Historic Premillennialism vs Amillennialism

While the whole of Revelation is not completely in chronological order, many of the events described happen in succession. The succession can be determined by the language used, and by comparing scripture with scripture. Some events are repeated and enlarged upon. Some events are out of place, but their order can be discerned.

Here's an example. Revelation 20 describes events surrounding the thousand year reign.

The order of Revelation 20 concerning the thousand year reign is sequential, with a few exceptions which are easy to spot.

• Revelation 20:5-6 The rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is describing the wicked that died by the word of Jesus at the second coming in Revelation 19:21. It cannot mean the saints because they were gathered at the second coming.
• Revelation 20:9 Satan and the wicked compass the beloved city, but it isn't described as coming down from heaven until Revelation 21:1-2. For Satan and the wicked to compass the city it had to have come down at some point within the thousand year reign or at the end of it, before Satan is loosed and the wicked are resurrected and gathered by him to the beloved city. Why did John then describe it coming down in John 21:1-2, afterward? So that we could read and experience the hope and joy of that scene. God wipes away all tears. No more death. No more sorrow. No more crying. No more pain. The former things are passed away.
• Revelation 20:11-15 repeats and enlarges Revelation 20:4,9-10, describing the judgment and the execution of judgment.

I can't read it as anything other than literal. It is prophecy that we are meant to understand, so we can look for real events in the past, present and future.

The use of symbols doesn't cancel out the literal and make it figurative; for example, if one looks at Daniel 2, 7 and 8, symbols are used, but the events are quite literal and in succession. Literal kingdoms, one after another.

In Revelation 13 the same symbols of Daniel 7's first three kingdoms are found in the description of the beast that rises out of the sea. This is quite deliberate as the symbols of Daniel 7 link the little horn to the sea beast of Revelation 13. They are literally one and the same, but at different points in time, as shown by the deadly wound that is healed (meaning it loses power for a time, but power is restored).

In the description of the beast that rises out of the sea, the sea is symbolic, but is defined in Revelation 17:15 as peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. Therefore one can conclude that the beast (a kingdom) rises in a populated area. The beast that rises out of the earth is described next. One can reasonably conclude that the earth is an unpopulated area if the sea is a symbol for a populated area. Even Genesis 1:10 calls the dry land earth.

Scripture interprets itself. Prophecy is sure. History fills in the blanks of prophecy, so that we can know the times we live in. Daniel helps us understand Revelation. Revelation 17 is an expand and enlarge of Revelation 13. If you bring these things together it reveals the prophetic panorama. And we haven't even touched on the rest of Daniel and Revelation, all of which is relevant to the overall picture.

9Rock9 said:

Hello!

I'm undecided about eschatology but doing some research on it. I think good points are made for both amillennialism and premillennialism. The only view I currently hold to with is inaugurated eschatology (or "already and not yet") where most prophecy has double fulfillment. It's normally associated with George Eldon Ladd, who was a premillennialist, but I don't see why one can't be amillennial and also agree with inaugurated eschatology.

I'm wondering if one can hold to a non-literalistic premillennialism?

Like, I don't think the events in Revelation are strictly chronological and probably could be oit of order or just the same events from different angles.

I also don't know if I believe the 1,000 years mentioned in the book to be be a literal millennium.

Could one believe in a Millennial State after the Second Coming, but not think the Millennial Kingdom will be a literal 1,000 years?

Click to expand...

I think I've answered this question before, either on this forum or on another forum. And my answer would be the same. Personally, I'm Premill, but acknowledge the long history of the Amill position, which I also grew up with. And I'm a big fan of George E. Ladd. What position you hold to is something you'll have to investigate for yourself. I just hope that you will remain open until you've thoroughly reviewed all of the positions.

The strength of Premill for me is that it appears to be a very early view in the history of the Church. It appears that the change to Amill in the larger Church may have been due to the failure of Israel to look like it has any future role in biblical prophecy. The Jews remained recalcitrant and unwilling to convert to Christianity. Premill anticipates a return of Israel to their biblically-promised place as God's chosen nation.

I completely reject Dual Fulfillment as a system of interpretation. But there certainly are repeating patterns in history, since what started with Israel ended up applying to many nations. The same salvation, as well as the same judgment, would follow for both Israel and the Christian nations, when they fall away.

