Contended Verses: Revelation 20:1-10
Key points: Refers to a 1,000-year period (seven times). Satan bound and locked in a pit; and is reported that he no longer can deceive the nations. People having authority occupying thrones and martyrs who were killed for their witnessing for Jesus brought back to life again are seen by John reigning with Jesus. Near the end of the 1,000 years Satan is released from the pit, who then deceives the nations again and provokes many to revolt against God. The revolt is terminated by God sending fire from heaven and Satan thrown in the lake of fire.
Introduction
Sadly, Biblical eschatology is one of the most debated subjects within Christianity. I call it sad because it creates disunity among churches and believers. I am reminded of Jesus’ prayer in the garden just before His arrest. John records late in that prayer regarding those that came to faith from the words of His apostles, “I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and You loved them, just as You loved Me.” (John 17:23, NASB) The shear number of Christian denominations alone tells us that this level of unity is not happening today. Like most Christians who believe strongly in something, it takes a lot of convincing to change my mind. But I did, I was taught amillennialism in the church I grew up in, I originally had no problem with the concept. But the more I read the Bible, the more I was uneasy about that position. As a teacher I have found it easier to teach the Bible and let the student make their own discoveries with the guidance of the Holy Spirit than to refute a belief. I know what you’re thinking, how can I teach without bias? In scenarios where there are multiple potential viewpoints I try to present as many as I am aware of, but that can’t be honestly done without some bias. From my perspective I will never teach something that I believe is contrary to the Bible. And yes, I do feel amillennialism is indeed contrary to the Bible, which is why I am going to attempt to refute the position rather than just present the text from Scripture.
Main Points
When I research a subject that I desire to refute I try to gather as much data as I can that supports the concept and then distill that down to salient points, as a lot of “supportive facts” are often more emotionally held and can often be less relevant or sometimes less accurate. Here are what I believe to be the salient points of amillennialism taken from several sources that proclaim it to be true.
Point No. 1
We are currently in the ‘millennial’ period, instead of being a literal 1,000 years, it is an arbitrary span of time. This period can essentially be defined as the time between the end of Jesus’ first coming and the beginning of His second coming.
Counterargument
Amillennialists believe that the millennial period referenced in Revelation 20:1-10 as a reference to the time between the first and second coming of Jesus (the period we live in now). But that leaves us with a few questions. The first question is why would the apostle John write that this period as being a thousand-year period, especially since he wrote it seven times? Why not write what he meant? Some say he was being elusive intentionally to align with the allegorization of the previous chapters. But there is no reason to allegorize any of the other chapters, let alone chapter twenty (the Bible teaches literal interpretation should be considered first, for example when Daniel read Jeremiah 25:12, he interpreted Jeremiah’s seventy years to mean a literal seventy-year period). God’s Word should be understood and not kept a secret, especially when referring to an important component of the end-time timeline. Then there are some who believe it was a copyist error or added later by someone else. Neither accusation can be supported by examining early manuscripts. Plus, we know of at least one church father and early commentator, Papias of Hierapolis (60-130 A.D.) who wrote about the millennium, so it was likely included in the earliest manuscripts. Many of the early church fathers were also ‘chiliasts’ (based on the Greek word for ‘thousand’) including Irenaeus. Some believe that the Greek term ‘chilioi’ (or chilia) can be a reference to a large number that is indeterminable, although there is nothing in the text to indicate that it represents something other than 1,000 years.
Point No. 2
Satan is bound and rendered ineffective. Due to Jesus’ victory on the cross, Satan was bound as evidenced by the spread of the gospel. He is no longer able to deceive the nations.
