalem for a literal millennium.[1] Adherents, myself included, argue that a consistent literal interpretation of the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants, predictions by the prophets and the announcement of the kingdom of heaven by John the Baptist and Jesus unavoidably lead to premillennialism.[2] It was the accepted view of the early church fathers up to early Augustine, who later erroneously discarded the view due to a personal prejudice against a particular belief (cited under amillennial).[3] Later post reformation teachers of the Lutheran, Reformed, and Puritan traditions like Jonathan Edwards, John Gill and Charles Spurgeon rediscovered premillennialism.[4] Today it is widely held by protestant evangelicals.

A. Basic Premises:

i. Millennium: A straight forward one thousand years as the text in Revelation chapter 20:1-6 says. The idea of a thousand year reign may also be supported by passages such as Acts 3:19–21 and 1 Corinthians 15:23–26, which speak of a future restoration and reign of Christ.[5]

ii. Resurrection: There are two resurrections the first are believers at the beginning of the millennium and the second at its conclusion for the great white throne judgment.[6]

iii. The Binding of Satan: Jesus Christ binds Satan upon his return. Dr. John Walvoord comments, “The passage makes clear that Satan is not simply restricted, as some would teach, but he is totally inactive in the Millennium.”[7] This point is simply not explained by any other view.

iv. The reign of Christ: While Christ is spiritually active in the lives of believers today his literally earthly reign will commence upon his arrival. He will rule from Jerusalem on the throne of David as promised in the New (Lk. 1:32) and Old Testaments (Zech. 14:9).

v. The Kingdom of God: The kingdom is here and also not yet. In Matthew 13:11, Jesus instituted a spiritual kingdom until His second coming, when He will initiate the anticipated messianic kingdom.[8]

vi. Israel: God will restore national Israel and fulfill all of His unconditional promises. At the end of the Tribulation, before the beginning of the Millennium, when Jesus is finally accepted by Israel, “all Israel will be saved” (Rom. 11:26).[9]

vii. Hermeneutic: A ‘literal’ interpretation means the understanding which any normal person would conclude. Premillennialism is rooted in a historical-grammatical interpretation of prophecy. The historical-grammatical method involves giving each word the same meaning it would have in normal usage.[10] (i.e. Israel means national Israel and thousand means 1,000).

B. Points of Strength:

i. The early church was indisputably premillennial, including: Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Lactantius and Irenaeus. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp who had direct contact with John, the author of the Apocalypse.[11] Their familiarity with the Apostle makes it hard to imagine why anyone would diverge from their understanding. Irenaeus wrote extensively on the literal future Messianic kingdom, a brief excerpt being, “The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead.”[12]

ii. Stated as a weakness in the opposing views, the fact that the New Testament explicitly teaches that Satan is alive and well on planet earth (1 Jn. 5:19, 2 Cor. 4:4, 2 Cor.4:3-4, Eph. 2:2, 2 Cor. 11:14, 1 Pet. 5:8). The argument seems overwhelming that Satan’s current imprisonment is absurd. Anyone who tries to advance the Gospel knows that Satanic opposition is very real.

iii. In the New Testament, the Angel Gabriel promised Mary that Jesus would sit upon the throne of David (Lk. 1:32-33). At that time there was no Israelite throne to sit on, even Herod was a vassal and this promised event has not yet occurred. Because God always keeps his promises it follows that this will be actualized.

iv. In Romans 9, 10, and 11 Paul’s purpose was to explain Israel’s future. If you simply read that sequence of chapters, replacement theology is absurd. The gentile church is clearly described as “grafted into” not replacing Israel.  Paul makes it abundantly clear in Rom. 11:29 that their election is irrevocable.

C. Points of Weakness:

i. The final releasing of Satan at the end of the millennium and subsequent apostasy after the millennium kingdom is difficult to explain. Yet Revelation 20 clearly predicts it.

ii. The millennium population of humans in a non-translated state must be rationalized by believers that come to faith during the tribulation.

iii. Satan was defeated at the cross. Why does he still have dominion on earth?

iv. The ambiguity about the timing of the rapture is problematic.

