70-1070AD Twenty-five Answers about "The Millennium" = "The 1,000 Years" = "The Day of the Lord"

TRUE. “1,000” means 1,000 and “years” means years. If 2 Peter 3:8 can be taken to hint that "The Day of the Lord" = "The 1,000 Years" of Rev 20, then it also is taken to reinforce the idea that "The 1,000 Years" is the amount of of actual time "The Day of the Lord" encompasses. I presently see no reason to bend Preterism’s insistence that the Bible’s “time statements” be taken seriously, no matter how far-fetched they may appear to some, (such as the accomplished Parousia). Notice how in 2 Peter 3:8, Christ's Apostle Peter does NOT write, “Well, with the Lord one day is as a 1000 years, or as an even 40, maybe a shag less than 14 years, or not: the Lord really cannot tell time.” No, with godly fear Peter doggedly sticks to the formula given to him by inspiration, saying it two times, both ways, really emphasizing that no matter which way you come at it, no matter which way readers try to slice it or dice it, it is clear: “With the Lord: '1 Day' = 1000 years, 1000 years = '1 Day.'”

TRUE. There are specific events described as taking place at the beginning of the 1,000 years, Rev 20:1-4. And there are specific events described as taking place at the end of the 1,000 years, (Rev 20:3 and Rev 20:5 and Rev 20:7). Rev 20:1-10's "The 1,000 Years," (aka "The Day of the Lord per 2 Peter 3:8), is, therefore, a finite quantity of time with epoch events marking its distinct beginning and ending points.

TRUE. See 70AD: "The Last Day" & Christ Arrive, His Servants Raised to Reign. Revelation 20:1-10's "The 1,000 Years" begins upon arrival of "The Last Day" when "the dead in Christ rise first," "the First Resurrection," which occurs at the moment Jesus descends from Heaven with a shout to Return, (John 6:54 and 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18 and Revelation 20:4). Preterism calculates that "The Last Day" finally arrived at Jerusalem's fall in 70AD. Per 2 Peter 3:8, "The 1,000 Years" is "The Day of the Lord." "The Lord's Day" is "The Last Day," the long awaited Sabbath Rest God had promised to His faithful people. And Jerusalem's Fall in 70 A.D. is one of many events associated with "The Day of the Lord." All the events described in Rev 18-20 following Babylon’s Fall appear to be listing the immediate consequences of that Fall, the reasons for Heavens’ rejoicing over that Fall.

FALSE. The Marriage Supper of the Lamb and the 1,000 Years both begin at the same time – at the Lord’s Return around the Fall of Babylon the Great (70AD Jerusalem). I simply consider the 1,000 years to represent the 1^st 1,000 years of the everlasting era that begins with Babylon’s Fall. But again, "The Marriage Supper of the Lamb" is an event associated with the arrival of "The Day of the Lord" which is also known as "The 1,000 Years."

TRUE. I understand the Tribulation to end with the Fall of Babylon at which point the 1,000 years begin. The Tribulation preludes the climactic arrival of “The Last Day” = “The Day of God” = "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years."

FALSE. Satan is cast into the Lake of Fire after the brief period of his release following the end of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord." (Rev 20;3 and Rev 20:7-10). But the arrival the New Heavens, New Earth and New Jerusalem occurs at the beginning of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord," at the Fall of Babylon/Jerusalem in 70AD. See New Heavens, New Earth, New Jerusalem & "The 1,000 Years" each began at Return of Christ. The community of "blessed and holy ones who have part in "The Resurrection the First" at the beginning of "the 1,000 Years" in Rev 20:4-6 is the same as "The Camp of the Saints and the Beloved City" of Rev 20:9 which is the same as "The Holy City, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" in Rev 21:2 fulfilling the promise of 1 Thessalonians 4:14, "God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus." This is the Home Christ promised to bring with His Return, John 14:1-3. So the New Heavens, New Earth & New Jerusalem all arrive with Jesus the moment He descends from Heaven with a shout, rising the dead in Christ and changing those alive and remain, (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 because "the dead in Christ who rise first in 1 Thess 4:16 are the partakers of the "the Resurrection the First" of Rev 20:4-6, which happens at the beginning of "The 1,000 Years," (Rev 4:4-6).

