So far I have covered in some detail five of the reasons why
I hold to the end-times position known as amillennialism. In this post I mention the remaining twelve
reasons with a few brief comments accompanying each one.
6. The second coming of Jesus Christ is
clearly after the tribulation. Since
there is no clear evidence for a secret rapture forming a two-stage coming, any
premillennarian position setting forth such a position is untenable. This means that one must hold either to
historic premillennialism (post-tribulational) or amillennialism—especially in
light of the problems of postmillennialism as discussed below.
All three versions of the Olivet Discourse of Jesus place
his coming after the time of the Tribulation and none of the three implies a
two stage coming that would suggest believers being raptured before or during
the Tribulation.
Matthew 24:29-31 reads: “Immediately after
the tribulation of those days…. Then
will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man…and they will see the Son of
Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they
will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the
other.”
Mark 13:24-27 reads: “But in those days,
after that tribulation…then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with
great power and glory. And then he will send out the
angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to
the ends of heaven.”
Luke 21:20-28, though using different
language, communicates the same events with the same order.
We should also note that 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 addresses the
snatching up of believers when Christ returns and suggests that it is the same
complex of events as seen in the Olivet Discourse: “For
this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are
left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen
asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will
descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and
with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will
be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and
so we will always be with the Lord”
7. New Testament theology prohibits taking
some of the Old Testament prophetic language as literal (rebuilding of a
temple, restoration of sacrifice, et al).
This leads one to see such language as depicting future realities to Old
Testament saints in language they would understand at the time they lived.
In Colossians 2:16-17 and Hebrews 8-10 we discover that the
tabernacle, temple, sacrifices, and all that surrounded them in the Old
Testament were only shadows of the real thing to come and that real thing was
and is Christ. Hebrews 8-10, especially, clarifies that Jesus Christ is far
superior to the Old Testament types that prepared us for and looked forward to
Christ. It is inconceivable that any of these temporary things (a temple or
sacrifices) could be re-built or reinstated with God’s stamp-of-approval. Since
there are Old Testament passages that speak of an end-times temple, for example
(Ezek. 40-48), we must conclude in light of New Testament teaching that this
does not have a literal fulfillment. Rather, it has its fulfillment in Christ
(John 2:19-21) and his followers who are united to him (1 Cor. 6:19; 2 Cor.
6:16). Since this is the case, then passages typically taken as literal
millennial references (e.g. Isaiah 65:17-25) may also be intended to be
figurative.
The Isaiah 65 passage is very important since it speaks of
“new heavens and a new earth,” which Revelation 21-22 locates in eternity
future and not a millennium before that.
So, though Isaiah 65 has some language that doesn’t quite fit in the future
eternal state (e.g. infants, living long days, etc.), most likely it is
intended figuratively to communicate that God will fulfill all his covenant
promises in the fullest sense. The language used was language that would be understood
by readers at the time.
8. Amillennialism preserves more than any
other view the Christ-centered nature of the entire Scriptures.
Simply-put, Christ is the center of God’s salvation history
(Eph. 1:10; 3:8-12), the one to whom even Israel, as God’s special corporate
son, looked forward (Mt. 2:13-15). Christ is the fulfillment of all the Old
Testament (e.g. Luke 24:27) and its promises (2 Cor. 1:20). There is no need
for promises to be fulfilled in a literal and national Israel (suggesting the
need for a millennium in which those promises can be literally fulfilled). What
is more, part of the Old Testament emphasis is that very unexpected peoples
from all over the world (the nations) would be part of the end-times Israel and
this by a coming Redeemer (Isaiah 56:1-8; 59:19-62:12). The emphasis is on
Christ and what he will do with his people—coming as King to reign now and even
in a greater way in the New Heaven and New Earth (not in a period between these
two ages).
9. Amillennialism does the best job of
dealing with the already/not yet emphasis in the New Testament.
The Kingdom has already come (Mk. 1:14-15), but it is not
yet fully here (Mt. 6:10). This already and not yet two age or stage emphasis
(not a three stage with a millennium) better fits biblical material.
Related to this, 1 Corinthians 22-28 seems to teach strongly
that death is ended at the coming of Christ, which would create a problem for
there being non-glorified persons in a millennium (those who would die) after
this. This text (with key clauses emphasized) reads: “For as
in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the
firstfruits, then at his coming
those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers
the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority
and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies
under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
27 For “God has put all things in subjection
under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is
plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the
Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection
under him, that God may be all in all.
10. Amillennialism does the best job of
dealing with resurrection and judgment language in the Bible which appears not
to put these events into different stages.
Consider John 5:28-29: “ Do
not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will
hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to
the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of
judgment.
Also, the most straightforward view
of Revelation 22:12 is that the coming of Jesus Christ and final judgment are
all one event: “Behold,
I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he
has done.”
11. The New Testament is to serve as the
manual for interpretation of Old Testament end-times expectation.
One of the problems of many premillennialists (especially of
the pre- and mid-tribulational variety) is that they do not allow the New
Testament to bring clarity to what the Old Testament was prophesying. A better
approach is to allow the New Testament to bring that clarity—a clarity that
focuses more on Christ, his Church unitied to him, and the nations as part of Israel,
rather than trying to force some kind of literal nationalistic Israel-centered
end-times approach.
