Spurgeon's View of the MILLENNIUM

Pilgrim Pub. ^ | MARK A. MCNEIL

[xzins]

---

CONFUSED ABOUT SPURGEON'S PROPHETIC VIEWS?

— WELL, NO LONGER!  HERE IS...

. Charles Haddon Spurgeon's VIEW OF THE
MILLENNIUM
	Annotated Summary by
	MARK A. MCNEIL

"I am not now going into millennial theories, or into any speculation as to dates. I do not know anything at all about such things, and I am not sure that I am called to spend my time in such researches. I am rather called to minister the gospel than to open prophecy. Those who are wise in such things doubtless prize their wisdom, but I have not the time to acquire it, nor any inclination to leave soul-winning pursuits for less arousing themes. I believe it is a great deal better to leave many of these promises, and many of these gracious out-looks of believers, to exercise their full force upon our minds, without depriving them of their simple glory by aiming to discover dates and figures. Let this be settled, however, that if there be meaning in words, Israel is yet to be restored. Israel is to have a SPIRITUAL RESTORATION or a CONVERSION."

[from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 429, Ezekiel 37:1-10 (age 30)]

INTRODUCTION

There has been some considerable difference of opinion regarding the position that C. H. Spurgeon, the great Baptist preacher from the 19th century, held in the area of Eschatology — regarding the doctrine of the Millennium. Each of the three major divisions within this area of doctrine have proponents who claim Spurgeon as one of their own. Many times authors claim a different millennial view than what Spurgeon actually believed.

It is not our task to sort out the arguments for each view. Such an assignment would take a very large volume (many are available) and the issue would still not be solved for all. We would simply like to define the basic positions and then demonstrate from Spurgeon's own words which one view he held.

PREMILLENNIALISM

The first view regarding the Millennium is that of PREMILLENNIALISM. The prefix, "Pre," denotes "before." The prefix is telling us at what point in relationship to the millennium that Christ will come. This view holds that our Lord will Literally return before a 1,000-year reign of Christ begins. The millennium of Revelation 20 is taken to be literal. If not literal, it at least is speaking of an indefinite period of time following the coming of Christ during which there will be perfect peace on the earth.

Within the premillennialist camp, there have come to be two identifiable views: the "dispensationalist" position, and the "historic" position. For further information defending each of these views, one should consult Reese's The Approaching Advent of Christ [historic] and Dwight Pentecost's Things to Come [dispensational]. Though the differences between the two are important, it is not within the scope of our purpose here to delve into such matters.

AMILLENNIALISM

The second view is called AMILLENNIALISM, or sometimes called "realized eschatology". The prefix, "A-," means "no". This would suggest that those who hold this view do not believe in a millennium. This is somewhat misleading, however. This view is the the product of a consistent Spiritual interpretation of prophetic literature. To those, the millennium is not some future physical reign, but the present reign of Christ in the hearts of believers. The "millennium" is an indefinite period of time (the present age) after which Christ will physically return. Prophecy in the Church, by Oswald Allis, is a standard work for the amillennial position.

This is the position of the Roman Catholic Church, also many other Protestant denominations. It grew out of St. Augustine's spiritualizing of these issues in his writings, and the tendency of many early Christian writers to see the Church as the "new Israel" and therefore the recipient of the promises of the Old Testament for the Jewish nation. Those who hold this view do not speak of the millennium as a future happening.  It is, to them, a Present Reality.

POSTMILLENNIALISM

The third, and last, major view is that of POSTMILLENNIALISM. The prefix "Post" speaks of "after." This teaching promotes the view that the physical return of Christ will Follow an actual millennium. The influence of Christianity will over-take the world for an extended period of time, then Christ will return.

This view appears to be a mixture of the principles that work to produce the first two views. It is not consistently spiritual or literal in its interpretation of the prophetic material relevant to this issue. Perhaps the foremost writing for this position today is The Millennium, by Loraine Boettner.

Spurgeon's VIEW  

With basic definitions before us, then, let's look at some quotes from Spurgeon to see what his position was on the Millennium.

"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial — that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial — that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]

Spurgeon here specifically identifies the Postmillennial view with a clear DENIAL of any adherence to it! Those who attempt to claim Spurgeon for this viewpoint do not demonstrate their contention by referring to clear comparisons such as this one. They rather go to sermons not specifically dealing with both positions and pull out of them ideas that are "compatible" with Postmillennial thinking. This is a faulty way of proving a point, however* — especially when they meet squarely with a Spurgeon statement like the one above, and those below.

