Millennialism is no longer part of Christianity

AdamjEdgar

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2021
449
139
52
Melbourne
✟17,432.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
How can one argue that the Church and Israel share identity as God's People, under two entirely different covenants, one made exclusively with the Jewish people as part of the covenant made with them on Mt. Horeb; and the other made inclusively with the whole world by the crucified flesh and shed blood of the Incarnate God-Man in which the former covenant and all its ritual, rites, and rules abrogated by the new and better covenant?

Well, very easily. A simple reading of the New Testament should suffice on this matter.



If they had believed it necessary of Christ's Faithful to observe the Shabbat they would have said so. Except not only did they not say that we must observe the Shabbat, they taught the exact opposite.



Could you clarify what exactly you're saying here?

-CryptoLutheran
Hebrews 8:8 says that we are not living under two different covenants...ie one for Jews and one for Gentiles'...

"Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,

when I will make a new covenant

with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah"

The difference between the 2 covenants, in the first the people said all these things we will do.
In the second God said all these things I will do (that is how one should be interpreting the statement "on better promises")

Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,428
26,868
Pacific Northwest
✟731,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Hebrews 8:8 says that we are not living under two different covenants...ie one for Jews and one for Gentiles'...

"Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,

when I will make a new covenant

with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah"

The difference between the 2 covenants, in the first the people said all these things we will do.
In the second God said all these things I will do (that is how one should be interpreting the statement "on better promises")

Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31

Of course we aren't living under two different covenants.

I won't speak concerning unbelieving Jews, as that's not my place. But for Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, there is the one covenant of grace in which we live. The things of the former covenant (which the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews says has been made obsolete) simply have no application for us. Christianity maintains that all the covenants God made in former times have been fulfilled in Jesus--so the covenants God established through Abraham, Moses, and David have all accomplished their purpose: The Lord Messiah, Jesus, has come.

This covenant began in Jerusalem, proclaimed by the Apostles first among the house of Israel and Judah (Jews and Samaritans), but as we see from the plain words of the New Testament, the Gospel went forth out from Jerusalem and not only the Jews of the Diaspora, but the Gentiles as well.

And so faithful (that is, believing) Israel, the natural olive branches on the olive tree have been joined with the wild olive branches which have been grafted upon the tree. And so Israel is not only Jews only, but Gentiles also--"For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God to save all who believe, the Jew first, and also the Greek." (Romans 1:16).

Thus faithful, believing Israel (from the Christian perspective) is the Church; and consists of both Jew and Gentile together in Christ; and in Christ there is no distinction between Jew or Gentile, circumcised or uncircumcised, male or female, slave or free, etc.

What covenant does the Church--faithful, believing Israel--have? The one delivered to the Jews alone through Moses? Of course not. But the one established in the Lord Messiah by His own life, death, and resurrection for all people.

The former covenant, with its rites, rituals, sabbaths, new moons, days of observance, et al simply does not exist for us.

The Sabbath, like all things of the former covenant, belongs to the former covenant established through Moses. The Covenant established through Christ--who is greater than Moses--has none of these things. The only "sabbath" in the new covenant is our joyous rest in Christ, He who has said both "I will give you rest" and "[I am] the Lord of the Sabbath".

The Sabbath pointed to Jesus not Jesus to the Sabbath, which is why He can proclaim Himself Lord over the Sabbath. Jesus is greater than the Sabbath, the Sabbath existed for Him, to point to Him, its purpose is fulfilled. The Sabbath is therefore nothing more than a shadow, a glimmer, a prefiguring foretaste of the true substance of Christ. The rest from our earthly labors prefigures the rest which the world finds in the Gospel; for we look forward to the glorious age when there is never-ceasing Sabbath not on the seventh day of the week which comes and then it goes; but rather the never-ceasing Sabbath of the eighth day, the everlasting and eternal day of God's new creation. The Day which began with Christ's resurrection, in which we live now by faith, and in which we shall live forever in the Olam HaBa, the Age to Come, world without end.