Counterargument
Understanding that humanity can be influenced by the world (through exposure to things that encourage envy, covetousness, etc.) and from within (our own sinful lusts, desires, etc.) we know that we don’t need to be influenced by another entity to sin (like the devil). But with that said, there still seems that we are oddly persuaded to sin. I say ‘oddly’ only because the influence can range from the mundane to catastrophic sin. As if we are targets to be “shot down” using any means possible. Which as Christians, we are indeed targets for the enemies of God. If Satan is bound and rendered ineffective does that include his minions too? It would have to be, otherwise what’s the point? So, where do all the temptations to sin for a believer come from? Okay, let’s set aside the temptation influence for the moment and look at the world with its conflicts, wars, hate-mongering, crimes against humanity, etc., are these all without third-party (namely the devil and his fellow fallen angels) influence? If so then what are the writers of the New Testament referring to in verses like: “Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places...take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one” (Ephesians 6:11-12, 16, ESV); “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” (James 4:7, ESV); And “Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.” (1 Peter 5:8, ESV) Plus, there are several similar verses (see Ephesians 4:27; 1 Timothy 3:6-7; 2 Timothy 2:26; 1 John 3:8, 10; Jude 1:9; Revelation 2:10; 12:9, 12). Is Satan bound? He doesn’t seem to be, no. Just as the classic retort claims, if Satan is bound then his chain is too long! He may be hampered by the spread of the gospel message, but he has not been stopped…yet.
Point No. 3
The promises made to Abraham, Israel, and David have been fulfilled by Christ or by His church.
Counterargument
The claim that all promises given to Abraham, Israel (Jacob), and David by God have been fulfilled either by Jesus or the church (the body of Christ) seems to be an overgeneralization as some of those promises don’t easily fit into a category that can be fulfilled by a person or group of people. For example, many of the promises refer to the Promised Land (for one example see Genesis 15:17-21). While several of the promises do make sense that they could and most likely be fulfilled by the Messiah (for a few examples, see 2 Samuel 7:12-16; 1 Chronicles 17:11-13; Psalm 89:1-4; Zechariah 13:1-7), others require either a non-standard method of interpretation (for example see Exodus 12:46), or some text to be ignored to fit (for example, see Genesis 12:2, again referring to a nation not a person). While there are several verses that state that the church consist of both Gentile and Jew, referring to the backgrounds of the believers (see Romans 10:12; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 5:6; Colossians 3:11), there are also many verses that refer to the Jewish lineage (the Israelites) and/or the nation of Israel interacting with God differently than the church (see Romans 11:25-36). There is very little Biblical evidence to embrace this concept except to intentionally allegorize.
We also quickly run into another problem since some of the promises made to the Jews (also known as the Israelites and Hebrews) were unconditional (for example see Genesis 17:7-8). If they were unconditional then God would be in violation of breaking His own promise. Since He does not lie (see Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; 1 Kings 8:56; Psalm 119:160; Titus 1:2: Hebrews 6:18) this is unlikely. Which is why proponents of amillennialism and replacement theology state that those promises were actually conditional. Primarily using the Parable of the Tenants (see Matthew 21:33-44) where Jesus tells the chief priests and the Pharisees listening that “the kingdom of God will be taken away” from them and given to others as justification, they often point out that the clause in the covenant promise given to Abraham in Genesis 17:9, “And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations.” (ESV) is conditional. The Hebrew word ṯiš·mōr’, translated here as “you shall keep,” means to watch, to preserve, to be careful, which is appropriate as the instruction that follows that verse pertains to circumcision and that if any male offspring failed to be circumcised they (the individual, not all offspring) would be cut off from his people (see Genesis 17:14). There is no reference, implied or otherwise, to be a conditional promise. Even though this covenant promise sounds similar to the covenant promise to Moses (see Exodus 19:3-7, notice the ‘if’, see also Numbers 14:8; Deuteronomy 28:15, 63-65) which is conditional (Abraham was unconditionally promised the land, as a possession, and Moses was conditionally promised the ability to occupy the land) which they did but later broke the covenant due to their disobedience (violated God’s law), the two covenant promises are not the same. Again, the promise to Abraham is unconditional (eternal, still in effect) but the promise to Moses was conditional.
Point No. 4
Jesus is currently reigning during this time from heaven (also known as Reformed Amillennialism or ‘present’ millennialism).