*NOTE: Furthur, a few postmillennialists (especially GARY NORTH), are guilty of misrepresenting Spurgeon constantly in articles and books; NORTH has repeatedly alleged that "Spurgeon was Postmillennial" — yet neither his supplied quotations "say" so, and/or he deliberately does not present a statement by Spurgeon that North will speculate "implies" a Postmillennial position. Our advice is to ignore anything North states regarding Spurgeon's views and Prophecy!

Again, consider Spurgeon's View here in light of 'Postmillennial' teaching...

"Paul does not paint the future with rose-colour: he is no smooth-tongued prophet of a golden age, into which this dull earth may be imagined to be glowing. There are sanguine brethren who are looking forward to everything growing better and better and better, until, at last, this present age ripens into a millennium. They will not be able to sustain their hopes, for Scripture gives them no solid basis to rest upon. We who believe that there will be no millennial reign without the King, and who expect no rule of righteousness except from the appearing of the righteous Lord, are nearer the mark. Apart from the second Advent of our Lord, the world is more likely to sink into a pandemonium than to rise into a millennium. A divine interposition seems to me the hope set before us in Scripture, and, indeed, to be the only hope adequate to the occasion. We look to the darkening down of things; the state of mankind, however improved politically, may yet grow worse and worse spiritually." [from The Form of Godliness Without the Power MTP Vol 35, Year 1889, pg. 301, 2 Timothy 3:5 (age 54)]

"We are to expect the literal advent of Jesus Christ, for he himself by his angel told us, 'This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven,' which must mean literally and in person. We expect a reigning Christ on earth; that seems to us to be very plain, and to be put so literally that we dare not spiritualise it. We anticipate a first and a second resurrection; a first resurrection of the righteous, and a second resurrection of the ungodly, who shall be judged, condemned, and punished for ever by the sentence of the great King." [from Things to Come MTP Vol 15, Year 1869, pg. 329, 1 Corinthians 3:22 (age 35)]

Here, stress is laid upon the Literal Nature of the second coming.  Also, after this literal return is stressed a reigning upon the earth.

"We have done once for all with the foolish ideas of certain of the early heretics, that Christ's appearance upon earth was but a phantom. We know that he was really, personally, and physically here on earth. But it is not quite so clear to some persons that he is to come really, personally, and literally, the second time. I know there are some who are labouring to get rid of the fact of a personal reign, but as I take it, the coming and the reign are so connected together, that we must have a spiritual coming if we are to have a spiritual reign. Now we believe and hold that Christ shall come a second time suddenly, to raise his saints at the first judgment, and they shall reign with him afterwards. The rest of the dead live not till after the thousand years are finished. Then shall they rise from their tombs at the sounding of the trumpet, and their judgment shall come and they shall receive the deeds which they have done in their bodies." [from The Two Advents of Christ MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pg. 39, Hebrews 9:27-28 (age 28)]

[from The Sinner's End MTP Vol 8, Year 1862, pgs. 712-713, Psalms 73:17-18 (age 28)], Spurgeon is discussing the final condition of the sinner — "Let us go on to consider their end. The day of days, that dreadful day has come. The millennial rest is over, the righteous have had their thousand years of glory upon earth."

In the quotes above, the order of events fits perfectly the PREmillennial point of view. The final end of the sinner is faced after the righteous have enjoyed a thousand years with Christ.

.
	"Our Hope is the Personal PRE-MILLENNIAL RETURN of the   Lord Jesus Christ in Glory."
	— August 1891, age 58

Of the various articles and writings by those who deny the conclusion that we feel is obvious, none that I have found bases itself on the same type of quotes we have produced (many others could have been given — see those that follow). To the contrary, their's are based on "interpreting" Spurgeon's statements apart from such quotes that we have given.

.

We feel safe in concluding, then,

that of the three views we began with,

Spurgeon expressly states that he believes in a

Literal Return of Jesus Christ

BEFORE

a Literal Millennium on the Earth.

———————————————————————————

.

Written by Mark A. McNeil (Houston TX USA), B.A., M.A., & PhD. Student

Author of An Evaluation of the 'Oneness Pentecostal' Movement

$3 + $1 shipping — Published by Pilgrim Publications

— also Read C. H. SPURGEON on "PRETERISM" <<< Click Link

  Join our company... Psalm 68:11 "The Lord gave the WORD:

Great was the COMPANY of those that PUBLISHED it."

