A 40 Year Millenium?

[anochria]

So, I imagine this has been asked before... if so, please just point me to the right thread. But, I'd like to hear from a full-preterist perspective (I myself being a partial preterist), how it is that the Millenium can be seen as a period of merely 40 years? Now, I'm an amillenialist and am, of course, not wed to a literal 1,000 year reign, but still, symbolic words have meanings too. It seems to me that the meaning behind a word like "millenium" is basically a "dang long amount of time". How is a 40 year millenium not an oxymorom?

[steve]

I'm glad you raised this question, because I too would be interested in hearing the answer.

[psychohmike]

I'm not really dogmatic one way or another. Except that first and foremost we must remember that this book of Revelation is filled with many numbers that are clearly symbolic. I do believe that it is the details found inside the chapter that truly define the parameter of the thousand years. It would appear to have it's beginning when Satan is Bound. And I would agree with Steve Gregg on this point having been during the earthly ministry of Jesus and His reference to the strongman being bound that Jesus would be able to plunder his house. See Matthew 12:29. In other words Jesus said, "If you see me casting out demons, then you know that Satan is bound."

And then I see the events of Revelation 20:7-9 where the ones that are persecuting the saints are devoured by fire from heaven as the same judgment spoken of by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-12. Both passages speak of fire coming down out of heaven upon those that are persecuting the saints.

It's also my understanding that the Jews had a concept of time being made up of 7000 years. That the world would end after 6000 years followed by 1000 years. Question is though...How did they interpret these things. Was it to be wooden literal 1000 year periods of time? Or simply 7 LONG periods of time? Or 6 wooden literal 1000 year periods and then 1 LONG period of time.

And the only thing I have found that give any real kind of explanation from a first century perspective is found in "The Epistle of Barnabas." which is traditionally ascribed to Barnabas who is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, though some ascribe it to another apostolic father of the same name, a "Barnabas of Alexandria", or simply attribute it to an unknown early Christian teacher. In chapter 16:6-10, the author speaks of the "WEEK" having been completed, evidenced in the destruction of the temple that was, "built by hands," and the building up of the spiritual...incorruptible temple in which God truly dwells.

That's the best answer I can come up with. And the testimony of Barnabas is the earliest I can find that speaks on the subject. Now if someone would like to suggest that what he meant by "the week" was speaking of something else...Perhaps the 70th week of Daniel. I'm more than open to the suggestion.

Either way he speaks the destruction of the physical temple and the building up of the spiritual temple as coinciding with the end of "THE WEEK." (Epistle of Barnabas Ch.16)

[Allyn]

My fast answer is this. This 1000 year period, it seems, is always described by futurists as being a period of time taking place on earth and for the living. This is not at all what the passage is showing us. It is a about what is taking place for the those who had already died and were already in the presence of the Lord Jesus and participating in the honorable position of reigning with Christ.
It is in a place that is already strictly spiritual (heaven) and describes their honored position in Him for having remained faithful to the end. These were those who were persecuted unto death by those who were persecuting the church during the time when Christ had already established His kingdom and had ascended to the Father.
For those still alive only 40 years may have oassed, but that is still not the point. The point is decribing what is going on in a place without normal 24hr per day time.

[Allyn]

I gave a fast answer as a first reply, but I do like this question alot and I must admit that I am trying to understand, biblically, how to reconcile this. I do have some thoughts but have not put them into a cohesive concept as of yet. I have just recently come to see some things from Dan. 7, Matthew 19 and Rev. 20 that to me all tie in together.

anochria, you tell us that you are a partial preterist/amillinialist and so having once been one myself I can relate to your question. There were some very certain prophecies that I believe the Bible has taught that must take place before another event can be said to have been fulfilled. We all agree on that, I think. But we differ on whether or not those things have already taken place.

It seems where a full pret and a partial pret agree is only up to the AD 70 event. From then on we hold to different ideas concerning:
The Rapture
The second coming
The general resurrection
How no one will see him again but yet every eye will see Him
The 1000 years
the first resurrection
the timing of the books opened

just to name a few.

Your thread has a specific question but yet the specific question cannot be answered, I think, without the discussion of what the Bible says about the above points we disagree on. So if I can stall a little more for time, I would like to try and respond more fully to your original question but still without writing a book.

[psychohmike]

Gee whiz Allyn, You make me feel like I answered in haste. I also agree with you about this having been a spiritual reality. One thing that I ask people when they begin to ask me about specific details regarding the apocalypse is, "Where is John at when he is receiving this vision?" The answer quite simply is that he was in heaven. Or at least the "theater of his mind," on a beach on the Island of Patmos. Kind of like Ezekiel being by the river Chebar when he received his vision.

Just a few thoughts

[Allyn]

Gee whiz Allyn, You make me feel like I answered in haste. I also agree with you about this having been a spiritual reality. One thing that I ask people when they begin to ask me about specific details regarding the apocalypse is, "Where is John at when he is receiving this vision?" The answer quite simply is that he was in heaven. Or at least the "theater of his mind," on a beach on the Island of Patmos. Kind of like Ezekiel being by the river Chebar when he received his vision.

Just a few thoughts

You did just fine

[RickC]

Rabbinic tradition(s) dating back to circa first century have differing ideas on the length of the Messiah's Reign (aka, Interregnum)- as well as where Messiah was to reign from (earth, or heaven, or both).

Excerpted from Jewish Enclyclopedia:

There are various views regarding the duration of this kingdom, and there is considerable confusion in traditional literature on this point, one and the same opinion being often quoted as held by different authorities. According to the two baraitot in Sanh. 99a, the Messianic kingdom is to last for 40, or 70, or 365, or 400, or even for 7,000 years.

And, in our tradition, 1,000 years....

I have a few of these texts in my computer some place...will try to find & post.
(If memory serves me correct, other views had the length as short as one day or week).

I personally think Paul possibly had a 40 year Reign in mind early in his ministry, or even till the end of his life (circa 67AD).
Thanks.

[Allyn]

Rabbinic tradition(s) dating back to circa first century have differing ideas on the length of the Messiah's Reign (aka, Interregnum)- as well as where Messiah was to reign from (earth, or heaven, or both).

Excerpted from Jewish Enclyclopedia:

There are various views regarding the duration of this kingdom, and there is considerable confusion in traditional literature on this point, one and the same opinion being often quoted as held by different authorities. According to the two baraitot in Sanh. 99a, the Messianic kingdom is to last for 40, or 70, or 365, or 400, or even for 7,000 years.

And, in our tradition, 1,000 years....

I have a few of these texts in my computer some place...will try to find & post.
(If memory serves me correct, other views had the length as short as one day or week).

I personally think Paul possibly had a 40 year Reign in mind early in his ministry, or even till the end of his life (circa 67AD).
Thanks.

Hi Rick, The rabbis had it wrong if they limit the reign of the Messiah. Jesus reigns forever.

[Paidion]

40 year millenium! Heh, heh.

This reminds me of the three-year "eternal" imprisonment which Josephus records Jonathan as having endured. Josephus indicated in Book 6 of The Wars of the Jews that Jonathan was "condemned to αιωνιος imprisonment".

If "αιωνιος" means "eternal" or "everlasting" (as some insist) rather than simply "lasting", then Jonathon's three-year imprisonment was eternal. (Maybe it seemed so to Jonathon).