If one observes the seventh day as a day of rest out of their freedom in Christ, then it is for the glory of God. If, however, one observes the seventh day as a day of rest out of the misguided belief that they must do so for the sake of righteousness, then they deny Christ in their false works.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

AdamjEdgar

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2021
449
139
52
Melbourne
✟17,432.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Of course we aren't living under two different covenants.

I won't speak concerning unbelieving Jews, as that's not my place. But for Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, there is the one covenant of grace in which we live. The things of the former covenant (which the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews says has been made obsolete) simply have no application for us. Christianity maintains that all the covenants God made in former times have been fulfilled in Jesus--so the covenants God established through Abraham, Moses, and David have all accomplished their purpose: The Lord Messiah, Jesus, has come.

This covenant began in Jerusalem, proclaimed by the Apostles first among the house of Israel and Judah (Jews and Samaritans), but as we see from the plain words of the New Testament, the Gospel went forth out from Jerusalem and not only the Jews of the Diaspora, but the Gentiles as well.

And so faithful (that is, believing) Israel, the natural olive branches on the olive tree have been joined with the wild olive branches which have been grafted upon the tree. And so Israel is not only Jews only, but Gentiles also--"For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God to save all who believe, the Jew first, and also the Greek." (Romans 1:16).

Thus faithful, believing Israel (from the Christian perspective) is the Church; and consists of both Jew and Gentile together in Christ; and in Christ there is no distinction between Jew or Gentile, circumcised or uncircumcised, male or female, slave or free, etc.

What covenant does the Church--faithful, believing Israel--have? The one delivered to the Jews alone through Moses? Of course not. But the one established in the Lord Messiah by His own life, death, and resurrection for all people.

The former covenant, with its rites, rituals, sabbaths, new moons, days of observance, et al simply does not exist for us.

The Sabbath, like all things of the former covenant, belongs to the former covenant established through Moses. The Covenant established through Christ--who is greater than Moses--has none of these things. The only "sabbath" in the new covenant is our joyous rest in Christ, He who has said both "I will give you rest" and "[I am] the Lord of the Sabbath".

The Sabbath pointed to Jesus not Jesus to the Sabbath, which is why He can proclaim Himself Lord over the Sabbath. Jesus is greater than the Sabbath, the Sabbath existed for Him, to point to Him, its purpose is fulfilled. The Sabbath is therefore nothing more than a shadow, a glimmer, a prefiguring foretaste of the true substance of Christ. The rest from our earthly labors prefigures the rest which the world finds in the Gospel; for we look forward to the glorious age when there is never-ceasing Sabbath not on the seventh day of the week which comes and then it goes; but rather the never-ceasing Sabbath of the eighth day, the everlasting and eternal day of God's new creation. The Day which began with Christ's resurrection, in which we live now by faith, and in which we shall live forever in the Olam HaBa, the Age to Come, world without end.

If one observes the seventh day as a day of rest out of their freedom in Christ, then it is for the glory of God. If, however, one observes the seventh day as a day of rest out of the misguided belief that they must do so for the sake of righteousness, then they deny Christ in their false works.

-CryptoLutheran
What Hebrews actually means (and it is simply re iterating what Jeremiah prophesied centuries earlier) both covenants are given to the Israelites and Judaens!

It is a false doctrine that the Old covenant was for the Jews and the New Covenant is for the Gentiles as is claimed by modern Sunday worshipping churches. They use this argument in order to ignore the 4th Commandment "remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. In six days you shall do all your work, however the Seventh Day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God"

Denying Christ is to deny his commandments (plural) ie 10 commandments.

