What is the Millennial Reign?

[mikew]

Rev 20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain.
Rev 20:2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.
Rev 20:4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.
Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison (ESV)

What is the Millennial Reign?

From what I see here, the time period doesn't define or restrict Christ's reign. And that would make sense because we know that His reign is eternal.

What does seem to be restricted or limited is the period of time where Satan has been bound followed by a brief release with some other events happening before his destruction. The other time limit is upon the reign of the saints with Christ.

What is the most logical description of this millennial reign?

[Allyn]

Its not actually about the length of time that Christ reigns because He reigns forever regrdless. Its telling us, rather, that the dead saints from the 40 year period between the ascension and 70AD are reigning with Christ for that time (whether it be 40 years on earth and 1000years in heaven it matters not) until the books are opened. These who are reigning with Christ are the Martha's of the christian world at that time. They are the ones Jesus said will never die. Lazuras, if you remember was an example of those who died and required the resurrection while Martha was the example of one who lives and believes in Jesus and will never die. One under the Old Covenant and one under the New Covenant.

20 Now Martha, as soon as she heard that Jesus was coming, went and met Him, but Mary was sitting in the house. 21 Now Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died. 22 But even now I know that whatever You ask of God, God will give You.”
23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
24 Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
27 She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

[mikew]

I have a question for you to consider in your response: Are you saying that a saint who died on the 39th year then was raised at that moment and then had a millennial reign with Christ of only one year?

Then also I don't see how you relate the John 11 passage at all to the issue of millennial reign. Jesus' discussion with Martha appeared to be about the benefit Christians have of resurrection in connection with the resurrection of Jesus. The odd situation here though was that Jesus described our benefit before anyone was aware that Jesus would be resurrected.

you said...

Lazuras, if you remember was an example of those who died and required the resurrection while Martha was the example of one who lives and believes in Jesus and will never die.

This seems unlikely that Jesus made any distinction between Martha's destiny and Lazarus' destiny. I don't understand what distinction you made between these two people.

But thanks for providing the first response. I'm more curious about the ranger of responses than the discussions -- but how could I resist discussing it -- oh well.

[Allyn]

I have a question for you to consider in your response: Are you saying that a saint who died on the 39th year then was raised at that moment and then had a millennial reign with Christ of only one year?

I have no idea what one year on earth feels like in Heaven. Remeber, this takes place in heaven. It probably has nothing to do with a time frame but rather the concept of honor and glory with the the One whom they lived and died for.

Then also I don't see how you relate the John 11 passage at all to the issue of millennial reign. Jesus' discussion with Martha appeared to be about the benefit Christians have of resurrection in connection with the resurrection of Jesus. The odd situation here though was that Jesus described our benefit before anyone was aware that Jesus would be resurrected.

It is apparent that Martha was aware of the resurrection. But to your question, it has much to do with Rev. 20 in that many of those who Jesus was referring to as he who lives and believes in Me shall never die are those who LIVED and reigned.

you said...
Lazuras, if you remember was an example of those who died and required the resurrection while Martha was the example of one who lives and believes in Jesus and will never die.
This seems unlikely that Jesus made any distinction between Martha's destiny and Lazarus' destiny. I don't understand what distinction you made between these two people.

Well its not original with me so I'll give credit where credit is due.
23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
24 Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
27 She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

But thanks for providing the first response. I'm more curious about the ranger of responses than the discussions -- but how could I resist discussing it -- oh well.

You're welcome

[mikew]

I have no idea what one year on earth feels like in Heaven. Remeber, this takes place in heaven. It probably has nothing to do with a time frame but rather the concept of honor and glory with the the One whom they lived and died for.

Where does the scripture say that the saints were in a realm called Heaven? I can't remember a fact unless that fact has been established as reasonable.

Then also I don't see how you relate the John 11 passage at all to the issue of millennial reign. Jesus' discussion with Martha appeared to be about the benefit Christians have of resurrection in connection with the resurrection of Jesus. The odd situation here though was that Jesus described our benefit before anyone was aware that Jesus would be resurrected.

It is apparent that Martha was aware of the resurrection. But to your question, it has much to do with Rev. 20 in that many of those who Jesus was referring to as he who lives and believes in Me shall never die are those who LIVED and reigned.

Are you saying Martha merely knew about resurrection in general or that she knew that Jesus would be raised? I was trying to say that no one knew yet that Jesus would be raised from the dead. So Martha would not see how Jesus' resurrection affected the resurrection of the Last Day (nor about the other ideas on resurrection presented in John 11). I doubt that there was a connection between John 11 and Rev 20, so I'm at a disadvantage seeing what you are saying. Though, I would say that the first century saints also got to enjoy the benefit of this John 11 eternal life even distinctly from the resurrection of the Last Day.

you said...
Lazuras, if you remember was an example of those who died and required the resurrection while Martha was the example of one who lives and believes in Jesus and will never die.
This seems unlikely that Jesus made any distinction between Martha's destiny and Lazarus' destiny. I don't understand what distinction you made between these two people.