There is a lot of symbolism in biblical prophecy, particularly in the apocalyptic literature. The reason for that may be debatable. I think it is because the authors could not spell out doom for the pagan nations that presided over them. Symbols had to be used to cloak references to judgment against these pagan nations, lest the authors be accused of sedition or rebellion. Jesus told parables because those rejecting his claims would use the information to attack him.

There is also symbolism used because what began as "shadows" under the Law came to a more literal fulfillment in Christ. So the language of the Law has been used to depict Christian realities in the New Testament era. We find a number of references as such in the book of Revelation, including the Temple, the Altar, and the Ark. Jerusalem itself may be a symbol of the entire Church--not sure?

Good luck. You're half the way there if you refrain at this point from committing before you've done all the research!

9Rock9 said:

Hello!

I'm undecided about eschatology but doing some research on it. I think good points are made for both amillennialism and premillennialism. The only view I currently hold to with is inaugurated eschatology (or "already and not yet") where most prophecy has double fulfillment. It's normally associated with George Eldon Ladd, who was a premillennialist, but I don't see why one can't be amillennial and also agree with inaugurated eschatology.

Click to expand...

I'm wondering if one can hold to a non-literalistic premillennialism?
Like, I don't think the events in Revelation are strictly chronological and probably could be oit of order or just the same events from different angles.
I also don't know if I believe the 1,000 years mentioned in the book to be be a literal millennium.
Could one believe in a Millennial State after the Second Coming, but not think the Millennial Kingdom will be a literal 1,000 years?

Click to expand...

Yes. . .because prophecy is prophetic riddle (dark sayings) not spoken clearly (Nu 12:6-8) and subject to more than one inpterpretation.

I see the book of Daniel as the key to the structure of the visions in Rev, where the visions of Daniel and Rev were
the sum of prophecy revealed by the Son of Man (Dan 10:4-9, Rev 1:12-18),
from the book of God's eternal decrees (Da 10:21, Rev 12:1),
regarding the OT Church (Da 2:28, 826, 10:14), the NT Church (Rev 1:19, 10:11) and their endings (Da 8:19, Rev 10:7, 11:18, 16:17, 21:6),
Daniel being given in four (chps 2, 7, 8, 10-11) and Rev in seven (chps1-3, 4-7, 8-11, 12-14, 15-16, 17-19, 20-22) progressive parallelisms, each revealing more detail of the same events and things.

I see the "millennium'" of Rev 20 to be figurative of the church age. where the "first resurrection" is from eternal death into eternal life in the new birth.

9Rock9 said:

Hello!

I'm undecided about eschatology but doing some research on it. I think good points are made for both amillennialism and premillennialism. The only view I currently hold to with is inaugurated eschatology (or "already and not yet") where most prophecy has double fulfillment. It's normally associated with George Eldon Ladd, who was a premillennialist, but I don't see why one can't be amillennial and also agree with inaugurated eschatology.

I'm wondering if one can hold to a non-literalistic premillennialism?

Like, I don't think the events in Revelation are strictly chronological and probably could be oit of order or just the same events from different angles.

I also don't know if I believe the 1,000 years mentioned in the book to be be a literal millennium.

Could one believe in a Millennial State after the Second Coming, but not think the Millennial Kingdom will be a literal 1,000 years?

Click to expand...

For clarity , this how I am defining Inaugurated eschatology:

A theological perspective that the end times began with the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, meaning the Kingdom of God is "already" present through His Flock but "not yet" fully realized. This "already/not yet" means believers currently experience the blessings and power of God' through salvation and the infilling of His Holy Spirit. The complete fulfillment, like the resurrection of all the dead and final judgment awaits after Christ's second coming.

Indeed this theology is deeply embedded in the New Testament and is considered to be the core biblical framework for understanding the Kingdom of God. The central tension arises from what transpires in the theological concept of the 'already,' leading to a dramatic parting of various theological perspectives.

My view as a Partial Preterist would define this period as symbolic for the 1000 year time frame mentioned in Revelation. This is not a millennium but rather takes its definition from the verse 2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

In reference to your question:

Could one believe in a Millennial State after the Second Coming, but not think the Millennial Kingdom will be a literal 1,000 years?