The new commandment (singular) that Jesus gave is not doing away with the original Moral Law. Gods laws are eternal...the 10 commandments are the standard by which all are judged. All Jesus did was summarise the existing moral law into two simple phrases...
Love God (commandments 1-3)
Love thy Neighbour (commandments 5-10)

They are joined by the Sabbath (Jesus is lord of the Sabbath and the mediator of the new covenant prophesied in Jeremiah ch 31)

The point of Jesus death is to provide us a cloak of righteousness so that the wages of sin (eternal death) are not automatically applied to all humanity. That is the point of the entire plan of salvation!

Believing in the relevance of the Law does not mean "we are saved by works"...that is ridiculous.

People just do not get the simple truth Jesus died for our sins, however, one cannot know what sin is unless there is a moral law by which we are judged! God has now written His Laws (10 commandments) on our hearts. That does not mean they no longer exist!
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,428
26,868
Pacific Northwest
✟731,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
What Hebrews actually means (and it is simply re iterating what Jeremiah prophesied centuries earlier) both covenants are given to the Israelites and Judaens!

It is a false doctrine that the Old covenant was for the Jews and the New Covenant is for the Gentiles as is claimed by modern Sunday worshipping churches.

Straw man. Re-read my post.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

AdamjEdgar

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2021
449
139
52
Melbourne
✟17,432.00
Country
Australia
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Re-read my post.

-CryptoLutheran
I will ignore the first remark in your post (one should not demonstrate poor intellect through the use of such phases as that which you used), and just deal with the doctrinal facts...

your claim appears to be that the first covenant did not allow for the salvation of gentiles. That is completely false doctrine. The two covenants actually mean the following:

God's people has always been anyone who accepts him! The israelites were simply the chosen people for spreading his word...as opposed to his chosen and the only ones who could be saved (as you appear to claim...I welcome being corrected on that interpretation of what you wrote).

When we convert someone to Christianity, we usually convert them to our own denomination. That is no different from the israelite model...we follow that same model. The problem was, the israelites abused the role they had to play in this, and made it a burden to all (including themselves).

Covenant one : the people make the promise "all these things WE WILL DO"
Covenant two: "God is now saying all these things I WILL DO" This is why the second covenant is based on better promises...the onus is now upon Gods shoulders to do the work for us in spreading his gospel to all the world. He speaks directly to the hearts of all men, he writes his laws on the hearts of all men. The Holy spirit is actively working for us.

"The promises of the new covenant are not better because they are different but rather because of the manner in which they are given to us. John Calvin reminds us that although the salvation promised to old covenant and new covenant believers is the same, the old covenant saints did not enjoy the same clarity of revelation that we do. " Better Promises | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,428
26,868
Pacific Northwest
✟731,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I will ignore the first remark in your post (one should not demonstrate poor intellect through the use of such phases as that which you used), and just deal with the doctrinal facts...

your claim appears to be that the first covenant did not allow for the salvation of gentiles.

This would be a misreading of what I was saying then. I didn't touch on the subject of the salvation of Jews or Gentiles under the Old Covenant at all. But since we are now talking about this, let me make a statement concerning that: The Old Covenant didn't have anything to do with salvation--nobody, Jew or Gentile, is promised salvation under the Old Covenant.

Salvation is found exclusively in Jesus Christ and what He has done.

The Old Covenant pointed toward the coming of the Savior.

And before anyone misunderstands me, I am not saying no one was saved prior to the Lord's birth. I am saying that the Old Covenant did not promise anyone salvation--it did not provide salvation. There is no salvation in the Old Covenant. Salvation, for both Jew and Gentile, before Christ was still from Christ.

For this reason our Lord Jesus Christ says that Abraham looked forward to His day. Moses was not saved under the covenant which he was himself the instrument of; Moses is saved under the New Covenant of Jesus Christ.

That is completely false doctrine. The two covenants actually mean the following:

God's people has always been anyone who accepts him! The israelites were simply the chosen people for spreading his word...as opposed to his chosen and the only ones who could be saved (as you appear to claim...I welcome being corrected on that interpretation of what you wrote).

