A 40 yr. Millennium? How can that be?

[Lehigh3]

Why do Preterists say the "thousand years" in Scripture equates to a prophetic 40 yr. millennium?

The answer is found in this study of Typology (OT type/NT anti-type) with emphasis on the 40 yr. wilderness wandering after Israel's original (type) "Exodus" from bondage in Egypt.


Typology and Forty

Of all the types and shadows of the Old Testament, none is as pervasive, and therefore important, as the shadows revealed in the relationship between "forty" and the fulfillment of promises.
Throughout the Old Testament we find this usage of the number forty. Examples of this usage are the forty days and nights that God caused it to rain upon the face of the earth; also, in the length of the reigns of Saul, David and Solomon (Acts 13:21; 2 Sam. 5:4). Besides these, we see forty used as a temporal shadow in the duration of Jonah's preaching of judgment to the Ninevites (Jon. 3:4) and the number of days that the spies of Canaan searched out the land (Num. 13:25).
The New Testament underscores the importance of this typological number. Christ fasted for forty days and forty nights and continually preached that the generation then living would see the judgment of God. In fact, Christ preached the very same judgment upon the city that Jonah did.
We find the most significant type of all in the forty years of wilderness wandering leading up to the possession of the temporal land of promise. In fact, Paul himself wrote that the surrounding events of the wilderness wandering "were our examples" (I Cor. 10:6), and that "they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) have come" (v.11).
One of the first lessons a student of types and shadows will learn is the lofty place given to the Exodus out of Egypt. It is this event which presents the clearest correspondences to the redemptive work of Christ and the time-frame of its fulfillment.
To be more specific, the exodus out of Egypt and into the promised land by the children of Israel under Moses is a direct shadow of the exodus of the New Testament generation from the cross to the entrance into the eternal land of rest.
Let's look at some comparisons between the two forty year exodus periods.
The first was preceded by physical slavery- the bondage of the Hebrews in Egypt. The second was preceded by spiritual slavery, man's bondage to sin and death. One introduced the first Passover with the blood of lambs. The other fulfilled the type with the sacrifice of the final Passover Lamb ( Jesus Christ):
1 Corinthians 5:7 (NKJV) Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. One brought God's people physical deliverance by crossing through the Red Sea. The other brought God's people spiritual deliverance by the working of the cross of Christ.
The first established a temporary contract of God with the people He chose- the Old Covenant. The second established a permanent contract- the New Covenant.


Full article/study: The Feasts of the Lord - Preterism.com -- English

 

[Sinthesis]

Why do Preterists say the "thousand years" in Scripture equates to a prophetic 40 yr. millennium?

The answer is found in this study of Typology (OT type/NT anti-type) with emphasis on the 40 yr. wilderness wandering after Israel's original (type) "Exodus" from bondage in Egypt.


Typology and Forty

Of all the types and shadows of the Old Testament, none is as pervasive, and therefore important, as the shadows revealed in the relationship between "forty" and the fulfillment of promises.
Throughout the Old Testament we find this usage of the number forty. Examples of this usage are the forty days and nights that God caused it to rain upon the face of the earth; also, in the length of the reigns of Saul, David and Solomon (Acts 13:21; 2 Sam. 5:4). Besides these, we see forty used as a temporal shadow in the duration of Jonah's preaching of judgment to the Ninevites (Jon. 3:4) and the number of days that the spies of Canaan searched out the land (Num. 13:25).
The New Testament underscores the importance of this typological number. Christ fasted for forty days and forty nights and continually preached that the generation then living would see the judgment of God. In fact, Christ preached the very same judgment upon the city that Jonah did.
We find the most significant type of all in the forty years of wilderness wandering leading up to the possession of the temporal land of promise. In fact, Paul himself wrote that the surrounding events of the wilderness wandering "were our examples" (I Cor. 10:6), and that "they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) have come" (v.11).
One of the first lessons a student of types and shadows will learn is the lofty place given to the Exodus out of Egypt. It is this event which presents the clearest correspondences to the redemptive work of Christ and the time-frame of its fulfillment.
To be more specific, the exodus out of Egypt and into the promised land by the children of Israel under Moses is a direct shadow of the exodus of the New Testament generation from the cross to the entrance into the eternal land of rest.
Let's look at some comparisons between the two forty year exodus periods.
The first was preceded by physical slavery- the bondage of the Hebrews in Egypt. The second was preceded by spiritual slavery, man's bondage to sin and death. One introduced the first Passover with the blood of lambs. The other fulfilled the type with the sacrifice of the final Passover Lamb ( Jesus Christ):
1 Corinthians 5:7 (NKJV) Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. One brought God's people physical deliverance by crossing through the Red Sea. The other brought God's people spiritual deliverance by the working of the cross of Christ.
The first established a temporary contract of God with the people He chose- the Old Covenant. The second established a permanent contract- the New Covenant.