It would be impossible. The fundamental conflict is that Dispensational Premillennialism demands a literal 1,000-year reign because its entire system is based on a strict, literal interpretation of prophecy. Accepting the 1,000 years as merely symbolic would violate this primary rule, undermining the unique basis of their view and putting their entire framework in a quagmire.
Blessings

9Rock9 said:

Hello!

I'm undecided about eschatology but doing some research on it. I think good points are made for both amillennialism and premillennialism. The only view I currently hold to with is inaugurated eschatology (or "already and not yet") where most prophecy has double fulfillment. It's normally associated with George Eldon Ladd, who was a premillennialist, but I don't see why one can't be amillennial and also agree with inaugurated eschatology.

I'm wondering if one can hold to a non-literalistic premillennialism?

Like, I don't think the events in Revelation are strictly chronological and probably could be oit of order or just the same events from different angles.

I also don't know if I believe the 1,000 years mentioned in the book to be be a literal millennium.

Could one believe in a Millennial State after the Second Coming, but not think the Millennial Kingdom will be a literal 1,000 years?

Click to expand...

the millennium is the thousand-year reign of Christ with His saints in heaven, during which the wicked will be judged and the earth will be desolate.

A resurrection begins the 1,000-year period.

This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection (Revelation 20:5, 6).
It is called the first resurrection. The saved blessed and holy from all ages will be raised in it.

The rest of the dead [those who were not saved] did not live again until the thousand years were finished (Revelation 20:5).
All who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation (John 5:28, 29).

The second resurrection takes place at the close of the 1,000-year period. The unsaved will be raised in this resurrection. It is called the resurrection of condemnation.

Please notice: The resurrection of the saved begins the 1,000 years. The resurrection of the unsaved ends the 1,000 years.

EVENTS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 1,000 YEARS:

• A devastating earthquake and hailstorm (Revelation 16:18–21)
• The second coming of Jesus for His saints (Matthew 24:30, 31)
• The saved dead raised to life (1 Thessalonians 4:16)
• The saved given immortality (1 Corinthians 15:51–55)
• The saved given bodies like Jesus (1 John 3:2; Philippians 3:20, 21)
• All the righteous caught up into the clouds (1 Thessalonians 4:17)
• The living wicked slain by the breath of the Lord’s mouth (Isaiah 11:4)
• The unsaved dead remain in their graves until the end of the 1,000 years (Revelation 20:5)
• Jesus takes the righteous to heaven (John 13:33, 36; 14:2, 3)
• Satan bound (Revelation 20:1–3)

eleos1954 said:

the millennium is the thousand-year reign of Christ with His saints in heaven, during which the wicked will be judged and the earth will be desolate.
A resurrection begins the 1,000-year period.
This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection (Revelation 20:5, 6).
It is called the first resurrection. The saved blessed and holy from all ages will be raised in it.
The rest of the dead [those who were not saved] did not live again until the thousand years were finished (Revelation 20:5).
All who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation (John 5:28, 29).
The second resurrection takes place at the close of the 1,000-year period. The unsaved will be raised in this resurrection. It is called the resurrection of condemnation.

Please notice: The resurrection of the saved begins the 1,000 years. The resurrection of the unsaved ends the 1,000 years.

EVENTS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 1,000 YEARS:

• A devastating earthquake and hailstorm (Revelation 16:18–21)
• The second coming of Jesus for His saints (Matthew 24:30, 31)
• The saved dead raised to life (1 Thessalonians 4:16)
• The saved given immortality (1 Corinthians 15:51–55)
• The saved given bodies like Jesus (1 John 3:2; Philippians 3:20, 21)
• All the righteous caught up into the clouds (1 Thessalonians 4:17)
• The living wicked slain by the breath of the Lord’s mouth (Isaiah 11:4)
• The unsaved dead remain in their graves until the end of the 1,000 years (Revelation 20:5)
• Jesus takes the righteous to heaven (John 13:33, 36; 14:2, 3)
• Satan bound (Revelation 20:1–3)

Click to expand...