Conclusions

Premillennial eschatology not only offers a real hope for the world’s future through its anticipation of the personal earthly reign of Jesus Christ  for one thousand years, it also provides for the literal fulfillment of God’s covenant promises to Israel and Mary in the New Testament. Concerning the kingdom Missler argues,

There are at least 318 references in 216 chapters of the New Testament. And 23 of its 27 books give prominence to the event. The early church looked longingly for His promised return as their “Blessed Hope” to rid a desperate world of its evil rulers.[13]

In contrast, those promises are given only a vague fulfillment in amillennial and postmillennial eschatology, a psuedo-fulfillment that only weakens our faith in the promises of the Bible. God promised a real space time kingdom headquartered in Jerusalem. God does not lie. It is dangerous when one’s theological constructs impute the character of God.  It’s fascinating how contrary supersessionism is to God’s sovereign election. If it is true, it means that God’s elect nation lost their election. That sounds suspiciously like Arminiainism. Isn’t it ironic that most reformed denominations embrace it? They need not. Jesus in Luke 19:42 and Paul in Romans 11:25 explain that Israel is blinded nationally for the church age. Temporarily blinded not replaced. We are grafted in. National Israel has a future as the spiritual leadership of the world (Zech 8:23).

I find the amillennial and postmillennial views both to be incoherent. They are inconsistent with reality and the biblical text. I can evidence both points in that Satan’s deceptions have not been restrained. The numerous biblical proof texts have been cited throughout this series and the nations are demonstrably being deceived. The U.S. Center for World Missions estimates that Christianity’s is growing at about 2.3% annually, approximately equal to the growth rate of the world’s population. Islam is growing faster: about 2.9% and is thus Islam will surpass Christianity as the world’s main religion by 2023.[14] Whether this is completely accurate is immaterial to the point that the world is full of false religion and unbelief. Jesus warned of widespread deception and we certainly do see it today.

I sincerely cannot believe a person can read the bible without outside influence and come to a conclusion other than premillennialism. Just read Revelation 20, that is clear and literal 1000 year kingdom. The alternate views are imposed on the text for external reasons. Of course sincere Christians maintain these views but I just do not find their rationale compelling. To embrace allegory over literal meaning requires a more persuasive theological and exegetical basis than the arguments offered. I have demonstrated that Augustine’s basis was quite shallow and had nothing to do with exegesis. I think those views stand on mere stubborn tradition. While the reformers did a great service in the areas of soteriology and ecclesiology they were duly occupied and failed to correct eschatology back to the apostolic intention. The early church, which had intimate contact with John the author of the Apocalypse were verifiably premillennial. I find that decisive. Finally, no matter what one’s millennial position, true Christians all look forward to the soon return of our Lord Jesus Christ.

θά, μαράνα θά



[1] Ed Hindson, Revelation, 89.

[2]Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four: Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2005), 553.

[3] Geisler, Systematic Theology, 567.

[4]Geisler, Systematic Theology, 572.

[5]Elwell and Comfort, 896.

[6] Edward Hindson. Revelation: Unlocking the Future, (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2002), 203.

[7] John F. Walvoord, The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook, Includes Indexes. (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1990), 625.

[8] Geisler, Systematic Theology, 556.

[9] Geisler, Systematic Theology, 556.

[10] Geisler, Systematic Theology, 416.

[11] David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1996, c1992), 3:457.

[12] Quoted in Geisler, Systematic Theology, 569.

[13] Chuck and Nancy Missler. The Kingdom, Power and Glory: The Overcomer’s Handbook. Coeur d’Alene, ID: The King’s Highway Ministries. 2009. 100.

[14] Unattributed. “Growth Rate of Christianity & Islam” Religious Tolerance ORG, http://www.religioustolerance.org/growth_isl_chr.htm (accessed 06/10/2010).