Please, Copy this article, pass it on, and mail to others.

Permission granted by Bob L. Ross — No Copyright

NOTES OF INTEREST

Watching and Waiting Magazine

                                          by C. W. H. Griffiths

Published by Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony

1 Donald Way, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 9JB United Kingdom

Stephen A. Toms, secretary

— Write and Request the Complete Article            

From the Summer 1990 issue of this magazine, C. W. H. Griffiths states Spurgeon "was a valued standard bearer for historic Pre-millennialism," and then presents an excellent article defending his Pre-millennial position.

Documenting additional quotations which we have added and expanded below —

Spurgeon (age 43) — There is moreover to be a reign of Christ. I cannot read the Scriptures without perceiving that there is to be a pre-millennial reign, as I believe, upon the earth and that there shall be new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness...

Spurgeon (age 49) — Then all His people who are alive at the time of His coming shall be suddenly transformed, so as to be delivered from all the frailties and imperfections of their mortal bodies: The dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed. Then we shall be presented spirit, soul, and body without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; in the clear and absolute perfection of our sanctified manhood, presented unto Christ Himself.

Spurgeon (age 50) — When the Lord comes there will be no more death; we who are alive and remain (as some of us may be — we cannot tell) will undergo a sudden transformation — for flesh and blood, as they are, cannot inherit the kingdom of God — and by that transformation our bodies shall be made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.

Spurgeon (age 52) — His coming will cause great sorrow. What does the text say about his coming? All kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Then this sorrow will be very general.

Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Restoration & Conversion of the Jews MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pgs. 427-430, Ezekiel  37:1-10] — Under the preaching of the Word the vilest sinners can be reclaimed, the most stubborn wills can be subdued, the most unholy lives can be sanctified. When the holy "breath" comes from the four winds, when the divine Spirit descends to own the Word, then multitudes of sinners, as on Pentecost's hallowed day, stand up upon their feet, an exceeding great army, to praise the Lord their God. But, mark you, this is not the first and proper interpretation of the text; it is indeed nothing more than a very striking parallel case to the one before us. It is not the case itself; it is only a similar one, for the way in which God restores a nation is, practically, the way in which he restores an individual. The way in which Israel shall be saved is the same by which any one individual sinner shall be saved. It is not, however, the one case which the prophet is aiming at; he is looking at the vast mass of cases, the multitudes of instances to be found among the Jewish people, of gracious quickening, and holy resurrection. His first and primary intention was to speak of them, and though it is right and lawful to take a passage in its widest possible meaning, since "no Scripture is of private interpretation," yet I hold it to be treason to God's Word to neglect its primary meaning, and constantly to say — "Such-and-such is the primary meaning, but it is of no consequence, and I shall use the words for another object." The preacher of God's truth should not give up the Holy Ghost's meaning; he should take care that he does not even put it in the back ground. The first meaning of a text, the Spirit's meaning, is that which would be brought out first, and though the rest may fairly spring out of it, yet the first sense should have the chief place. Let it have the uppermost place in the synagogue, let it be looked upon as at least not inferior, either in interest or importance, to any other meaning which may come out of the text.

The meaning of our text, as opened up by the context, is most evidently, if words mean anything, first, that there shall be a political restoration of the Jews to their own land and to their own nationality; and then, secondly, there is in the text, and in the context, a most plain declaration, that there shall be a spiritual restoration, a conversion in fact, of the tribes of Israel.

The promise is that they shall renounce their idols, and, behold, they have already done so. "Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols." Whatever faults the Jew may have besides, he certainly has no idolatry. "The Lord thy God is one God," is a truth far better conceived by the Jew than by any other man on earth except the Christian. Weaned for ever from the worship of all images, of whatever sort, the Jewish nation has now become infatuated with traditions or duped by philosophy. She is to have, however, instead of these delusions, a spiritual religion: she is to love her God. "They shall be my people, and I will be their God." The unseen but omnipotent Jehovah is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth by his ancient people; they are to come before him in his own appointed way, accepting the Mediator whom their sires rejected; coming into covenant relation with God, for so our text tells us — "I will make a covenant of peace with them," and Jesus is our peace, therefore we gather that Jehovah shall enter into the covenant of grace with them, that covenant of which Christ is the federal head, the substance, and the surety. They are to walk in God's ordinances and statutes, and so exhibit the practical effects of being united to Christ who hath given them peace. All these promises certainly imply that the people of Israel are to be converted to God, and that this conversion is to be permanent, for the tabernacle of God is to be with them, the Most High is, in an especial manner, to have his sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore; so that whatever nations may apostatize and turn from the Lord in these latter days, the nation of Israel never can, for she shall be effectually and permanently converted, the hearts of the fathers shall be turned with the hearts of the children unto the Lord their God, and they shall be the people of God, world without end.