TRUE. Satan is cast into the Lake of Fire after the brief period of his release following the end of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord." (Rev 20;3 and Rev 20:7-10). But the arrival the New Heavens, New Earth and New Jerusalem occurs at the beginning of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord," at the Fall of Babylon/Jerusalem in 70AD. See New Heavens, New Earth, New Jerusalem & "The 1,000 Years" each began at Return of Christ. The community of "blessed and holy ones who have part in "The Resurrection the First" at the beginning of "the 1,000 Years" in Rev 20:4-6 is the same as "The Camp of the Saints and the Beloved City" of Rev 20:9 which is the same as "The Holy City, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" in Rev 21:2 fulfilling the promise of 1 Thessalonians 4:14, "God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus." This is the Home Christ promised to bring with His Return, John 14:1-3. So the New Heavens, New Earth & New Jerusalem all arrive with Jesus the moment He descends from Heaven with a shout, rising the dead in Christ and changing those alive and remain, (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 because "the dead in Christ who rise first in 1 Thess 4:16 are the partakers of the "the Resurrection the First" of Rev 20:4-6, which happens at the beginning of "The 1,000 Years," (Rev 4:4-6).

TRUE. Revelation 20:3 and Revelation 20:1-3 and Rev 20:7-10. Satan is loosed for a little season following his bondage lasting "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord."Rev 20:3b “after these things he must be released for a short time. … 7b And when the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released” NASB

TRUE. The little season of Satan’s Release ends AT the moment Satan is cast into the Lake of Fire where the Beast and False Prophet had already been cast previously, Rev 20:10.

ALMOST ENTIRELY TRUE. Though Rev 1:1 introduces the Vision as mainly predictive, Rev 1:19 expands on this to include some "things that are" along with the "things which will take place after this." Revelation describes things: some of which had already been seen, such as the Lamb having been slain; some of which were then occurring, such as the state of affairs at the Seven Churches, Rev 2-3. Rev 4:1 introduces the visions of those events that were to “come to pass” shortly following Revelation’s 63AD writing by saying “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things" that had just been described and foretold in Revelation 1-3. The time of Satan’s Binding, the enthroning of Saints, the Resurrection the First, and the arrival of the “1,000 Years” were ALL to “come to pass” shortly after Revelation’s writing. It is unfaithful to the Text to say that any these things occurred prior to Revelation’s writing. And it is unfaithful to the Text to demand that that all those things that were to about to begin with Christ’s Return had to end by Christ’s Return. Example, the New Heavens & New Earth & New Jerusalem were to begin shortly, but that in no wise means that they were to end shortly, too. In like manner, the 1,000 Years were to begin shortly, as well, but that in no wise means that they were to end shortly. (Interestingly, this the very question by which 30-70AD Millennialism refutes itself).

FALSE. See Mythbusting "All Things Fulfilled by 70AD". The Law of Moses was fulfilled on Christ’s Cross from which He shouted, “It is finished!” The Prophets are fulfilled, not by the events surrounding “70 A.D.,” but rather, the Prophets are fulfilled by the events surrounding “The Last Day” = “The Day of God” = “The Day of the Lord” = “The 1,000 Years,” (2 Peter 3:8). A.D. 70's Fall of Jerusalem/Babylon is just one of many events associated with the arrival of "The Day of the Lord" aka “The 1,000 Years.” This is the main place to defeat my position here: if it can be proven that the fulfillment of all the Law and the Prophets occurs strictly at Jerusalem's A.D. 70 destruction rather than with "The Day of the Lord." (Some good points on this are found at http://www.preteristarchive.com/PartialPreterism/mckenzie-duncan_pp_03.html while I do not agree with everything he writes there).

TRUE. The Law of Moses was fulfilled at the Cross, see Mythbusting "All Things Fulfilled by 70AD" and The Law of Christ. The Prophets found fulfillment with the entirety of events surrounding “The Day of the Lord” rather than just that notable event the marks the Day’s beginning. The Prophets organized their prophecies around "The Day of the Lord," NOT "the date of AD70." I’m exploring the possibility that the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets is associated with "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years" which had its beginning circa A.D. 70 (Destruction of Jerusalem) and went on to encompass an actual 1,000 years of human history, (per 2 Peter 3:8), ending circa A.D. 1070.

FALSE. The Law of Moses was fulfilled at Christ’s Cross from which He shouted, “It is finished!” (See Mythbusting "All Things Fulfilled by 70AD" and The Law of Christ).This is why Peter and Paul “lived as do the Gentiles” and yet were not considered “least in the Kingdom of Heaven” per Matthew 5:17-20]. It was by this fulfillment of the Law of Moses at the Cross by which Christ gained the power to destroy him who held the power of death, Hebrews 2:14. But Death and Hades were not cast into the Lake of Fire until Judgment Day which began at Christ’s Return, (Revelation 20:11-15 among all those things that were shortly arrive: Answer to Question 10).