Israel's chosenness is bound to God's promise to Abraham. The covenant established with Abraham was that from him would come the promised Seed, which St. Paul says--quite plainly--is Jesus Christ. Israel was chosen by God because from Israel comes Jesus Christ.

The Old Covenant did not establish ancient Israel to be an evangelizing people--but a people who dwell in the land promised to their fathers, to practice God's Torah, and in this way be a distinct and peculiar people among the nations. And from this nation of people would come the Messiah, our Lord Jesus.

Jesus is not just another page in the history of Israel. Jesus is the whole book.

When we convert someone to Christianity,

We don't. We don't convert anyone to Christianity.

Conversion is the work of the Holy Spirit worked through the power of the Gospel through the God-given Means of His grace: Word and Sacrament.

We preach the Gospel because God Himself works through the preaching of the Gospel to create faith, and through this faith justifies sinners by imputing to them the full righteousness of Jesus Christ.

we usually convert them to our own denomination. That is no different from the israelite model...we follow that same model. The problem was, the israelites abused the role they had to play in this, and made it a burden to all (including themselves).

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Neither the ancient Israelites, nor we ourselves, convert anyone.

Covenant one : the people make the promise "all these things WE WILL DO"
Covenant two: "God is now saying all these things I WILL DO" This is why the second covenant is based on better promises...the onus is now upon Gods shoulders to do the work for us in spreading his gospel to all the world. He speaks directly to the hearts of all men, he writes his laws on the hearts of all men. The Holy spirit is actively working for us.

You have some things right, and some things wrong.

The old covenant: God promised a specific people that they would dwell in the land of their fathers, if they would hold firm to His Torah. We can see what happened when they betrayed God, as the writings of the Prophets and the Histories show us.

The New Covenant: God fulfills all of His ancient promises, the Messiah has come, and in Him there is peace with God, eternal life, and the promise of the restoration of all things in the Age to Come. It is not about instructions written on tablets of stone, but the very Law of God written on our hearts, inscribed upon us by the Holy Spirit who reminds us of what Christ our God has said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind; and you shall love your neighbor as yourself."

"The promises of the new covenant are not better because they are different but rather because of the manner in which they are given to us. John Calvin reminds us that although the salvation promised to old covenant and new covenant believers is the same, the old covenant saints did not enjoy the same clarity of revelation that we do. " Better Promises | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org

Of course the promises of the New Covenant are better because they are different. These are totally different promises: There is no promise of salvation from the Old Covenant. No where does the old covenant promise or deliver salvation. Rather, the old covenant prefigures the salvation we have received in the new, this is seen in the deliverance of Israel from Egypt in the Exodus and the bringing them into the promised land. The deliverance of God's people from earthly tyranny prefigures the deliverance of all people from the tyranny of sin, death, hell, and the devil.

The better promises of the new covenant are salvation in Jesus Christ. For we have such a great high priest who makes intercession, who has made reconciliation for us by His own life spilled out unto death, and is our Peace with God. There is no peace, no shalom with God without Jesus Christ. That very Shalom in which we share every time we celebrate the Most Holy Supper of the Eucharist: The very broken body and shed blood of Jesus Christ our Lord, Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0
Apr 19, 2020
1,161
1,048
Virginia
✟95,798.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The following is long, but is a very good presentation of the three major views on millennialism, if you would like a clearer understanding of the controversy. Pre mil.,
A mil. and post mil.( The presenter is pre millennialism).

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,128
5,685
49
The Wild West
✟472,750.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I keep seeing people posting their ideas on the future "millennium", but millennialism was abolished by the first Council of Constantinople, and the Nicene Creed was changed to read, regarding Christ's kingdom, "whose kingdom shall have no end".

Millennialism is contrary to the Nicene Creed.