Full article/study: The Feasts of the Lord - Preterism.com -- English

Poor use of Typology.2 Forty doesn't signify a permanent change as does Millennium. It can represent the interface between eras, but is not an era itself.

 

[Lehigh3]

Poor use of Typology.2 Forty doesn't signify a permanent change as does Millennium. It can represent the interface between eras, but is not an era itself.

No, I think you're wrong & disagree & challenge you to present another as comprehensive than this Preterist scholar has!

From David to Jesus was a "thousand Years" The thousand years is also in view prophetically, when God was rebuilding David's tabernacle through the apostles. Jesus was & is the greater David. James notes the rebuilding of David's tabernacle in Acts 15.
A "thousand years" is also like one day to the Lord prophetically- so your claim is not valid!

 

[Stormcrow]

No, I think you're wrong & disagree & challenge you to present another as comprehensive than this Preterist scholar has!

From David to Jesus was a "thousand Years" The thousand years is also in view prophetically, when God was rebuilding David's tabernacle through the apostles. Jesus was & is the greater David. James notes the rebuilding of David's tabernacle in Acts 15.
A "thousand years" is also like one day to the Lord prophetically- so your claim is not valid!

I think this may be where some preterist teachers go off the rails. The sequence of events as they unfold in Revelation has the millennium starting AFTER the fall of Jerusalem.

Jerusalem falls in chapter 18, Christ comes with the armies of heaven in chapter 19, then Satan is bound for a thousand years (chapter 20).

There is something I noticed, however, in looking at these passages again:

{4} Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. Revelation 20:4 (NASB)

{6} Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years. Revelation 20:6 (NASB)

Just "thinking out loud" here, but these verses don't say Christ will reign 1,000 years, but that those who are part of the first resurrection will reign WITH HIM for 1,000 years. The subject of the verse is "the one who has a part in the first resurrection", not Christ.

Christ reigns forever. These reign with Him for only 1,000 years of His eternal reign.

Does that provide any further insight into what this means?

 

[Lehigh3]

I think this may be where some preterist teachers go off the rails. The sequence of events as they unfold in Revelation has the millennium starting AFTER the fall of Jerusalem.

Jerusalem falls in chapter 18, Christ comes with the armies of heaven in chapter 19, then Satan is bound for a thousand years (chapter 20).

It is not a mistake by preterists- it is a mistake by those who do not know that Rev.20, like Rev.12 in particular- are recapitulalions of the 30- 70AD millennium.
Rev. is not chronological, as you know, & even Satan is treated separately for emphasis on God's perennial enemy. But Rev.20 is all a recap from when Christ bound the strong man during His 1st advent- allowed the nations to receive the gospel, told the apostles they would sit on thrones as judges of the tribes of Israel (this they did during the "millennium") Then we see the martyrs fate - treated separately to show that they were the first resurrection of the NT righteous on earth & to heaven when Jesus returned. They reigned in life during that "thousand years" with Christ.

There is something I noticed, however, in looking at these passages again:

Just "thinking out loud" here, but these verses don't say Christ will reign 1,000 years, but that those who are part of the first resurrection will reign WITH HIM for 1,000 years. The subject of the verse is "the one who has a part in the first resurrection", not Christ.

Christ reigns forever. These reign with Him for only 1,000 years of His eternal reign.

Does that provide any further insight into what this means?

I look at that differently. Their reign for only that millennium time just means that they were betrothed to Christ before He ascended to heaven. Jesus told them that He would be with them "always, even until the end of the age."
That means that they didn't see Him again until the Old Covenant age was over in AD70 & the consummation took place at the marriage supper of the Lamb in heaven. Jesus also promised to eat & drink "anew" in the kingdom with them.

In the New Jerusalem (heaven & earth) the saints reign forever and ever (Rev.22:5)

Hope that helped.

 

[Stormcrow]

{24} "And in her [Jerusalem] was found the blood of prophets and of saints and of all who have been slain on the earth." Revelation 18:24 (NASB)

{1} After these things I heard something like a loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying, "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God; Revelation 19:1 (NASB)

{20} And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone. {21} And the rest were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse, and all the birds were filled with their flesh. ["Wherever the corpse is..."] Revelation 19:20-21 (NASB)

{1} Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. Revelation 20:1 (NASB)

I don't see a regression of the narrative or any recapitulation here. The narative appears both linear and chronological.