TRUE. Revelation 20:13. This is their final & complete destruction. The only way around this attractive conclusion would be a review of the meaning of the word “destroy” as the Bible employs it and see if it could possibly find lesser fulfillments in anything sooner, but that is doubtful. There is nothing more final and complete a destruction than the Lake of Fire of Rev 20:13.

TRUE. Regardless, Revelation 20 describes the destruction of Satan as one of the events associated with "The 1,000 Years," (aka "The Day of the Lord"), the arrival of which was shortly to “come to pass” as answered in Question 10 here. And Satan’s final destruction is at his being cast into the Lake of Fire after the Short Season of Satan’s Release which begins after “The 1,000 Years,” well after the 63AD writing of Revelation 4:1, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things" described and foretold in Revelation 1-3. (Again, see Question 10 and its answer).

NOT ENTIRELY TRUE. The vindication and avenging of the "beheaded" dead in Christ begins at 70AD and continues throughout "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years" as they reign with Christ, Rev 20:4-10. They are futher vindicated and avenged again after "The 1,000 Years" have finished and Satan is released to subject "The Camp of the Saints, the Beloved City" to the same trial the Old Jerusalem faced in 70AD: only this time God comes to the New Jerusalem's rescue, Rev 20:7-10. This contrast between God's judgment upon the Old Jerusalem in 70AD and His rescueing of the New Jerusalem after "The 1,000 Years" is the ultimate vindication of "The Camp of the Saints." The vindication or avenging of the "beheaded" martyrs in the visionary vignette of Rev 20:4-7 is one of the events that mark the beginning "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord" as is the Fall of Babylon-Jerusalem in 70 A.D. It is attractive to regard this visionary vignette of Rev 20:4-10 as describing some of the immediate consequences associated with Babylon-Jerusalem's A.D. 70 Fall just like the rest of Rev 18-22 appears to do.

TRUE. The Saints are declared kings and priests unto God prior to Revelation’s writing, Revelation 1:6. But they are not Resurrected to reign until Christ’s 70AD Return at the arrival of the Last Day, John 6:54. (See my article 70AD "The Last Day": Christ Returns, His Servants Raised to Reign). Revelation 20:4-5 reads in those series of visions that follow the announcement of Babylon's Fall,"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of the 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 upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." NASB " Note how it specifically includes here those Saints who were beheaded, those who refused to worship the beast, refused to receive the mark of the beast. I am not entirely sure if "The 1,000 Years" (aka "The Day of the Lord") begins with 70 A.D. or shortly before, but it surely appears to follow the Tribulation marked by the beast. It remains attractive to me to consider the vignette of Rev 20:4-10 as describing, along with the rest of Rev 18-22, events directly associated with, possibly consequent to, Babylon’s A.D. 70 Fall. They appear to be detailing the reasons for Heaven's rejoicing over Babylon's Fall. One would consider, however, that these same saintly people had also been among those who “had been made kings and priests unto God” earlier back in Rev 1:6 where things were being described as a past tense, accomplished reality. The Scriptures seem to make a distinction between being made king and actually reigning. A fine job of making this clear was made in William Bell's teaching on the Parable of the Absent King. This same distinction may apply to explain the difference between being seated with Christ in Heavenly places (Eph 2:5-6) and actually reigning with Christ (Rev 20:4-10). Again, see Question 10 and its answer to see how 30-70AD Millennialism refutes itself at this point by declaring the Saints to be raised and reigning decades before Revelation was written to show “those things that must shortly come to pass.”

FALSE. The New Jerusalem and "The 1,000 Years" "Day of the Lord" arrive at the same time: at Christ’s Return. See New Heavens, New Earth, New Jerusalem & "The 1,000 Years" each began at Return of Christ. Revelation 21-22’s New Jerusalem is a more detailed look into “The Camp of the Saints, the Beloved City” of Rev 20:9 which is one and the same as the community of reigning, Resurrected Saints of Rev 20:4-6. I cannot get away from Hebrews 12:22-24’s description of the Heavenly Jerusalem, (equal to the New Jerusalem), at the base of said Mount Zion the first readers of Hebrews 12:18-27 stood, being called upward to meet the Lord, (as Moses & the elders did at Sinai), and to receive the Home for them He returned with, John 14:1-3. At any rate, the New Jerusalem's arrival is associated with the beginning of "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years" which was to arrive shortly after the writing of Rev 4:1.

