The 1,000 Years That Wasn't There: A Horror Story
Considering the Christian Zionist take on the 1,000 yr reign of Christ.
“Confronting Christian Zionism” Episode II
The Jews must be in their “homeland,” aka Israel in order for Christ to come and reign from Jerusalem for 1,000 years. Or at least that’s what Christian Zionists would have us believe. In order to take away the rationale Evangelicals have for the continued current siege on Gaza, we’ll examine the relevant texts to see if they really mean what some people think they mean. If Jesus is not going to reign from Jerusalem, or at least not the one currently in existence, then where will he be reigning from? Once again, if you’re not a Christian, you may know somebody who is and would benefit from this.
I don’t know if Sunday Schools in US Zionist churches today tell stories about the return of Christ and the final defeat of evil to wide eyed schoolchildren these days? Seems like it was always Noah and the Ark or Moses back in my day. In any case what could be more comforting? The Dragon and his allies [Rev 19:20-20:3] may cause us untold suffering and harm, but eventually he’ll be put away, and Jesus will come back to beat up on Israel’s enemies and establish his throne upon the Earth. A wonderful Comic-book superhero-like story with political moorings to boot~!
But like a horror movie where something that seems really beautiful takes an ugly turn, we find something really disturbing. Jesus’s followers who are supposed to reign with him lo those many centuries, although supposedly having been glorified ["sinfulness removed from our bodies"] and having spent a full thousand years in the presence of the Savior, are once again subjected to temptation to rebel against God and join up with Satan instead. You heard me, I didn’t stutter.
My sincere apologies if I made you break out in a cold sweat~! [And yes, I realize that Dispensationalism doesn’t hold this view. But I think it does logically lead to that, if one is willing to follow it’s moorings to their conclusions. ]
Is that really the future Jesus offers us? Are we destined to turn a blind eye to the violence levelled at people in Gaza because Jesus is coming back on the side of the occupiers, will take away our sins, and then abandon us to Lucifer himself all over again?
To put it succinctly “I don’t think so.”
What is “Amillennialism?” Why do I say the 1,000 year reign is not literal?
What is commonly called the “Millennium” [Thousand Years] is located in Rev 20:4 and reads as follows:
Rev 20:4 I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and such as didn’t worship the beast nor his image, and didn’t receive the mark on their forehead and on their hand. They lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years [WEB]
According to the Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms by Stanley Grenz, et. al, Amillennialism is:
The belief that the thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 do not represent a specific period of time between Christ’s first and second comings. Many Amillennialists believe instead that the millennium refers to the heavenly reign of Christ and the departed saints. Amillennialists usually understand Revelation 20 to mean that the return of Christ will occur at the end of history.
In this scenario, Jesus is going to return one time, and then the New Heaven and Earth will be established as in Rev 21:1-4. No 1,000 year temporal reign is on schedule to happen prior to that Great Day.
The more popular interpretation of Rev 20:4 is “Premillennialism,” which is the belief that Christ will return to establish a temporal 1,000 year reign on Earth, before allowing Satan to become more actively belligerent, then be defeated once and for all before setting up the New Heaven and New Earth.
But not often talked about in this scenario, is that Satan is being “released” to tempt Glorified Saints into rebellion. The Premillennialist allows him or herself to think the unthinkable.
So why do I personally identify as Amillenial? In as succinct a blog post as is possible to write and give a fair answer, I’ll simply give an informal outline of what I am compelled to believe when I read the 20th chapter of Revelation.
To get to the meat of the issue, let’s see if we can’t do this using the standard Journalism questions:
WHO: The Saints who were martyred for their testimony to the Word of God.
WHAT: The reign of Christ with his followers who gave their lives for his sake [martyrdom.]
Other references to Martyrs being in God’s presence are in Rev 6:9, 7:14-15, alluded to in 14:4.
But… Are “only” Martyrs going to be in Christ’s upcoming Earthly reign? Some might point to the 144,000 mentioned in Chapters 7 & 14. Leon Morris, writing in his Commentary on Revelation concerning ch 14 says “This number of completeness stands for the whole church of Jesus Christ.” But by the time we get to Ch 20, there seems to be no mention of this particular class of saints.
WHERE: The following clues should be our guide:
The use of "Thrones" as part of the locale:
The word “thrones” tells you where the events in Rev 20:4 take place. In heaven [the presence of God.]
Every other place in the book where you see that word - the plural of “throne“ [4:4, 11:16] that's what's intended, so why should this be any different?
When Revelation says “throne” singular it's referring to God's throne except for 2:13 where it specifically refers to Satan, and 13:2; 16:10 which refer to the Beast
The description of “Souls”:
Another indicator these events do not take place on Earth. They are not already ressurected. But they need to be and will be ressurected in V 5 “When the thousand years are over.”
So in assessing the data above, the notion of a “literal” 1,000 year temporal reign of Christ located on Earth is not very likely. Because 1) “Thrones” is a word to depict” Heaven or “Paradise” if you prefer.