Indeed it is. Also the Left Behind novels were poorly written and offensive to Romanian, Carpatho-Rusyn, and Eastern Orthodox Christians.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,128
5,685
49
The Wild West
✟472,750.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Not really. The addition to the Nicene Creed was meant to refute the stated Sabellianism of Marcellus of Ancyra and others. Their doctrine included an end to Christ's reign and which is explicitly singled out for condemnation by the council in Canon #1.

Canon 1

The Faith of the Three Hundred and Eighteen Fathers assembled at Nice in Bithynia shall not be set aside, but shall remain firm. And every heresy shall be anathematized, particularly that of the Eunomians or [Anomæans, the Arians or] Eudoxians, and that of the Semi-Arians or Pneumatomachi, and that of the Sabellians, and that of the Marcellians, and that of the Photinians, and that of the Apollinarians. (Constantinople - Canons of the 381 Council)

Whose kingdom will have no end is cited to be explained in canon 1 above:

Creed
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sits at the Right Hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead. Whose kingdom shall have no end. (I)

And [we believe] in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver-of-Life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And [we believe] in one, holy, (II) Catholic and Apostolic Church. We acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, [and] we look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen. (CHURCH FATHERS: First Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381))

Therefore, the Sabellian view (a corruption of 1 Corinthians 15:28) of Christ's reign coming to an end was condemned but not millennialism. The early orthodox fathers espousing millennialism did not advocate Christ's reign coming to an end.

Almost. The anti-Chiliast clause was inserted in response to a different heretical sect, the Apollinarians, who believed a deeply flawed Christology that the human body of our Lord was possessed by God. They also were Chiliasts.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
After quoting HTacianas as saying:
"I keep seeing people posting their ideas on the future 'millennium', but millennialism was abolished by the first Council of Constantinople, and the Nicene Creed was changed to read, regarding Christ's kingdom, 'whose kingdom shall have no end'.

Millennialism is contrary to the Nicene Creed."


Indeed it is. Also the Left Behind novels were poorly written and offensive to Romanian, Carpatho-Rusyn, and Eastern Orthodox Christians.

Truth is determined by what the Bible says, not by what church councils or creeds say.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,128
5,685
49
The Wild West
✟472,750.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
After quoting HTacianas as saying:
"I keep seeing people posting their ideas on the future 'millennium', but millennialism was abolished by the first Council of Constantinople, and the Nicene Creed was changed to read, regarding Christ's kingdom, 'whose kingdom shall have no end'.

Millennialism is contrary to the Nicene Creed."




Truth is determined by what the Bible says, not by what church councils or creeds say.

The Church Councils and Creeds gave us the correct interpretation of Scripture where multiple interpretations are impossible. Also, the same Early church that had the Council of Constantinople, whose creed, declaring the Kingdom of Jesus Christ will have no end, is the Statement of Faith, is the one who gave us the Bible in its present form, and whose doctrines and practices Luther, Cranmer, Calvin, and Wesley were trying to restore, with varying levels of success; the four Eastern communions preserved mostly intact the faith of the early church, but with some liturgical losses, despite an overall improvement in church music. For example, the ancient Divine Liturgy of St. Mark is no longer routinely used by the Eastern Orthodox, even though a recension that is interchangeable with their Divine Liturgies of St. Basil and St. Chrysostom was compiled in the 1890s, and likewise they gave up the West Syriac Rite, which was preserved only by the Syriac Orthodox and Maronites. But Rome did worse, in letting the Gallican, Beneventan and Celtic rites die off completely, and allowing the Mozarabic Rite, the ancient liturgy of Spain, to dwindle to a single chapel in the Cathedral in Toledo.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
After quoting HTacianas as saying:
"I keep seeing people posting their ideas on the future 'millennium', but millennialism was abolished by the first Council of Constantinople, and the Nicene Creed was changed to read, regarding Christ's kingdom, 'whose kingdom shall have no end'.

Millennialism is contrary to the Nicene Creed."