For what it's worth.

 

[Lehigh3]

I don't see a regression of the narrative or any recapitulation here. The narative appears both linear and chronological.

For what it's worth.

The KJV has it worded differently. Makes a big difference!

Revelation 20

1And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

 

[Sinthesis]

No, I think you're wrong & disagree & challenge you to present another as comprehensive than this Preterist scholar has!

From David to Jesus was a "thousand Years" The thousand years is also in view prophetically, when God was rebuilding David's tabernacle through the apostles. Jesus was & is the greater David. James notes the rebuilding of David's tabernacle in Acts 15.
A "thousand years" is also like one day to the Lord prophetically- so your claim is not valid!

Wow! I must have touched a nerve. Fine. I'll soon explain why your author is wrong, and propose a better type/anti-type for 'forty vs millennium'. However, I'm not a copy/paste theologian. It will take a little time to compose my thoughts, but soon doesn't mean 1000yrs.

 

[Lehigh3]

Wow! I must have touched a nerve. Fine. I'll soon explain why your author is wrong, and propose a better type/anti-type for 'forty vs millennium'. However, I'm not a copy/paste theologian. It will take a little time to compose my thoughts, but soon doesn't mean 1000yrs.

Sounds very defensive to me.

And of course "soon" doesn't mean thousands of years later, duh!

 

[Sinthesis]

Wow! I must have touched a nerve. Fine. I'll soon explain why your author is wrong, and propose a better type/anti-type for 'forty vs millennium'. However, I'm not a copy/paste theologian. It will take a little time to compose my thoughts, but soon doesn't mean 1000yrs.

OK, I intended to go through the article and refute each errant point, but actually there is nothing in that study equating forty to a millennium. There are a lot of examples of forty, but not one example of a thousand or a millennium. So it simply fails to support the idea of a 40yr millennium.

It is however spot on in the comparison of the two historic forty year wilderness periods for God's people PRIOR to their entrance into the promised land.

The Israelites, after demonstrating their lack of faith in God's promise, wandered 40yrs before the remnant crossed the Jordan to possess Canaan. Their possession was to be permanent(metaphorically 1000yrs) provided they kept the first covenant. They didn't, and were thus vomited back out as a consequence.

First century Jews, after demonstrating their lack of faith in God's Son, had 40yrs to repent and follow Him. Just as crossing the Jordan represents a water baptism, the devastation of 70AD represents a baptism of fire that was to be crossed prior to Christianity emerging from the bondage of Judaism to enter the promised land of the entire earth, and take possession of it through the Holy Spirit as Jesus' eternal(metaphorical 1000yrs) earthly Kingdom.

In each case the 'millennium' is the era following the 40yrs period.

 

[Lehigh3]

OK, I intended to go through the article and refute each errant point, but actually there is nothing in that study equating forty to a millennium. There are a lot of examples of forty, but not one example of a thousand or a millennium. So it simply fails to support the idea of a 40yr millennium.

It is however spot on in the comparison of the two historic forty year wilderness periods for God's people PRIOR to their entrance into the promised land.

The Israelites, after demonstrating their lack of faith in God's promise, wandered 40yrs before the remnant crossed the Jordan to possess Canaan. Their possession was to be permanent(metaphorically 1000yrs) provided they kept the first covenant. They didn't, and were thus vomited back out as a consequence.

First century Jews, after demonstrating their lack of faith in God's Son, had 40yrs to repent and follow Him. Just as crossing the Jordan represents a water baptism, the devastation of 70AD represents a baptism of fire that was to be crossed prior to Christianity emerging from the bondage of Judaism to enter the promised land of the entire earth, and take possession of it through the Holy Spirit as Jesus' eternal(metaphorical 1000yrs) earthly Kingdom.

In each case the 'millennium' is the era following the 40yrs period.

Wow, someone is confused about Biblical prophecy!

The thousand years (we term a millennium) in Rev.20 was prophetically a 40 yr. period equal to the 1st exodus. This time, with the New Covenant, God gave Israel 40 yrs. to merge with Christianity. Only the remnant of Israel was saved.

This is the "thousand years" of Rev.20- a recapitulation from Jesus binding the strongman , so the nations could receive the gospel- from the cross to the parousia. (approx.AD30-70) When the martyrs reigned on thrones judging the 12 tribes.
Where "after the 1,000 yrs. were finished" then we see the judgment of Judah for persecuting spiritual Israel. Fire comes down & destroys them (this is figurative language of the judgment) Then we see the devil (who deceived them) destroyed too.
There is the general resurrection & judgment of the dead scene also- at the "end of the age" The end of the age is the same as the end of the prophetic "thousand yrs" also. AD70.

