Problems with a 1,000 Year Earthly Reign of Christ

Scriptural Challenges for Premillennialists and the general belief in a literal millennium rule of Christ

Belief in a literal, post-2nd coming of Jesus (the parousia in the Greek Scriptures) 1,000 year earthy rule of Christ is not supported by careful reading and cross reference of relevant bible passages. While some early church and other historic theologians accepted a millennial rule of Jesus on this earth from Jerusalem prior to the final judgment and the New Heavens and Earth, it is not a sound exposition of the Bible and conflicts with many clear and vital doctrines of the Bible.

Until I have time to further develop my own version of this subject, I am reprinting part of a blog post by Sam Storms, author of Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative (Christian Focus Publications). I have not read his book yet, but I have read the Bible, and the points he makes below are well grounded in the Scriptures. I am confident that his book examines many of the verses I have found in my studies. Although Sam Storm did not include specific verse references, I will do so when I get time to expand on this subject. For those interested in a theologically packed (that is, not for lighter reading), Scripturally sound, Lutheran perspective, a booklet can be downloaded from the Reports section near the end of this following link:

https://www.lcms.org/about/leadership/commission-on-theology-and-church-relations/documents/lutheran-doctrine-and-practice#christian-faith-life-witness-menu

Shortly follows excerpts from a blog post by Sam Storms addressing clear teachings of Scripture that establish things that occur at the time of Jesus’ 2nd Coming/parousia. Premillennialists normally place this return just after their proposed 7-year tribulation. Yet, if the literal 1,000 year earthly reign did precede the final rebellion, judgment, and the New Heavens and earth they say happens at the end of the millennial rule, all sorts of serious biblical/theological contradictions are created and then ignored by them. That’s his main point below.

[begin quote from Sam Storm’s blog post]

If you are a premillennialist, whether dispensational or not, there are several things with which you must reckon:

• You must necessarily believe that physical death will continue to exist beyond the time of Christ’s second coming.
• You must necessarily believe that the natural creation will continue, beyond the time of Christ’s second coming, to be subjected to the curse imposed by the Fall of man.
• You must necessarily believe that the New Heavens and New Earth will not be introduced until 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelieving men and women will still have the opportunity to come to saving faith in Christ for at least 1,000 years subsequent to his return.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally resurrected until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.
• You must necessarily believe that unbelievers will not be finally judged and cast into eternal punishment until at least 1,000 years subsequent to the return of Christ.

So what’s wrong with believing these things, asks the premillennialist? What’s wrong is that these many things that premillennialists must believe (because of the way they interpret Scripture), the NT explicitly denies. In other words, in my study of the second coming of Christ I discovered that, contrary to what premillennialism requires us to believe, death is defeated and swallowed up in victory at the parousia, the natural creation is set free from its bondage to corruption at the parousia, the New Heavens and the New Earth are introduced immediately following the parousia, all opportunity to receive Christ as savior terminates at the parousia, and both the final resurrection and eternal judgment of unbelievers will occur at the time of the parousia. Simply put, the NT portrayals of the second coming of Christ forced me to conclude that a millennial age, subsequent to Christ’s return, of the sort proposed by premillennialism was impossible.

The second factor that turned me from premillennialism to amillennialism was a study of Revelation 20, the text cited by all premillennialists in support of their theory. Contrary to what I had been taught and long believed, I came to see Revelation 20 as a strong and immovable support for the amillennial perspective.

[End quote from Sam Storms’ post]

[My note] Just for simplicity, when we realize that the number “1,000” symbolizes completeness or fullness and we interpret it as the majority of the church has done for 2,000 years, we find that understanding the millennium as representing the full church age resolves ALL the conflicts in the bible/theology created by demanding a post-2nd coming earthly reign of Jesus from Jerusalem. Besides, as he told us, “My kingdom is not of this world”! Belief in the literal millennium seems to make Jesus a liar.

[Read Sam Storms’ full post here:  https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-the-millennium/)]