Counterargument
There are several indications that Jesus will reign on earth before the white throne of judgment (see Revelation 20:11-15) which is the last event before eternity begins. One of those indicators is a reference to Jesus ruling from David’s throne (see 2 Samuel 7:12-13; 22:51, see also Jeremiah 30:9). Note that David’s throne was on earth, not in heaven. We also see other prophecies about the throne being in Jerusalem during this time including Micah 4:1-5; Zephaniah 3:14-20; and Zechariah 4:1-21.
Point No. 5
When the Old Testament prophets and writers spoke about the future, they used terminology that they knew. Therefore, all eschatological themes need to be reinterpreted using New Testament references. Those Old Testament images are types and shadows that are fulfilled in Jesus, meaning that Jesus is the true Israel, the true Temple, and the true heir to David’s throne, etc.
Counterargument
It is likely that the Old Testament writers did not fully understand who or what they were writing about. Peter tells us that, “This salvation was something even the prophets wanted to know more about when they prophesied about this gracious salvation prepared for you.” (1 Peter 1:10, NLT) That much of prophecy was indeed a mystery that, according to Paul, was “made known through the church to the rulers and authorities in the heavens” (Ephesians 3:10b, CSB). Imagine the church teaching the angels about the end times! We know that the entire Bible is about Jesus (see John 5:39; Luke 24:27). But to say that all Old Testament eschatological references need to be reinterpreted so radically to say that when a prophecy refers to Israel, the Temple, or David’s throne that it is always pointing to Jesus, that has no Biblical support. It is true that many of the types and shadows (models) of the Old Testament were to lead us to a better understanding of Jesus our Lord and Savior, but we also see that when a prophecy pertaining to the revival of Israel (multiple times), hear about the many details of a temple that will be built, or that David’s throne will be occupied again, and about many more future events, it doesn’t seem likely that those references always point to the person Jesus, unless you offer a less than physical point of view. One way to allegorize without raising too many questions is to “spiritualize.” Understanding the fundamental dichotomy of life having two existences, the physical (body) and the spiritual (the non-physical), an interpreter can say that something only applies to the spiritual realm where no one can see without opposition. Here we see that amillenialists have spiritualized Israel, the temple and to some degree, David’s throne.
Point No. 6
The New Testament provides the key to the proper interpretation of the Old Testament. The goal of studying eschatology is to understand how prophecies in the Old Testament are interpreted and applied by writers of the New Testament. If New Testament writers interpret Old Testament prophecies in a nonliteral sense, then the Old Testament passages should be understood considering that New Testament interpretation.
Counterargument
The premise of this point is nearly identical to Point No. 5 but further adds a ‘rule’ to how prophecies are to be interpreted. It is essentially saying if a New Testament writer interprets an Old Testament prophecy non-literally then we should consider doing the same. Peter wrote, “knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20-21, ESV) In other words only God’s intended interpretation is valid. Since the New Testament writer would likely interpret correctly, this point is not challenged. However, it appears that there are several Old Testament prophecies literally interpreted in the New Testament including: The second coming of the Messiah (Daniel 7:13 interpreted literally in Matthew 26:64; Mark 14:62; Revelation 1:7); the destruction of Jerusalem (Palm 79:1; Isaiah 63:18; Daniel 8:13 interpreted literally in Luke 21:22-24); the abomination of desolation (Daniel 9:26-27 interpreted literally in Matthew 24:15); the deliverance of Israel (Psalm 14:7; 53:6; Isaiah 59:20; Jeremiah 31:31-34; Amos 9:11-15 interpreted literally in Acts 15:16-18; Romans 11:26; Hebrews 8:8-12); the restoration of Israel (Isaiah 27:12-13; 54:1-17; Jeremiah 30:1-11; interpreted literally in Matthew 24:31; Galatians 4:27; Revelation 11:15); salvation offered to Jews and Gentiles (2 Samuel 22:50; Psalm 18:49; 11:1; Isaiah 11:10 interpreted literally in Romans 15:8-12); and every knee shall bow before Jesus (Isaiah 45:23 interpreted literally in Romans 14:10-12; Philippians 2:10).