What do we not see anywhere in this verse: Any indication or any mention at all that there’s a Kingdom being set up on the Earth at this point. That does not happen until Revelation chapter 21.
WHEN: For the duration of what is referred to as "a Thousand Years"
That the Greek for “thousand” is “Chilloi” [χίλιοι] of which the the Liddel. Scott & Jones Greek lexicon confirms that the Greek word for 1,000 - χίλιοι “chilioi” is largely a poetic term. Like “A long, long time” it is a feminine* plural form of an indefinite amount.
Therefore, we can be confident that Amillennialism is taught right in the original languages of Holy writ!
It's like when it says Psalm 50:10 “For every animal of the forest is mine, and the livestock on a thousand hills.” We know that's not a literal “thousand” because he owns all the cattle on all the hills!
Taken from The Liddell, Scott, Jones Ancient Greek Lexicon Furthermore, Strong’s Lexicon tells us:
[Thanks to Facebook user Ionatus for the above screenshots.]
But there are other other clues in the text render the non-literal definition even more likely, as we shall soon see.
"They Lived" or,,, "They came to life?":
There's a translation discrepancy here most don't notice. Many popular versions read “They came to life” or “They lived again”
But others simply read “They lived” or words meaning the same thing.
Among the versions that used "They lived" or a variant: The KJV, NKJV, World English Bible, Douay-Rheims, Geneva Bible and most of your “Literal” translations – ones with “Literal” in the name [Young's Literal Translation, Concordant Literal Version, etc etc]
The Greek there is ζάω - “Zao” like “zow” which simply means “to live.”
The Resurrection of the dead doesn't take place until verse 5:
“When the thousand years are over.”
If “they came to life” was the intention, we could then reasonably assume that they were going to be on a Kingdom set up on Earth. But “they lived” seems to not be an indication of the Dead being brought back to life. The implication would appear to be that the souls of those who kept the faith and paid for it with their lives continues “to live” in God’s presence for however many centuries the Lord determines. But not on Earth… Not yet.
WHY: To differentiate between the events described in Rev 20:5-6 and the actual physical and present reign of Christ on the Earth.
The “1st Resurrection” does not take place until verse 5 “When the thousand years are over.
It's not until chapter 21:1-4 we see the actual Kingdom of God on earth:
The New Heaven v. 1
The New Earth Also v. 1
The New Jerusalem, “prepared like a bride adorned for her husband” v 2.
Note the language in V.3 especially. It practically dances with joy that God is now physically dwelling with his people. It’s as if this is the 1st time this ever happened or at least not for centuries. If there was an earlier time this took place - such as the Millennial reign of Christ in 20 v.4. that would take the force out of the tone of reconciliation we see in 21:3.
Some have tried to make something out of the fact that the New Jerusalem has the names of the 12 Tribes on the gates. Zionists seem to try to get whoever they can even at the last minute~! 😜
However, the tribes are enumerated differently - with the Rebel Tribe of Dan removed. This likely indicates a “Spiritual Israel,” as the tribe of Manasseh has been taken it’s place. So much for it being “literal” Israel!
The names on the foundation are the 12 Apostles, ie "Israel" being re-founded.
Now having said all of that, I have to ask you Dear Reader:
Which is better? A confusing and often spurious system of interpretation that usually winds up making predictions that go horribly awry, and encourage support of the mass killings of Indigenous Arabs in the Holy Land? To say nothing of the countless persecution of journalists just trying to do their jobs or Commentators exercising their right to Freedom of Speech and who have paid for it with their careers?
Or a very worshipful and hopeful view of the future that steers clear of politically motivated speculations and demands we all give our ultimate loyalty… to the Prince of Peace?
We live right now in times of a true Horror Story. An over-zealous contingent of Zionist Christians who are damned determined to support the “Jews right to their homeland” even if it touches off WWIII. All for a 1,000 years that was never there in the first place. Won’t they be surprised when they see Jesus himself reigning not from the present-day Jerusalem that has actually been re-built by the Romans, but the Jerusalem coming down from above.
AFTERWARD: I am not by this writing intending to cast doubt on the idea of Satan being released in the end times to gather up armies against the Lord. But in placing that event 1,000 years into Jesus having reigned on the earth, the PreMillennialists miss the unintended consequences that those of us Jesus rescued from Satan will be due to have Old Scratch come back and harass us AGAIN. That’s a nightmare on your street. A true horror movie~! Problem is it won’t hold up to scrutiny.
Lots of things to be considered and discussed. Who is the Israel of God today? A very important question that I hope to take up soon.
For more on my rationale against those who would marshal Bible verses in defense of the previous year of siege and bloodthirsty violence visited on the land & people of Gaza, please read my previous post “The Sick Demented Doctrine of "CHRISTIAN ZIONISM."
I commend you for your efforts, howsoever they may be received by your intended readers.