We look forward, then, for these two things. I am not going to theorize upon which of them will come first, whether they shall be restored first, and converted afterwards, or converted first, and then restored. They are to be restored, and they are to be converted too. Let the Lord send these blessings in his own order, and we shall be well content whichever way they shall come. We take this for our joy and our comfort, that this thing shall be, and that both in the spiritual and in the temporal throne, the King Messiah shall sit, and reign among his people gloriously.

Spurgeon (age 30) [from The Lamb — the Light MTP Vol 10, Year 1864, pg. 439, Revelation 21:23] — (Spurgeon says of the millennial earth), They shall not say one to another, "Know the Lord: for all shall know him, from the least to the greatest." There may be even in that period certain solemn assemblies and Sabbath-days, but they will not be of the same kind as we have now; for the whole earth will be a temple, every day will be a Sabbath, the avocations of men will all be priestly, they shall be a nation of priests — distinctly so, and they shall day without night serve God in his temple, so that everything to which they set their hand shall be a part of the song which shall go up to the Most High. Oh! blessed day. Would God it had dawned, when these temples should be left, because the whole world should be a temple for God. But whatever may be the splendours of that day — and truly here is a temptation to let our imagination revel — however bright may be the walls set with chalcedony and amethyst, however splendid the gates which are of one pearl, whatever may be the magnificence set forth by the "streets of gold," this we know, that the sum and substance, the light and glory of the whole will be the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, "for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof." Now, I want the Christian to meditate over this. In the highest, holiest, and happiest era that shall ever dawn upon this poor earth, Christ is to be her light. When she puts on her wedding garments, and adorns herself as a bride is adorned with jewels, Christ is to be her glory and her beauty. There shall be no ear-rings in her ears made with other gold than that which cometh from his mine of love; there shall be no crown set upon her brow fashioned by any other hand than his hands of wisdom and of grace. She sits to reign, but it shall be upon his throne; she feeds, but it shall be upon his bread; she triumphs, but it shall be because of the might which ever belongs to him who is the Rock of Ages. Come then, Christian, contemplate for a moment thy beloved Lord. Jesus, in a millennial age, shall be the light and the glory of the city of the new Jerusalem. Observe then, that Jesus makes the light of the millennium, because his presence will be that which distinguishes that age from the present. That age is to be akin to paradise. Paradise God first made upon earth, and paradise God will last make. Satan destroyed it; and God will never have defeated his enemy until he has re-established paradise, until once again a new Eden shall bless the eyes of God's creatures. Now, the very glory and privilege of Eden I take to be not the river which flowed through it with its four branches, nor that it came from the land of Havilah which hath dust of gold — I do not think the glory of Eden lay in its grassy walks, or in the boughs bending with luscious fruit — but its glory lay in this, that the "Lord God walked in the garden in the cool of the day." Here was Adam's highest privilege, that he had companionship with the Most High. In those days angels sweetly sang that the tabernacle of God was with man, and that he did dwell amongst them. Brethren, the paradise which is to be regained for us will have this for its essential and distinguishing mark, that the Lord shall dwell amongst us. This is the name by which the city is to be called — Jehovah Shammah, the Lord is there. It is true we have the presence of Christ in the Church now — "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." We have the promise of his constant indwelling: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." But still that is vicariously by his Spirit, but soon he is to be personally with us. That very man who once died upon Calvary is to live here. He — that same Jesus — who was taken up from us, shall come in like manner as he was taken up from the gazers of Galilee. Rejoice, rejoice, beloved, that he comes, actually and really comes; and this shall be the joy of that age, that he is among his saints, and dwelleth in them, with them, and talketh and walketh in their midst.