Truth is determined by what the Bible says, not by what church councils or creeds say.
But, Jesus and the Apostles taught Amillennialism. Peter preached it at Pentecost.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
But, Jesus and the Apostles taught Amillennialism. Peter preached it at Pentecost.
Amillennialism is not taught ANYWHERE in the ENTIRE Bible.

Instead, although only Revelation 20 says how long it will last, the scriptures are literally FILLED with EXPLICIT statements about a future PHYSICAL kingdom ON THIS EARTH, which it says will be established AFTER the Lord returns, not BEFORE.

Furthermore, saying that Christ's kingdom "will have no end" is NOT, as has been alleged here, an Amillennial statement. For although Revelatin 20 EXPLICITLY says there will be a rebellion at the end of "the thousand years," it ALSO, just as EXPLICITLY, says that the rebellion will be crushed, So it clearly says that Christ's reign will continue after "the thousand years" is over.
 
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Amillennialism is not taught ANYWHERE in the ENTIRE Bible.

Instead, although only Revelation 20 says how long it will last, the scriptures are literally FILLED with EXPLICIT statements about a future PHYSICAL kingdom ON THIS EARTH, which it says will be established AFTER the Lord returns, not BEFORE.

Furthermore, saying that Christ's kingdom "will have no end" is NOT, as has been alleged here, an mil statement. For although Revelatin 20 EXPLICITLY says there will be a rebellion at the end of "the thousand years," it ALDO, just as EXPLICITLY says that the rebellion will be crushed, So Christ's reign will continue after "the thouand years" is over.
Only because you are blind to it.

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3 (KJV 1900)
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Only because you are blind to it.

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3 (KJV 1900)
No, Amillennialism is BASED on NOT BELIEVING what the Bible EXPLICITLY says.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hazelelponi

:sighing:
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,360
8,763
55
USA
✟688,339.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I keep seeing people posting their ideas on the future "millennium", but millennialism was abolished by the first Council of Constantinople, and the Nicene Creed was changed to read, regarding Christ's kingdom, "whose kingdom shall have no end".

Millennialism is contrary to the Nicene Creed.

It's not nonexistent, we ARE now IN the millennium, which is not a specific number of years, but rather describes the time between the two advents.

The above is traditional thought.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
It's not nonexistent, we ARE now IN the millennium, which is not a specific number of years, but rather describes the time between the two advents.

The above is traditional thought.
But is is contrary to the scriptures.

Whether the 1000 year duration of the future earthly kingdom is literal or merely metaphorical for "a very long time," is a mere detail. The scriptures could not be more clear in repeatedly and explicitly stating that, after the Lord returns, He will set up a physical kingdom on ths earth, BEFORE the time of the New Heavens and New Earth.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, Amillennialism is BASED on NOT BELIEVING what the Bible EXPLICITLY says.
Only the born again can see the present kingdom. I believe it is possible someone can be born-again but deceived and look for the Pharisee's Millennial Kingdom to their own hurt.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,428
26,868
Pacific Northwest
✟731,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
But is is contrary to the scriptures.

Whether the 1000 year duration of the future earthly kingdom is literal or merely metaphorical for "a very long time," is a mere detail. The scriptures could not be more clear in repeatedly and explicitly stating that, after the Lord returns, He will set up a physical kingdom on ths earth, BEFORE the time of the New Heavens and New Earth.

The only place in the Bible where that idea could be taken is from the passage concerning the thousand years in the Apocalypse.

There is no "Millennium" anywhere else in Scripture. There is no "physical kingdom on this earth, before the time of the new heavens and the new earth" mentioned in Scripture unless one takes this one very particular passage in the Revelation literally.