Why Eschatology Matters Part IV: Amillennialism

continued from Why Eschatology Matters Part IV

I. Amillennial View: The Amillennial view can be traced back as far as the Alexandrian school when early church father Origen (AD 185-254) was the first to allegorize “reigning with Christ” to mean the spiritual growth of the soul. Origen’s penchant for allegory led him to views that today are considered heretical.[1] This influenced Augustine who once held the premillennial view but was disgusted by speculations about celebratory feasting during the millennium that he viewed as carnal. Augustine wrote,

“for I myself, too, once held this opinion [premillennialism].  But, as they assert that those who then rise again shall enjoy the leisure of immoderate carnal banquets, furnished with an amount of meat and drink such as not only to shock the feeling of the temperate, but even to surpass the measure of credulity itself, such assertions can be believed only by the carnal.” [2]

Also a North African Donatist, Tyconius, who favored Origen’s allegorical hermeneutic, influenced Augustine to change his view to a spiritualized one. Soon Augustine’s view was widely adopted by the Roman Catholic Church and was subsequently retained by reformers Martin Luther and John Calvin.[3] Today it is still the majority view of the mainline denominations.[4]

A. Basic Premises:

i. Millennium: The prefix a- indicates a straightforward negation. However, they actually do believe a millennium exists, just that it is now. The millennium is symbolic of the church age and is said to be fulfilled spiritually not literally.[5] Augustine popularized the idea that the millennium began with the incarnation and is fully realized by the church. Proponents disagree amongst themselves as to where this Millennium is located. Some believe it is now on earth in the church while others believe it is now in heaven.[6]

ii. Resurrection: The majority contend that there is only one physical resurrection of the righteous and the wicked. The “first resurrection” of Revelation 20 is understood as a spiritual in the sense that believer’s souls will go to heaven to reign with Christ spiritually.[7] The second is understood as physical and all are then judged.

iii. The Binding of Satan: They understand this as being in effect during the period between the first and second comings of Christ.[8]Accordingly, Satan is currently chained and cannot deceive the nations. Most believe that there will be a rebellion as Satan is released just prior to Christ’s return[9] Thus, the world will get worse not better. In this way they agree more with premillennialists than postmillennialists.

iv. The Reign of Christ: Christ is reigning now in the hearts of believers, they influence the culture by living out their faith.[10] He will return and judge the world and then start over with a new heavens and earth.

v. The Kingdom of God: The kingdom of God is present now in the world as Christ is ruling believers through the Spirit and his word. They also look forward to a future, the new heaven and new earth.[11]

vi. Israel: The Abrahamic and Davidic covenants were conditional and demand no future fulfillment. The church has replaced Israel as spiritual Israel. Thus there is no prophetic future for national Israel.[12]

vii. Hermeneutic: The necessary theory of interpretation is reminiscent of the Alexandrian tradition that prophecy is symbolic and need not be taken literally. A passage’s basic sense can be taken spiritually or even mystically. However, the lines are not so clearly defined as Dr. Norman Geisler explains,

Again, it complicates matters that even those who allegorize certain prophetic passages claim adherence to the historical-grammatical method of interpretation. (Some do admit to enhancing and expanding it to include an allegorical, symbolical, or typological understanding of certain texts.) The issue, then, boils down to the understanding and/or application (rather than the name) of the method of interpreting (hermeneutics).[13]

B. Points of Strength:

i. The millennium is only found in Revelation 20, which being a book of apocalyptic imagery, can justifiably be interpreted symbolically.[14]

ii. It is a long standing tradition in many denominations.

iii. The view tacitly acknowledges that the world is not getting better and better.[15] This agrees with historical reality.

iv. In the Bible, the word “thousand” is occasionally used symbolically (cf. 1 Chron. 16:15; Ps. 50:10).[16] This provides a rationale for their interpretation of “thousand” as an indefinite period.

v. Because the sheep and goat judgment in Matt 25:3 is interpreted as the same event as the great white throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15). They avoid the perceived conflict when Jesus teaches that judgment takes place at his return.

vi. They avoid explaining how people enter the kingdom in natural bodies.

vii. According to Riddlebarger, “Its understanding that imminent return of Christ is the consummation of all things and marks the fullness of both the kingdom of God and the age to come.”[17]

C. Points of Weakness:

i. It is hard to imagine how one could come to this conclusion by reading the book of Revelation alone. This view appears imposed upon the plain meaning of the text.