"If I read the word aright, and it is honest to admit that there is much room for difference of opinion here, the day will come, when the Lord Jesus will descend from heaven with a shout, with the trump of the archangel and the voice of God. Some think that this descent of the Lord will be Post-millennial — that is, 'after the thousand years' of his reign. I CANNOT THINK SO. I conceive that the advent will be PRE-millennial — that He will come first; and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon earth. But whether or no, this much is the fact, that Christ will suddenly come, come to reign, and come to judge the earth in righteousness." [from Justification & Glory MTP Vol 11, Year 1865, pg. 249, Romans 8:30 (age 31)]

[RnMomof7]

opps spiritual

[CCWoody]

John 5 doesn't tell when the good come forth and when the evil come forth.

This is a lie against the gospels and you know it:

• The hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

The gospel from the very mouth of Christ Himself says that all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth in a single period of time. The good and the evil will come forth together xzins. This is what John 5 plainly says.

[CCWoody]

Further revelation clarifies the meaning of John 5.

That Jesus was such a cryptic wasn't He. Hey, do any of you Momons want to help xzins clarify the gospel with any of your further revelations?

Aside to RnMom. Do you have a better explaination than that offered by xzins? Evidently, he believes that the gospel is veiled even to believers until the final Revelation of Jesus Christ.

[xzins]

The hour is coming when I will speak with freepers -- with DrStevej about barbeque and with ftD about coleslaw.

I'd like to point out that I could talk to DrStevej next week about barbeque and to ftD the following week about coleslaw. The hour had come when both of those were true. That is a perfectly acceptable use of "time" conventions built into language.

Now, IF I then run across a passage in the book of XzinsPlans Chapter 20, verses 4 - 5 that says the barbeque discussion is separated from the coleslaw discussion by a period of ONE WEEK, then I have sealed the case.

That is precisely what was meant by that use of a linguistic time convention.

John 5 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Revelation 20: 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.......11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

[xzins]

Since the canonical John 5 was written before Chapter 20 of the canonical book of Revelation, are you saying that Revelation is not canon and is on a par with the Book of Mormon?????

You are just attacking me now, Woody. Get over it.

In fact, the book was named REVELATION!!! (When you do this kind of thing it makes you look so petty; up 'til then a fine discussion was taking place and your points were decently supported. You shouldn't allow your temper to ruin your posts.)

[CCWoody]

Jean I believe scripture interprets scripture..a word search of the word resurrection shows it speaks of bodiely resurrection consistantly..how can you just change it to a spiritul meaning ?

Is this a spiritual resurrection or a physical bodily resurrection?

• "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

I believe this. I believe that I have already passed from death into eternal life.

• God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.
• These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life,...

In Him you were... buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the certificate of debt with its requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us.

If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.

---

There are 2 resurrections and 2 only:

• There is a spiritual resurrection. I have died and now my life is hidden with Christ in God. My life is in God.
• There is a bodily resurrection. When my life appears which is Christ and is in Christ, then I will also appear with Him in glory.

This should make perfect sense to you as man is a 2 part being; spirit and dust. My spirit must experience a resurrection and my body must experience a resurrection in order for my soul to be completely alive and holy. If I only experience a bodily resurrection, then I will live forever dead to God. This is why the Lord removed man from the Garden. If Adam had eaten from the tree of Life, he would have lived forever spiritually dead and hostile to God.

And since I live in Christ right now, I shall never die. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ,....

[CCWoody]

The hour is coming when I will speak with freepers -- with DrStevej about barbeque and with ftD about coleslaw. I'd like to point out that I could talk to DrStevej next week about barbeque and to ftD the following week about coleslaw. The hour had come when both of those were true. That is a perfectly acceptable use of "time" conventions built into language.

There is just one little word which shreds your argument, a word which you completely left out:

The hour is coming when I will speak with all Freepers about BBQ. Those who bring BBQ sauce will sit on the right and the heretic coleslaw bringers will sit on the left.

The problem here is that you think that the Revelation of John is actually the Clarification of John. Evidently Jesus was not clear the first time He spoke and needed to clarify Himself. You should rename your Book appropriately.

And this doesn't even address the fact that you are BBQ'ing the greek word hora to make it fit your reinterpretation of John. The definition of this word speaks about a definite point in time. There is no reason to believe that this is not the case except that you must consult your master "mere 7 verses" from the Clarification of John to change this into 2 definite points in time.

You are embarrassing yourself here.

[CCWoody]

Since the canonical John 5 was written before Chapter 20 of the canonical book of Revelation, are you saying that Revelation is not canon and is on a par with the Book of Mormon?????