Well its not original with me so I'll give credit where credit is due.
23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
24 Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
27 She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

Hmm. I have read the passage many times recently. I was interested in explanation.
As I see it ...Once Lazarus was raised he was in the same condition as Martha. I doubt that Jesus got into such nitty gritty theological distinction at this graveside event so as to make a distinction between Martha's and Lazarus' conditions.

[Allyn]

I have no idea what one year on earth feels like in Heaven. Remeber, this takes place in heaven. It probably has nothing to do with a time frame but rather the concept of honor and glory with the the One whom they lived and died for.

Where does the scripture say that the saints were in a realm called Heaven? I can't remember a fact unless that fact has been established as reasonable.

Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

Where did this take place in your view?

Are you saying Martha merely knew about resurrection in general or that she knew that Jesus would be raised? I was trying to say that no one knew yet that Jesus would be raised from the dead. So Martha would not see how Jesus' resurrection affected the resurrection of the Last Day (nor about the other ideas on resurrection presented in John 11). I doubt that there was a connection between John 11, so I'm at a disadvantage seeing what you are saying.

I did not mention it was Jesus' resurrection that Jesus was talking to Martha about (i don't think I did). Jesus was talking about people being raised.

you said...
Lazuras, if you remember was an example of those who died and required the resurrection while Martha was the example of one who lives and believes in Jesus and will never die.
This seems unlikely that Jesus made any distinction between Martha's destiny and Lazarus' destiny. I don't understand what distinction you made between these two people.

Well its not original with me so I'll give credit where credit is due.
23 Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.”
24 Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”
25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
27 She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

Hmm. I have read the passage many times recently. I was interested in explanation.
As I see it ...Once Lazarus was raised he was in the same condition as Martha. I doubt that Jesus got into such nitty gritty theological distinction at this graveside event so as to make a distinction between Martha's and Lazarus' conditions.

Yes, Lazuras was in the same condition as Martha (after his reanimation) but He was using him as part of his illustration anyway by saying:
He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. In otherwords those who die before the resurrection will be raised back to life. But others may never die before that happens and for them Jesus said: And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.

[mikew]

Where does the scripture say that the saints were in a realm called Heaven? I can't remember a fact unless that fact has been established as reasonable.

Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

Where did this take place in your view?

I'm not ready to just make a guess. I would tend to exclude them reigning in physical bodies on the earth, cause this was not noticed by any historians. If there are no more explicit verses on the topic, we are left to mere speculation -- something I do at times but maybe not at the moment.

Are you saying Martha merely knew about resurrection in general or that she knew that Jesus would be raised? I was trying to say that no one knew yet that Jesus would be raised from the dead. So Martha would not see how Jesus' resurrection affected the resurrection of the Last Day (nor about the other ideas on resurrection presented in John 11). I doubt that there was a connection between John 11, so I'm at a disadvantage seeing what you are saying.

I did not mention it was Jesus' resurrection that Jesus was talking to Martha about (i don't think I did). Jesus was talking about people being raised.

Oops. sorry. I didn't clarify that I saw the passage as being where Jesus introduced His being raised where its recorded that "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life..." (John 11:25). (I see Jesus describing eternal life and our resurrections in connection to His as the initial resurrection.)

Hmm. I have read the passage many times recently. I was interested in explanation.
As I see it ...Once Lazarus was raised he was in the same condition as Martha. I doubt that Jesus got into such nitty gritty theological distinction at this graveside event so as to make a distinction between Martha's and Lazarus' conditions.

Yes, Lazuras was in the same condition as Martha (after his reanimation) but He was using him as part of his illustration anyway by saying:
He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. In otherwords those who die before the resurrection will be raised back to life. But others may never die before that happens and for them Jesus said: And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die.

Its getting pretty complicated here. But you have raised an interesting alternate meaning here. I see an aspect of resurrection being included that went beyond the time frame of Eschatological events.

[Douglas]

I could see a possible understanding of the millennial reign being the time a person accepts Christ as his saviour until physical death. We reign with Christ now from the point of our being "born again" until we physicaly die, then we go and be with Him forever. One could consider the "first" resurrection at the time of being "born again", and the second resurrection at the time right after physical death, as that could be considered a resurrection of sorts as well. Just something to ponder.

[mikew]

I could see a possible understanding of the millennial reign being the time a person accepts Christ as his saviour until physical death. We reign with Christ now from the point of our being "born again" until we physicaly die, then we go and be with Him forever. One could consider the "first" resurrection at the time of being "born again", and the second resurrection at the time right after physical death, as that could be considered a resurrection of sorts as well. Just something to ponder.

Wouldn't we first have to be beheaded to qualify though? and then we could reign in this life?

It seems that the millennial reign was a reward granted to the believers in the first century, a recompense, for the extreme suffering and persecution they endured.

If this was a benefit to each believer, does that benefit fit in the context of the whole Book of Revelation?

[Douglas]

I hate to point out the obvious, but the "beheading" might..., just maybe...., possibly....., be symbolic and not literal.

And it is your prerogative to limit Rev. 20 to the first century, but I don't necessarily see it that way.