Keeping in mind that Revelation is prophcy, which is given in riddles (Nu 12:6-8) not spoken clearly and subject to more than one interpretation, which "millennium" is not in agreement with NT apostolic teaching (1 Th 4:16-17) of Christ (Lk 10:16).

9Rock9 said:

Hello!

I'm undecided about eschatology but doing some research on it. I think good points are made for both amillennialism and premillennialism. The only view I currently hold to with is inaugurated eschatology (or "already and not yet") where most prophecy has double fulfillment. It's normally associated with George Eldon Ladd, who was a premillennialist, but I don't see why one can't be amillennial and also agree with inaugurated eschatology.

I'm wondering if one can hold to a non-literalistic premillennialism?

Like, I don't think the events in Revelation are strictly chronological and probably could be oit of order or just the same events from different angles.

I also don't know if I believe the 1,000 years mentioned in the book to be be a literal millennium.

Could one believe in a Millennial State after the Second Coming, but not think the Millennial Kingdom will be a literal 1,000 years?

Click to expand...

No.

(1) Premillennialism is totally preoccupied with, and dependent upon, one chapter in the Bible – Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter, 3 chapters before the end of the Bible, located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this passage out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support all its main tenets. This is demonstrated by the fact, there is not one single second coming passage in the Bible that teaches 1000 years (or any significant period of time) follows this great glorious event where sin and death continue. Amils have a problem with, and are opposed to, this loose form of hermeneutics and questionable mode of exegesis.

(2) Premillennialism hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the different recaps (or different camera views pertaining to the intra-Advent period) that exist throughout the book of Revelation, divorce their opinion of these 2 chapters from repeated Scripture on this matter and also explain away the clear and explicit climactic detail that pertains to Revelation 19. Revelation 19 depicts the end of the world where all surviving mortal life is destroyed - "the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great." Premillennialists conveniently refuse to take this literal because it exposes their thesis.

Disprove the chronology between Revelation 19 and Revelation 20 and Premillennialism falls apart.

(3) Premillennialists interpretation of Revelation 20 contradicts numerous explicit climactic Scriptures. The coming of the Lord is shown throughout the Word of God to be "the end." There is no gap of time in-between the coming of Christ, the resurrection/judgment of mankind and the end. This all belongs to the one final all-consummating overall event. The second coming is shown to be the termination of all rebellion. It is the time “when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power." This is the time “when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father.” This is described as the end (1 Cor 15:24)! It is clear that everything is tied up at the end (“His coming”). Repeated Scripture calls this "the last (or final) day."

(4) Premillennialism is always explaining away the clear and explicit New Testament Scripture (the fuller revelation) by the shadow, type and vaguer Old Testament. It uses indistinct or misunderstood Old Testament Scripture to negate and reject clear and explicit New Testament Scripture that teaches otherwise. We Christians have the benefit of the New Testament to explain what is difficult or obscure in the Old Testament. Christ has superseded the old covenant arrangement and now fulfils the new covenant arrangement as predicted. The New Testament is the greater revelation. The interpretation placed on the Old Testament by Christ and the New Testament writers override all other opinions and interpretations of man. As Augustine wrote: “The New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed, the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed.”

(5) Premillennialism lacks corroboration for all its fundamental beliefs on Revelation 20. Whether you look at the binding of Satan, the release of Satan 1,000 years after the second coming, the restoration of animal sacrifices in an alleged future millennium, a thousand years of peace, perfection and prosperity, two different judgment days, two different resurrection days, the rebellion of the wicked at the end of the millennium, these enjoy no other support in Scripture. I struggle with this, because the only way to authenticate and understand any doctrine is interpret it with other Scripture.

Premillennialists somehow extrapolates two distinct physical future resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+ out of Revelation 20. Where in Scripture does it even mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end? Nowhere! What Scripture corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct future judgement days (that will see all mankind stand before Christ to give account for their lives) separated by a literal 1000 years+? Where in Scripture does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end? What Scripture corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent, then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroy them? There is no other Scripture that teaches this doctrine. Premillennialists force that upon the sacred text.

They have absolutely nothing to reinforce their core beliefs. They interpret their opinion of Revelation 20 by their opinion of Revelation 20. This is ridiculous! This is one of many reasons why this non-corroborative doctrine should be rejected.