Nope, I am saying that you are changing the gospel based upon only an intrepretation, which is essentially what the Mormons do when they change the gospel based upon a revelation. Neither are scripture.

In fact, the book was named REVELATION!!!

Are you sure it is not named CLARIFACATION or INTREPRETATION?

The problem you are not even addressing is that you must bring the gospel to Revelation. You, OTOH, are taking the Revelation to the gospel and making the gospel fit nothing more than an interpretation of Revelation.

[xzins]

In the following passage about those who rejoice in Jesus light for "a period of time", the word hora (hwpa) is translated: Niv=time; Nasb=while; Kjv=season; and YLT=hour.

However, it really doesn't matter, however, since Rev 20 explains exactly what John 5:28-29 means.

---

John 5:35 :: New International Version (NIV)

John 5
35John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light.


John 5:35 :: New American Standard Bible (NASB)


John 5
35 "He was (1) the lamp that was burning and was shining and you (2) were willing to rejoice for a while in his light.



John 5:35 :: King James Version (KJV)


John 5
35 He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.




John 5:35 :: Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

John 5
35 he was the burning and shining lamp, and ye did will to be glad, for an hour, in his light.

[CCWoody]

In the following passage about those who rejoice in Jesus light for "a period of time", the word hora (hwpa) is translated: Niv=time; Nasb=while; Kjv=season; and YLT=hour.

That's right! A single period of time. But you have the hour of John 5:28 as two periods of time, separated by 1000 years. The greek word is never used in this way.

• The single period of time is coming in which all who are in the graves will... come forth.

John 5:25 also speaks about the hour, meaning a season. But, it means a season where people are living throughout the entire season.

However, it really doesn't matter, however, since Rev 20 explains exactly what John 5:28-29 means.

Isn't it amazing that Jesus had to have a Revelation to explain exactly what He meant. The Roman Catholics also have to have something to explain what He meant and the Mormons as well. Isn't it amazing that the gospel is a closed "book" until the Clarification of John was penned.

[RnMomof7]

I do not have it in front of me ..but someone said the word resurrection appears 41 times in scripture and all but one of those times it is bodily...do you know?

[RnMomof7]

The hour is coming when I will speak with all Freepers about BBQ. Those who bring BBQ sauce will sit on the right and the heretic coleslaw bringers will sit on the left.

LOL LOL on another thread there was discussion if I ( yes I:>) was a heretic because I left the RC church...I make a mean coleslaw..but I INTEND to sit on the right

[CCWoody]

I'll get to your resurrection question as I have time...

I have hope in God that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.

[fortheDeclaration]

Since the canonical John 5 was written before Chapter 20 of the canonical book of Revelation, are you saying that Revelation is not canon and is on a par with the Book of Mormon????? You are just attacking me now, Woody. Get over it. In fact, the book was named REVELATION!!! (When you do this kind of thing it makes you look so petty; up 'til then a fine discussion was taking place and your points were decently supported. You shouldn't allow your temper to ruin your posts.)

If you cannot reconcile Scripture with your preconceived ideas, ignore it or twist it!

So much for Sola Scriptura!

[fortheDeclaration]

You have offered absolutely NO evidence! NONE! Only CONJECTURE!

Now 'Jean' screaming about 'evidence' and 'conjecture' that is funny!

[JesseShurun]

This is obscure and not meant for just anyone.

I can't give you diamonds for they aren't mine to give.

[Jean Chauvin]

"How in the world can you say that citing verses specifically saying there are 2 resurrections is conjecture? "

Actually, the passage does ~not~ tell us explicitly what the (assumed) 2nd Resurrection is. The words 2nd Resurrection are not even found in the text. According to the words themselves of Rev 20, we are told that the "living" (~NOT~ 'lived ~again~') and "reigning" with Christ ~IS~ 1st Resurrection. And since John sees two groups of people which is inclusive of people who are alive in the body, this cannot possibly be a reference to a bodily resurrection -only a spiritual resurrection -Regeneration -John 11:25,26!!!

Furthermore, Rev 20:4-6 says ABSOLUTELY ~NOTHING~ about anything taking place on Earth. Furthermore, the Millennium isn't even the point of the passage. It's a sub point. It isn't the main thrust of the text. The insistance of the Pre-Mill position to make the "Millennial Reign" the end-all of Rev 20 is grossly distorting the main point of John's vision at this point. Rev 20:4-6 is all about who John sees, not about the millennial reign.