What we do see elsewhere in Scripture is that Christ has ascended and seated at the right hand of the Father until His return, when He returns there is not temporal kingdom to be established, there is only the everlasting reign of God when God renews and restores all things--new heavens and new earth. In the Acts of the Apostles St. Peter said,

"Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send the Messiah appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time of the restoration of all things, about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago." - Acts of the Apostles 3:19-21

When the Lord returns, it is for the restoration of all things, even as the ancient prophets have spoken, such as Isaiah who speaks of the time of new heavens and new earth, when wolf and lamb lay down together, eat grass together, the lion shall eat straw like the ox, etc. (Isaiah 65:25, Isaiah 11:5-9), when the knowledge of the glory of God shall cover the earth as waters cover the seas (Habakkuk 2:9).

Likewise, the Apostle has written concerning the resurrection of the dead at the coming of the Lord in glory that He must reign--at the right hand of the Father--until the end, until every enemy is defeated. The last enemy to be defeated is death, at which point He shall hand the kingdom to the Father and God shall be all-in-all (1 Corinthians 15:20-28), the total annhilation of death is at the resurrection, where it is said, "Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?" (ibid, verses 54-55).

Christ has ascended, the Son of Man taken up in the clouds before the Ancient of Days (Acts of the Apostles 1:9) receiving kingdom, glory, and everlasting dominion (Daniel 7:13-14), as Christ Himself has said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matthew 28:18).

Time and again the Scriptures tell us that Christ, having ascended, reigns and has authority as the King Messiah, exalted to the right hand of the Father (Philippians 2:9). Christ is exalted, not because He was deficient in glory as God (He is, of course, the eternal Son of the Father, God of God, True God); but the exaltation of the Messiah is about the Enthronement of the Messiah. Jesus has taken His throne as King Messiah. He sits on the throne of His father David forever (Luke 1:32-33), not an earthly throne in Jerusalem, but that He as Messiah ben David reigns with everlasting dominion and kingdom.

The Messiah is enthroned, reigning at the right hand of the Father until the time of the end, Christ returns as judge of the living and the dead (2 Timothy 4:1), this we long and await for, our blessed hope of the Parousia of our "Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13), when the dead are raised (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, 1 Corinthians 15:20-24) and God makes all things new--new heavens and new earth.

An earthly, literal, thousand year kingdom is not based upon a thorough and proper reading of the entire counsel of Scripture; but a very particular interpretation of a passage from the Apocalypse of St. John--a book that constantly uses symbols and metaphors.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟531,725.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
There are a literal host of explicitly stated scriptures that explicitly promised the ancient nation of Israel that it would be re-established in its ancient homeland.
The only place in the Bible where that idea could be taken is from the passage concerning the thousand years in the Apocalypse.

There is no "Millennium" anywhere else in Scripture. There is no "physical kingdom on this earth, before the time of the new heavens and the new earth" mentioned in Scripture unless one takes this one very particular passage in the Revelation literally.

What we do see elsewhere in Scripture is that Christ has ascended and seated at the right hand of the Father until His return, when He returns there is not temporal kingdom to be established, there is only the everlasting reign of God when God renews and restores all things--new heavens and new earth. In the Acts of the Apostles St. Peter said,

"Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send the Messiah appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time of the restoration of all things, about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago." - Acts of the Apostles 3:19-21

When the Lord returns, it is for the restoration of all things, even as the ancient prophets have spoken, such as Isaiah who speaks of the time of new heavens and new earth, when wolf and lamb lay down together, eat grass together, the lion shall eat straw like the ox, etc. (Isaiah 65:25, Isaiah 11:5-9), when the knowledge of the glory of God shall cover the earth as waters cover the seas (Habakkuk 2:9).

Likewise, the Apostle has written concerning the resurrection of the dead at the coming of the Lord in glory that He must reign--at the right hand of the Father--until the end, until every enemy is defeated. The last enemy to be defeated is death, at which point He shall hand the kingdom to the Father and God shall be all-in-all (1 Corinthians 15:20-28), the total annhilation of death is at the resurrection, where it is said, "Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, O Death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?" (ibid, verses 54-55).