William Tyndale (1494-1536) an English Biblical scholar and linguist, a prominent figure in the Protestant Reformation and translated much of the Bible into English, wrote: "Thou shalt understand, therefore, that the scripture hath but one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the root and ground of all, and the anchor that never faileth, whereunto if thou cleave, thou canst never err or go out of the way. And if thou leave the literal sense, thou canst not but go out of the way."[1]
Point No. 7
By using the “Analogy of Faith” Biblical hermeneutic principle that states if a passage appears to conflict with another passage, the unclear passage should be interpreted in light of the clearer passage. Amillennialists use this principle to support their view in several applications (below are two).
Application No. 1
One being the belief in a “two-age” model which states that bodily resurrection and final judgment will occur when Jesus returns and therefore there couldn’t be a period after Jesus’ return that would be populated by non-resurrected (perishable) bodies as Revelation 20:5 reports, which states that the rest of the dead will rise at the end of the 1,000 years. They use the reference to the singular resurrection in Paul’s first letter to the church in Corinth as justification (see 1 Corinthians 15:42) and that since Paul later used the phrase “the perishable body must put on the imperishable” (verse 53, ESV, emphasis added), that there is no exception therefore all bodies that were to be made imperishable at that time leaving none to be transformed later.
Counterargument
The sequence Paul is referring to pertains to all those who believe in Jesus at that time (taken by the rapture), that their perishable bodies will become imperishable. The first ten verses of Revelation 20 should not be considered a contradiction to anything taught by God in the Bible. We do not need to invoke the analogy of faith hermeneutic principle. Due to the fact that there will still be people living on earth at the end of the Tribulation period that may not be believers, some could accept Jesus during the 1,000-year period and would then receive their imperishable bodies later. There will be at least a two-stage resurrection which matches other text regarding the death of believers (see 2 Corinthians 5:8; Philippians 1:23) versus the death of non-believers (see Luke 16:19-31).
Application No. 2
Amillennialists believe that since Scripture does not mirror this 1,000-year period anywhere else, that it should not be interpreted literally.
Counterargument
While most imperative instruction is repeated in the Bible, not all are. Does that make them less important or unnecessary? There are several not-yet-fulfilled promises that will be fulfilled before eternity begins (see response to Point No. 12).
Point No. 8
Both premillennial and postmillennial views of the millennium consider it a favorable time, some even call it a “golden age.” Amillennialists consider it a period marked by conflict, martyrdom, and revolt against God. Revelation 20 depicts the church militant, not the church triumphant.[2]
Counterargument
This statement seems counter to the earlier premise that Jesus was reigning from heaven (see Point No. 2 above). How can you reconcile a period of “revolt against God” during a time where Jesus is reigning? What does that say about His ability to rule? This is not to say that God is not reigning, He is the King of the Universe! But we know that the temporary ‘ruler’ of this world is Satan (see John 12:31; 14:30; 1 Corinthians 4:4) and that we look forward to a time when Jesus comes and His “will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” (Matthew 6:10)
Point No. 9
Amillennialists proclaim that their eschatology is not epoch centered like that of the dispensationalists as they believe that the story of redemption is about Jesus and His kingdom. While dispensationalists claim that God interacted with people differently in several distinct historical periods, the redemptive system after the fall remains through Jesus only.
Counterargument
God may have interacted with people differently in the various periods. In the classic dispensational breakdown: Innocence (Genesis 1:1-3:7); Conscience (Genesis 3:8-8:22); Human Government (Genesis 9:1-11:32); Promise (Genesis 12:1-Exodus 9:25); Law (Exodus 20:1-Acts 2:4); Grace (Acts 2:4-Revelation 20:3); and the Millennium Kingdom (Revelation 20:4-6), the ‘process’ of death always remained the same, those that believed in God’s promises in the Old Testament were saved (see Hebrews 11:1-40), and those that believe in Jesus after His resurrection are also saved, but both groups are saved by the blood of Jesus, no exceptions.
Point No. 10
The Bible contains two passages that state that for God one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like one day (see Psalm 90:4; 2 Peter 3:8). The millennial period is therefore only one day.