ii. The New Testament overwhelmingly teaches that Satan is actively opposing the church (1 Cor. 7:5, 2 Cor. 4:4, 2 Cor. 2:11, 2 Cor. 11:14, Eph. 2:2, Jms. 4:7, 1 Tim 1:20, 1 Pt. 5:8) and in fact “the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” (1 Jn. 5:19b, ESV)

iii. It interprets the two resurrections of Revelation 20 differently, one spiritual (Rev.20:4) and one physical (Rev.20:5). However the same Greek word, zao, for “came to life” is used for both. Additionally, the passage itself does not indicate that the writer intended a difference of meaning.[18] Verses five and six directly contradict the notion that the first resurrection is anything but bodily physical resurrection of believers.

iv. There were no chapter divisions in the original manuscript and chapter 20 begins with the Greek preposition kai having causal and copulative relation to Christ’s parousia in chapter 19.[19] For instance, the binding of Satan is inextricably chronologically connected to Christ’s return.

v. Even though the word “thousand” is used occasionally as a long period (e.g. 1 Chron 16:15), it appears over one hundred times and only a few are non-literal, and those are hyperbole not allegory.[20]

vi. The church does not have 12 tribes and in Luke 22:30 Jesus makes clear that National Israel will not only be present in the future kingdom but that they will also retain tribal identity. If the church is now “spiritual Israel” and God was finished with National Israel this simply would not follow. Also note that the 144,000 in Revelation are chosen from the 12 tribes, again ruling out the church.

Next up Postmillennialism


[1]David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1996, c1992), 4:834.

[2]Augustine. City of God, Book 20, chapter 7.

[3]Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four: Church, Last Things (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2005), 548.

[4]John F. Walvoord, The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook, Includes Indexes. (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1990), 624.

[5] Edward Hindson. Revelation: Unlocking the Future, (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2002), 86.

[6]Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Israelology : The Missing Link in Systematic Theology, Previous Ed.: 1993., Rev. ed. (Tustin, Calif.: Ariel Ministries, 1994), 123.

[7]Geisler, Systematic Theology, 549.

[8]R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000, c1998) ch. 9.

[9]Fruchtenbaum, Israelology, 128.

[10]Sproul, The Last Days, 9.

[11]Sproul, The Last Days, 9.

[12]Hindson, Revelation, 86.

[13] Geisler, Systematic Theology, 413.

[14]Fruchtenbaum, Israelology, 135.

[15]Fruchtenbaum, Israelology, 126.

[16]Geisler, Systematic Theology, 550.

[17] Kim Riddlebarger, (http://pjcockrell.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/eschatology-q-a-what-are-the-strengths-and-weaknesses-of-the-different-millennial-views/) accessed 07/04/2010.

[18]Walter A. Elwell and Philip Wesley Comfort, Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale reference library (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), 896.

[19]James Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible : Showing Every Word of the Text of the Common English Version of the Canonical Books, and Every Occurrence of Each Word in Regular Order., electronic ed. (Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship., 1996), G2532.

[20]Geisler, Systematic Theology, 558.

Why Eschatology Matters Part Four

MILLENNIAL VIEWS

continued from Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

Christians of all denominations routinely implore “thy kingdom come” without giving it a second thought. It follows that if one is still asking for something to come, then it cannot be fully present. Even so, the expectation for a literal millennial reign of Christ on earth is perhaps the most controversial subject in eschatology. It is inescapable that the bible plainly proclaims it. Revelation 20:1-6 speaks of a one thousand year period when believers reign with the Lord Jesus after his return.

Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years. (Revelation 20:6)

This plain sense view is also called “chiliasm” from the Greek word chilioi for thousand. Although the word “thousand” is used six times in Revelation chapter 20, the duration is a major point of contention. There is an acknowledged history of allegorical interpretation deeply entrenched in ecclesiastic tradition. Because of this, the majority of the denominational church denies a literal millennium.[1] There are three principle views concerning the millennium promised by God in Revelation chapter twenty: Premillennial (divided into pre & post tribulational positions on the chart below), Postmillennial, and Amillennial.

My next post will outline the Amillennial view and its theological implications.


[1]John F. Walvoord, The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook, Includes Indexes. (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1990), 624.