It all was to take place "soon" in Rev. John wrote Rev. towards the end of the thousand years - or this 40 yr. period.

You do well to study & learn the Preterist position on this. It can't & won't be refuted intellectually:
A Forty Year Millennium? Is That Possible? | eschatology.org

 

[warfrog]

I think this may be where some preterist teachers go off the rails. The sequence of events as they unfold in Revelation has the millennium starting AFTER the fall of Jerusalem.

Jerusalem falls in chapter 18, Christ comes with the armies of heaven in chapter 19, then Satan is bound for a thousand years (chapter 20).

There is something I noticed, however, in looking at these passages again:

Just "thinking out loud" here, but these verses don't say Christ will reign 1,000 years, but that those who are part of the first resurrection will reign WITH HIM for 1,000 years. The subject of the verse is "the one who has a part in the first resurrection", not Christ.

Christ reigns forever. These reign with Him for only 1,000 years of His eternal reign.

Does that provide any further insight into what this means?

Christ does not reign forever.

1 Corinthians 15:20-28

He reigns with His after the gathering at the end of the tribulation, that is why the martyrs of the ribulation are spoken of to signify that all His will be gathered at once and will "live and reign with Christ 1000 years. But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished"

That shows several things in those few words of Rev 20:4-6

1.the saints are judged
2.they are resurrected and live and reign with Christ for the given time frame
3 the rest of the dead do not live
4. it says "rest of the dead" signifying that the first also were dead but are made alive after the tribulation to rule 1000 years.

When the last enemy is destroyed, which is death, the Son will subject Himself to the Father, that God may be all in all. Rev 20:11-15 shows us when the last enemy is destroyed and that the judgement of the dead takes place at that time, Death being the last and is cast into the lake of fire which is the second death.

I do not know what this 40 year thing is at all in any form, nor have i ever even heard of it before these last few minutes.

 

[Sinthesis]

It can't & won't be refuted intellectually:

Yes, some hyper positions are quite immune to intellect.:rolling:rolling:rolling

 

[Lehigh3]

Yes, some hyper positions are quite immune to intellect.:rolling:rolling:rolling

And the green-eyed dragons are immune to intellect!

 

[Sinthesis]

When was John on his throne?

 

[Lehigh3]

When was John on his throne?

Can't dignify that question with an intelligent answer.

 

[Sinthesis]

Can't dignify that question with an intelligent answer.

It doesn't have to be an intelligent answer; any answer you're capable of will suffice.

 

[Lehigh3]

It doesn't have to be an intelligent answer; any answer you're capable of will suffice.

Sorry, any answer is just "gossip" :p

 

[Sinthesis]

Can't dignify that question with an intelligent answer.

The point being that if the millennium was complete around 70AD then John himself could not be one of the heavenly 24 elders he glimpsed as part of the future in Rev 4. John would not leave this world until well past 70AD. This is not a problem when one realizes the millennium began in 70AD and continues still.

 

[Lehigh3]

The point being that if the millennium was complete around 70AD then John himself could not be one of the heavenly 24 elders he glimpsed as part of the future in Rev 4. John would not leave this world until well past 70AD. This is not a problem when one realizes the millennium began in 70AD and continues still.

So you assume that John is or was or literally will be 1 of the 24 elders in the symbolic book of Revelation!?!
No. That explains nothing.
The better understanding of the scene John beholds is - the heavenly archetype of the earthly sanctuary & its furniture. Round about the throne, John sees 4 & 20 seats or lesser thrones. Upon the seats he sees 4 & 20 elders, clothed in white, wearing gold crowns. These are the royal priests & presbyters of God. They sit as part of the court & counsel of the Great King.
The elders answer to the 24 courses of priests from the sons of Aaron that served in the sanctuary. (1 Chrn.24:1-19)
They symbolize the church universal before the throne of God & the Lamb.
They consist of the redeemed of all nations united in Christ & seated with him in heavenly places.(Eph.2:6)
The purpose of the elders in the vision is to signify the reign of the saints as joint heirs with Christ (Rom.8:17)
The heavenly image fulfills Isaiah's prophecy concerning God's spiritual kingdom "when the Lord of hosts shall reign in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, before His elders, gloriously." (Isa.24:23)

John was "in the Spirit." God gave his prophets visions & revelations of things unseen- or the spiritual realm. Here symbolized by the heavens- where John was shown events soon to unfold.