Christ has ascended, the Son of Man taken up in the clouds before the Ancient of Days (Acts of the Apostles 1:9) receiving kingdom, glory, and everlasting dominion (Daniel 7:13-14), as Christ Himself has said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" (Matthew 28:18).

Time and again the Scriptures tell us that Christ, having ascended, reigns and has authority as the King Messiah, exalted to the right hand of the Father (Philippians 2:9). Christ is exalted, not because He was deficient in glory as God (He is, of course, the eternal Son of the Father, God of God, True God); but the exaltation of the Messiah is about the Enthronement of the Messiah. Jesus has taken His throne as King Messiah. He sits on the throne of His father David forever (Luke 1:32-33), not an earthly throne in Jerusalem, but that He as Messiah ben David reigns with everlasting dominion and kingdom.

The Messiah is enthroned, reigning at the right hand of the Father until the time of the end, Christ returns as judge of the living and the dead (2 Timothy 4:1), this we long and await for, our blessed hope of the Parousia of our "Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13), when the dead are raised (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, 1 Corinthians 15:20-24) and God makes all things new--new heavens and new earth.

An earthly, literal, thousand year kingdom is not based upon a thorough and proper reading of the entire counsel of Scripture; but a very particular interpretation of a passage from the Apocalypse of St. John--a book that constantly uses symbols and metaphors.

-CryptoLutheran


There are a literal host of explicitly stated scriptures that promised the ancient nation of Israel that it would be re-established in its ancient homeland. Jeremiah 31 literally uses that very word, "nation" in a promise that Israel would never cease to exist.

But God did not just make these promises to the ancient nation of "Israel." He also made them to both of the ancient sub-nations of “Ephraim” and “Judah” in Isaiah 11:11-15, Ezekiel 37:15-28 and Zechariah 9:12-17, and to each of “the twelve tribes of Israel” by name in Ezekiel 48:1-8 and 23-19. He further made explicitly stated promises to the descendants of “Phinehas” in Numbers 25:10-13, to the descendants of “Zadok” in Ezekiel 44:15-16, to the descendants of “Nathan,” “Levi,” and “Shimei,” in Zechariah 12:12-13, to the descendants of the ancient “Levites” in Jeremiah 33:18 and Ezekiel 44:10-16, and to the descendants of “Jonadab” in Jeremiah 35:18-19. He also made explicitly stated promises to the “mountains of Israel,” along with “the hills, the rivers, the valleys, the desolate wastes, and the cities that have been forsaken, which became plunder and mockery to the rest of the nations all around” in Ezekiel 36:1-10, to the plot of real estate defined by specifying its borders in Ezekiel 47:13-20, to “Zion” in Zechariah 9:13, Joel 3:16-17 and Micah 4:2-13, and to the city of “Jerusalem” in Jeremiah 32:32-44 and 33:16, Joel 3:1-21, Micah 4:2-8, and Zechariah 14:2-21 and 12:1-9.

All these promises were made to the ancient “nation” of “Israel,” using terms that no scripture even implies could even possibly mean “the church.” But the promises did not stop there. Our God also made explicitly stated promises to the ancient nations of “Assyria” and “Egypt” in Isaiah 19:22-24, to the ancient nations of “Moab,” “Ammon,” and “Elam” in Jeremiah 48:47, Jeremiah 49:6, and Jeremiah 49:39, to “Sodom” and “Samaria” in Ezekiel 16:53-55, and finally, to the world generally in Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3, and Romans 11:15.

So, even if you were correct in claiming that the “thousand years” of Revelation 20:1-8 is only a metaphor, simply meaning “a very long time,” this period is explicitly promised in many other scriptures. So whether this promised period of bliss will actually last “a thousand years,” or will only last “a very long time,” is only a minor detail. For it will most certainly take place, regardless of how long it will last. And anyone who denies this is making God out to be a liar.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Semper-Fi
Upvote 0