12. We must interpret texts according to
authorial intent, even if that intent is figurative. It appears that many OT
texts that premillennialists have interpreted as prophesying a literal
millennium are instead prophesying the future new heaven and new earth using
language of the current day.
This is seen
especially in Isaiah 65:17-25, which we have addressed already above.
13. There are some key passages that
support amillennialism.
A proper understanding of Isaiah 2; 11; 25; 56; 59:19-62:12;
65:17-25; Daniel 9:20-27; and 2 Thessalonians 1 all support the amillennial
understanding of the end-times.
14. It is difficult to see any legitimate
purpose for a future literal millennial reign, especially in light of the way
Revelation 21-22 appears to be the counter-point to Genesis 1-3 and the climax
of Scripture.
What is more, if it can be demonstrated that most likely the
fulfillment of the New Covenant promises of Jeremiah 31:31-34 consists of an
already/not-yet fulfillment centered around the first and second comings of
Christ based upon Hebrews 8-10 (i.e. the fulfillment has started/been
inaugurated, even though it awaits the full consummation for the future), and
so it is fulfilled in the New Covenant Church (both Jew and Gentile), then a
key purpose for the millennium is removed. Even a well-known Dispensationalist
has admitted: “If the Church fulfills the covenant, she may also fulfill the
other covenants made with Israel and there is no need for an earthly
millennium.”[1]
15. A future literal millennial reign of
Christ with glorified and non-glorified saints on a non-glorified earth is
problematic.
In regard to a future millennial kingdom, Anthony Hoekema (The Bible And The Future,
184-85) explains: “The return of the
glorified Christ and of glorified believers to an earth where sin and death
still exist would violate the finality of their glorification. Why should
believers, who have been enjoying heavenly glory during the intermediate state,
be raised from the dead in order to return to an earth where sin and death
still exist? Would this not be an anticlimax? Do not glorified resurrection
bodies call for life on a new earth, from which all remnants of sin and of the
curse have been banished? Why, further, should the glorified Christ return to
an earth where sin and death still exist? Why should he after his return in
glory still have to rule his enemies with a rod of iron, and still have to crush
a final rebellion against him at the close of the millennium? Was not Christ’s battling against his enemies
completed during his state of humiliation?
Did he not during that time win the final, decisive victory over evil,
sin, death, and Satan? Does not the
Bible teach that Christ is coming back in the fullness of his glory to usher
in, not an interim period of qualified peace and blessing, but the final state
of unqualified perfection?”
Sam Storms, Kingdom Come,
156, also helpfully asks: “What becomes of these born again believers who die
physically during the millennial age? The premillennialist insists that
conditions will prevail during the millennium such that physical life will be
unusually prolonged, much as it was in the days preceding the flood of Noah. Be
that as it may, physical death will still occur. So what becomes of those who
die in faith? Where do they go? What do they experience?” Storms continues:
“The Apostle Paul makes it clear in both Philippians 1 and 2 Corinthians 5 that
when a believer dies he/she immediately enters the presence of Christ…. But
during the so-called millennial age, Jesus is not in heaven. He’s on earth. So
where are those who have died during this time period?” One possibility is resurrection occurring for
each person who dies, which leaves us with thousands of resurrections—something
that the New Testament appears to deny.”
16. Amillennialism does justice to the
language in the New Testament which suggests the complex of eschatological
events surrounding the 2nd Coming of Christ are impending and
therefore one must be ready and expectant.
Especially for the mid- and some post-tribulational
premillennialists, a seven year Tribulation must take place before Jesus Christ
comes for his church. This is hard to square with teaching that calls believers
to be ready for him to come at any moment. Mt. 24:36-51; 1 Thes. 4:13-5:11.
17. Though postmillennialism would share
some tenets with amillennialism, it also has problems that decide against it.
Consider just a few.
Old Testament prophecies interpreted by postmillennialists
as referring to a future millennial golden age picture the final state of the
redeemed community—that is, the New Heaven and New Earth (a critique that also
applies to premillennialism). It must be
remembered that the final state includes both a new heaven and a new
earth.
The common postmillennial interpretation of the great
tribulation of Matthew 24 and of the apostasy of 2 Thessalonians 2, that they
are only past, is not justified.
As we discovered above, Revelation 20:1-6 does not support
the postmillennial position. This passage describes the reigning of the souls
of believers in heaven during the present era, and does not picture a future
golden age.
The postmillennial expectation of a future golden age before
Christ’s return one that gradually is ushered in as the gospel triumphs in the world,
does not do justice to the continuing tension in the history of the world
between the kingdom of God and the forces of evil.
Conclusion
It seems to me that these
seventeen reasons mentioned in these ten posts lead us to conclude that Amillennialism
is the most likely explanation for how things will take place at the very end of
this end-times.
[1] J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1964, 1979), 116, cited in Samuel E. Waldron, with Richard C. Barcellos, A Reformed Baptist Manifesto: The
New Covenant Constitution Of The Church (Palmdale, Ca.: Reformed Baptist Academic Press), 13.