"How can you say that citing a passage that 5 times uses "1000 years" in 7 verses is conjecture? It's not conjecture; it's simply reading what's there."

No! You bastardize the text by insisting that this passage is mainly about a millennial reign -on earth- when there is no mention of earth until vs 8. John knows very well how to say "on earth". He does so in 5:10 and again in Ch. 22 which is a vivid description of the News Heavens and the New Earth. I would suggest to you to you, that if John had intended to convey that this '1000' years was to take place on earth, he would have said so. That he didn't tells us we shouldn't read that thought into the passage!

Furthermore, there are ~two~ millennia, as I have already pointed out. vs 4 mentions the millennial reign which is concurrent to John's vision. vs 6 mentions a future millennial reign with an all together different description of this reign.

There are also two groups of people John sees. John sees the souls of those who were beheaded and he sees those who did not worship the beast. This is inclusive, quite obviously, of people who are alive in the body and have yet to die. According to 1 Cor 15:51,52, not all will sleep, but all shall be changed. Resurrection of the ~dead~ is NOT applicable to living people. Therefore, this is the resurrection of regeneration spoken of by Christ and recorded by John in John 11:25,26. It cannot possibly be a reference to the Resurrection of the Body. It doesn't say so (remember, Rev 20 does not mention the Resurrection of the ~DEAD~. It never mentions that these folks that John sees "rise again". It just says that they "lived" and "reigned".)

~YOU~ are the one insisting that this verse says things it doesn't remotely say..."earth"...."lived ~again~".... CONJECTURE!

And you are ~not~ reading Rev 20 for what it says! You are completely disregarding what the words themselves say and you continue to insist on inserting words not found in the Greek!

Jean

[xzins]

Sorry, John, but the case is closed. Rev 5:10 says the bloodbought will be priests reigning on earth. Rev 20:1-10 says that after his reign Christ will reign a 1000 years with those same bloodbought priests on the earth.

It's clear. There's really not any more to say about it. Everyone can read the bible and see I'm telling the truth.

The case is closed. I'll get over your being ashamed of me.

[Jean Chauvin]

"Jean I believe scripture interprets scripture..a word search of the word resurrection shows it speaks of bodiely resurrection consistantly..how can you just change it to a spiritul meaning ? "

Woody already hit this, but I need to reiterate it:

Your presumption that the word resurrection:

Greek anastasis
a 'standing up' again, i.e. (lit.) a resurrection from death (individual, gen. or by impl. [its author]), or (fig) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth): -raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again.

It is ~not~ consistantly spoken of as the bodily resurrection.

John 11:25,26 is just such a 'spiritual' resurrection. Jesus calls himself the "resurrection" "I am the resurrection". Now, is Jesus trying to tell us that he ~is~ the literal resurrection of body? No, of course not. He is the source of life -and the point of John 11:25,26 -the source of spiritual life. Is a "spiritual resurrection" any less literal???

Paul echo's this same thought in Eph 2:

1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

Paul is speaking of the very same "first resurrection"! Paul tells us that we "were dead" in our sins and that God has "quickened" us (made us alive).

No, Paul doesn't use the same words John does in John 11:25,26 or Rev 20:4,5, but it is the very same idea!

Jean

[Jean Chauvin]

"Sorry, John, but the case is closed. Rev 5:10 says the bloodbought will be priests reigning on earth. Rev 20:1-10 says that after his reign Christ will reign a 1000 years with those same bloodbought priests on the earth. "

Here we go again....

Rev 20:1-6 says absolutely nothing about a reign "on earth".

Furthermore, Rev 20:6 is speaking of a future millennial reign. One that is distinct and differentiated from John's point in the vision. 20:4,5 are past/present tense and 20:6 is future tense. It has not yet happened. It ~will~ happen in 22:5 (same 'saints' reigning!) -but this time -explicitly on EARTH for ever and ever!

"It's clear. There's really not any more to say about it. Everyone can read the bible and see I'm telling the truth."

LOL! With you continually insisting Rev 20 says things it doesn't remotely say???? John 5's "hour" is a thousand years long? ROTFLMAO!

"The case is closed. I'll get over your being ashamed of me. "

Ummmm...it wasn't ~I~ who was ashamed of you, I was merely commenting that ~YOU~ ought to be ashamed of ~YOURSELF~! (reading comprehension classes, x....go for it!)

Jean