Counterargument
Both authors are referring to the fact that God is ‘outside’ the realm of time. He created time and is not affected by time. Since humanity cannot relate to someone that is eternal and exists where time has no influence, the Holy Spirit inspired these two writers to express this condition the only way we could relate. To God one long period of time is no different than a short period because He doesn’t experience time. Neither passage has any connection to eschatology, they are not ‘keys’ to some cipher nor are they secret decoders. We need to remember that God wants His people to know and understand His Word, He will not (and did not) encrypt it.
Point No. 11
Since only believing Jews are the “true Israel” and the ethnic Jews that did not accept Jesus were cast away, the remnant of Israel has already received the inheritance promised God’s people since they are the children of promise (see Romans 9:6-8). Due to the ethnic Jews being cast away the door for salvation opened for Gentiles.
Counterargument
There are two primary errors in this statement. While Paul does refer to Christians as being the children of promise (see Galatians 4:28), he is speaking about the promise of being adopted as God’s children, recipients of eternal life and spending eternity with Him, which are not related to the promises given to the Israelites in the Old Testament especially those pertaining to land and other physical applications. The second error is that God didn’t change His mind regarding non-Israelites, they were not grafted in only because the Jews rejected Jesus (see Romans 11:13-24), it was His plan from the very beginning (see John 1:29; 3:16-17; 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9, see also Isaiah 56:7).
Point No. 12
Since the true Israel are believers and recipients of the inheritance promised to God’s people (see Point No. 11) there are no unfulfilled promises that need to be fulfilled.
Counterargument
There are a significant number of promises that have not, to our best ability to determine, been fulfilled. Here is a partial listing of them with a brief summary (see the referenced Scripture for greater detail), note the diversity as many would be difficult to categorize as being fulfilled through the inheritance promised to all believers: The full extent of the Promised Land, historically the boundaries promised were never obtained (see Genesis 15:18-21; 26:44; 2 Samuel 7:10; Isaiah 27:12); The throne of David and Solomon will be reestablished (see 2 Samuel 7:13, 16; Psalm 132:11); Jesus to reign on earth and govern the people (see Psalm 9:1-20; 72:15-20; 89:19-37; 96:1-13; 97:1-12; 98:1-9; 99:1-9; Isaiah 9:1-7; 40:12-31; Jeremiah 23:5-6); Jesus made a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek (see Psalm 110:1-7); Judah will be humbled in the Day of the Lord (see Isaiah 2:11-18); Israel will be cleansed from sin and glory restored (see Isaiah 4:2-6; 14:1-2; 42:1-13; 43:14-28; 44:1-23; 45:14-25; 54:1-17; 61:1-3, 4-11; 62:1-12; Jeremiah 3:11-18; 16:14-15; 30:16-24; Ezekiel 39:25-29; Micah 4:1-8; Nahum 1:15; Zephaniah 3:14-20; Zechariah 8:1-17); A kingdom established where death is conquered and tears wiped away (see Isaiah 25:1-27:13); Israel to rejoice in kingdom (see Isaiah 35:1-10); A blessing to Israel and to the Gentile nations (see Isaiah 49:1-26; 52:7-12; 56:1-8); God promises to fulfill His promises to Israel (see Isaiah 51:1-23); God to bring salvation to Israel and recognize it came from Him (see Isaiah 52:1-6); Prayers answered after fasting (see Isaiah 58:1-14); God will judge the wicked (see Isaiah 63:4-19); A remnant will be rescued (see Isaiah 64:1-12); Glory of God revealed (see Isaiah 65:17-25); Kingdom will come following Jesus’ return (see Isaiah 66:1-24); Regathering of Israel in its land (see Jeremiah 23:5-8; 30:1-11; 31:1-30; Ezekiel 11:16-25; 28:25-26; 34:22-24; 37:24-25; Zechariah 10:9-12); A new everlasting covenant of grace and forgiveness (see Jeremiah 31:31-40; Ezekiel 37:26-28); Israel as a nation enduring as long as the heavens cannot be measured (see Jeremiah 31:35-37); David resurrected to rule (see Jeremiah 