FALSE. The New Jerusalem arrives at the same moment "The 1,000 Years" begins: at the Resurrection the First, (Rev 20:4-6), the moment "the dead in Christ rise first," (1 Thess 4:16), at the moment the Lord descends with a shout upon arrival of the Last Day, the Day of the Lord, (1 Thess 4:16 and John 6:54). See New Heavens, New Earth, New Jerusalem & "The 1,000 Years" each began at Return of Christ. The New Jerusalem's arrival is associated with old Jerusalem/Babylon's Fall. And old Jerusalem/Babylon's Fall is associated with the beginning of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord." The New Jerusalem and the 1,000 Years arrive at the same time: at the arrival of Christ at Babylon/Jerusalem’s 70AD Fall.

The term, "The 2^nd resurrection” is nowhere to be found in Scripture. Revelation 20:5 actually says “the rest of the dead did not live again until the 1,000 years are finished.” Rev 20:4-6 foresees the souls of those slain for the Gospel come alive at the beginning of “The 1,000 Years” but foresees “the rest of the dead” come alive again at the end of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord."

Again, the term “The 2^nd resurrection” is simply no where to be found in Scripture. It is "The Day of the Lord" which is the fulfillment of the Prophets. Revelation 20:4-6 foresees the “shortly to come to pass,” (see Question 10 here), fulfillment of the prophet Daniel’s Dan 12:2. “The Day of the Lord” is a single eschatological event with more than one component. The souls of the Righteous Saints “come to life” at the beginning (Rev 20:4) and the Unrighteous “rest of the dead” “come to life” at the end of this single eschatological event, "The 1,000 Years", “The Day of the Lord” Rev 20:5). And both "coming to life of the rest of the dead" and "the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets" are matters directly associated with "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years." There is no honest way Rev 20:4’s “come to life” can refer to “coming to covenant life” without Rev 20:5’s “come to life” meaning the exact same thing, (See my article Rev 20:4's "come to life" = "come to life" of Rev 20:5). And that would mean that “the rest of the dead” of Rev 20:5 eventually come to the same covenant life as did the souls of the martyred Saints of Rev 20:4 – Universalism. And Universalism is no way the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets. (See Revelation 20 & Universalism). And again, for 30-70AD Millennialism to place its “2^nd resurrection” at 70AD, it has to position the Bible’s “Resurrection the First” prior to the writing of 2 Timothy 2:18 (error of Hymenaeus) and also refute its own answer to Question 10 here. Or just reduce “the 1,000 Years” down to a matter a few years – refuting their own “Can God Tell Time?”

FAULTY QUESTION. Revelation 6:9-11 in no wise describes the martyrs as “reigning.” They are described as souls of the saintly martyrs finally being given some clothes and being told to hold out waiting a little longer until their numbers grow to contain more martyred saints. It sounds like they are eager to get out of that condition. Hardly “reigning,” they are portrayed as barely just getting robes. They seem to be described as eagerly waiting for this reigning/judging/avenging to finally begin. And again, Rev 6:9-11 is among those things that Rev 4:1 introduces as “shortly to come to pass” after it’s writing by John around 63AD. (Again, see Question 10 and realize that 30-70AD Millennialism refutes itself at this point, as well). But Rev 6:9-10's souls of the martyred saints are finally freed from their powerless waiting and come to life and are promised they will reign with Christ in the visionary vignette of Rev 20:4-6 : this truly is one component of the fulfillment of the prophet Daniel’s Dan 12:2’s Judgment Day, also known as "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years," 2 Peter 3:8. See 70AD: "The Last Day" & Christ Arrive, His Servants Raised to Reign.

FALSE. No one has ever found anywhere at any time the term, “2^nd resurrection,” in Holy Writ, ever. Rev 20:5 employs these words, “the rest of the dead did not live again until the 1,000 years are finished,” placing this component at the end of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord." I propose that "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years" had its beginning circa A.D. 70's Fall of Jerusalem/Babylon and its ending an actual 1,000 years of human history later. This would place “the coming to life of the rest of the dead” far into our past, along with the rest of the events of “The Last Day.” (Because of such, it is inaccurate to tag me “partial-preterist”).

No one can find the term, “2^nd resurrection,” anywhere in Scripture. It is just not there. Rev 20:5 employs these words, “the rest of the dead did not live again until the 1,000 years are finished” placing this component at the end of "The 1,000 Years" aka "The Day of the Lord." I hold that "The Day of the Lord" aka "The 1,000 Years" had its beginning circa A.D. 70's Fall of Jerusalem/Babylon and its ending an actual 1,000 years of human history later. This would place all these events far into our past. “The rest of the dead came to life” in fulfillment of the vision foreseen in Rev 20:5 long, long ago and is past. Again, because of such, it is inaccurate to affix “partial-preterist” to my position.