23:5-8; Ezekiel 34:11-31; 37:24-25); Resurrection of Israel to her land (see Ezekiel 36:1-24; 37:1-14); The ten tribes (representing the northern kingdom of Israel) and the two tribes (representing the southern kingdom of Judah) brought together (see Ezekiel 37:15-23); The future millennial kingdom with temple (see Ezekiel 40:1-43:27; Zechariah 2:1-13; Zechariah 14:9-21); A new life and worship (see Ezekiel 44:1-46:24); A new river flowing from the temple with living creatures, fish, and fruit trees (see Ezekiel 47:1-12); Land divided among the tribes (see Ezekiel 47:13-48:35); Israel’s deliverance from Assyria and other enemies (see Micah 5:5-16); Resurrection will come on the Day of the Lord (see Zephaniah 3:11-13); Jerusalem forgiven and restored (see Zechariah 3:1-10); Evil transported from Israel to Babylon (see Zechariah 5:5-11); Deliverance of Israel (see Zechariah 12:1-9); Spiritual restoration (see Zechariah 13:1-7);Jesus to sit on David’s throne (see Luke 1:32-33); and Drink wine in the kingdom (see Matthew 26:27-29; Mark 14:23-25; Luke 22:17-18).
Allegorical Interpretation is Dangerous
Strong words but true nonetheless. This is not to say that allegory as a literary device is not found in the Bible, there are many wonderful examples of allegory in Scripture (for example see Psalm 80:8-13; Proverbs 7:1-27; Ecclesiastes 12:1-8; Ezekiel 23:1-49; Luke 15:3-7; 20:9-18; John 10:1-18; 1 Corinthians 3:10-15; Galatians 4:21-31; Ephesians 6:11-17). It is when allegory is used as a method of interpretation that it can become problematic at best or downright dangerous at worst. Here are a few reasons to consider, but before reading please remember Peter’s words, “knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20-21, ESV) Since the Bible, being the true Word of God, is the only book that matters after we die, knowing it correctly is vitally important!
Disregards God's Intention
God intends for humanity to clearly understand His words, using language's normal meaning. When God warned Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge, there was no hidden meaning; it was Satan who introduced doubt and misled Eve.
Scripture shows many instances where God spoke audibly without ambiguity, and His written revelations are equally clear and precise. God expects His communications to be understood and obeyed. Allegorical interpretation ignores this intention, relying instead on the interpreter's imagination and worldview.
Potential Barrier to the Truth
Allegorical interpretation attempts to communicate through symbolic representations. The final decision on its meaning is determined by the one practicing it. Due to its use of symbols and metaphors to convey meanings, rather than focusing on the literal usage of words it can lead to different understandings of what God intended. For example, Origen, the “father of Biblical allegorization,” interpreted the Parable of the Good Samaritan using allegory. He interpreted the robbed man as Adam, Jerusalem as paradise, Jericho as the world, the priest as the law, the Levites as the Prophets, the Samaritan as Christ, the donkey as Christ’s physical body carrying the wounded man (the wounds being his sins), the inn as the Church, and the Samaritan’s promise to return as the second coming of Christ. Thus completely changing the true lesson of the parable. J. Dwight Pentecost (1915-2014) a Christian Theologian summarizes this concept with these words, “It would seem that the purpose of the allegorical method is not to interpret Scripture, but to pervert the true meaning of Scripture, albeit under the guise of seeking a deeper or more spiritual meaning.”[3]
Disregards the Hermeneutic Rule to Avoid Eisegesis
Biblical Hermeneutics encourages one to always use exegesis, the reading “out of” the text as opposed to eisegesis, the reading into the text, which allows the text to mean whatever the interpreter wants it to mean. Origen thought that the literal meaning of Scripture was unworthy of God and one should seek a deeper meaning that was worthy of God. That does not make any sense, how can God inspire us to write words unworthy of Him?
Ignores the Facts
Allegorical interpreters do not believe that prophecy will be fulfilled literally, for example they believe that the church has replaced Israel due to its sin and rejection of Jesus. But that claim ignores the facts that state the opposite. Moses explains why God chose the Israelites, “because he loved your fathers and chose their offspring after them” (Deuteronomy 4:37a, ESV). He further states, “Know, therefore, that the LORD your God is not giving you this good land to possess because of your righteousness, for you are a stubborn people.” (Deuteronomy 9:6, ESV) The selection of Israel was not based on their righteousness or obedience. Consequently, Israel cannot be excluded from being God's chosen people due to unrighteousness or disobedience. The selection of Israel as an elect nation by God was not contingent upon their national response. Scripture indicates that God's covenant with Israel is founded on His unwavering faithfulness. Paul wrote, “Then what’s the advantage of being a Jew? Is there any value in the ceremony of circumcision? Yes, there are great benefits! First of all, the Jews were entrusted with the whole revelation of God. True, some of them were unfaithful; but just because they were unfaithful, does that mean God will be unfaithful? Of course not! Even if everyone else is a liar, God is true.” (Romans 3:1-4a, NLT) The famous English preacher Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892) once stated, “I think we do not attach sufficient importance to the restoration of the Jews. We do not think enough of it. But certainly, if there is anything promised in the Bible it is this. I imagine that you cannot read the Bible without seeing clearly that there is to be an actual restoration of the children of Israel.”[4]
Summary
Before summarizing I need to say that this presentation of points and counter-points is far from being exhaustive and it will likely grow in time (God willing).
As a Bible teacher I have read a number of commentaries and listened to several teachers and have grown to truly appreciate the study of Biblical hermeneutics, but sadly not everyone uses the same rules for interpretation. In my study and research the first rule I apply is the literal principle.
A literal interpretation is to understand the text in a straightforward manner without any special considerations or modifications. Many make the mistake of trying to read between the lines and come up with meanings for Scriptures that are not truly in the text. That doesn’t mean there are not areas where there are some ‘spiritual truths’ behind the plain meanings of Scripture, however that does not mean that every Scripture has a hidden spiritual truth. Biblical hermeneutics helps us remain faithful to the intended meaning of Scripture and away from allegorizing and symbolizing Bible verses and passages that should be understood literally. The principle assumes that each word in a passage has a normal, literal meaning, unless there is good reason to view it as a figure of speech, preventing one from improperly spiritualizing or allegorizing. The principle encourages readers to allow the words to mean what each word actually means.
In my view of the Bible I have no problem in believing literally what John wrote in Revelation 20:1-10. That there will be a one-thousand year period where Jesus will reign on earth between His second coming and when eternity begins.
Bibliography
Gingrich, R. E. (2001). The Millennium. Riverside Printing.
Fruchtenbaum, A. G. (1994). Israelology: the missing link in systematic theology (Rev. ed.). Ariel Ministries.
Pentecost, J. D. (1958). Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology. Zondervan.
Riddlebarger, K. (2013). A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times (Expanded Edition). Baker Books.
Spurgeon, C. H. (1855). The New Park Street Pulpit Sermons (Vol. 1). Passmore & Alabaster.
Tyndale, W. (1848). Doctrinal Treatises and Introductions to Different Portions of the Holy Scriptures (H. Walter, Ed.; Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
Walvoord, J. F. (1990). The prophecy knowledge handbook. Victor Books.
Zuck, R. B. (1991). Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth (C. Bubeck Sr., Ed.). David C. Cook.
[1] Tyndale, W. (1848). Doctrinal Treatises and Introductions to Different Portions of the Holy Scriptures (H. Walter, Ed.; Vol. 1, p. 304). Cambridge University Press.
[2] Riddlebarger, K. (2013). A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times (Expanded Edition, p. 234). Baker Books.
[3] Pentecost, J. D. (1958). Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology (p. 5). Zondervan.
[4] Spurgeon, C. H. (1855). The Church of Christ. In The New Park Street Pulpit Sermons (Vol. 1, p. 214). Passmore & Alabaster.