The Millennium
Text: Revelation 20:1-10
Series: Restoration Sermons
Date:
Speaker: Ed Rangel
Location: Waupaca Church of Christ
Bible Version: NASB 1995
Sermon Type: Expository
Learning Objectives
By the close of this lesson the hearer should be able to:
- State the premillennial theory in its own terms — Christ returning to reign on David's throne in Jerusalem for 1,000 years — and explain why the New Testament does not teach it.
- Apply the four laws of interpretation established in this outline to Revelation 20:1-10, and show why "one thousand years" must be read as figurative in a book that names itself as symbolic.
- Articulate the internal contradiction of taking "one thousand years" literally while treating the eighteen other symbols in the same passage figuratively.
- Identify the two specific objections to the theory: it makes Christ and his saints reign over only the wicked, and it is a major doctrine built on a single figurative text.
- State the conclusion: only speculative teaching can be given for the Millennium — and explain why the church should not elevate speculative teaching to doctrinal prominence.
Thesis
The millennial theory is built on a single figurative text in the most symbolic book of the New Testament. Every other fundamental doctrine of the New Testament is taught repeatedly in plain language. The Millennium is not. Only speculative teaching can be given for it — and speculation is not a sufficient basis for a major doctrine.
Burden
The premillennial theory was a major controversy in the Restoration Movement of the generation. Churches were being divided over it. This outline's approach is not dismissive but methodological: it states the theory accurately, establishes rules of interpretation that apply to all Scripture, applies those rules to Revelation 20, and demonstrates that the theory cannot be established even on its own preferred text. The result is not an attack on sincere believers but a careful, honest assessment: the doctrine cannot be proven, and doctrines that cannot be proven should not be pressed as tests of fellowship or given the authority of established truth.
Introduction
"Millennium" comes from the Latin: mille (a thousand) and annus (year) — one thousand years. The theory connects this period to the second coming of Christ. But that connection, the outline notes at the outset, is not made in the Bible.
The text of Revelation 20:1-10 is the one passage in all of Scripture that mentions a thousand-year reign. Every other major doctrine of the New Testament — the resurrection, the atonement, justification by faith, baptism for remission of sins, the return of Christ — appears repeatedly in multiple books, in both plain and figurative language, with internal consistency across the canon. The Millennium does not. That asymmetry is itself significant.
I. The Theory Stated
To engage an argument honestly, it must be stated accurately. The premillennial theory, stated in its own terms:
Christ will come to earth in person, set up a kingdom, sit on David's throne in Jerusalem, gather all Jews to Palestine, and reign for one thousand years. Those who believe this are called "millenarians." Two classes: pre-millenarians hold that the second coming marks the beginning of the millennium; post-millenarians hold that the second coming marks its close.
If there is a millennium, Christ must come before, during, or after it. Those are the only options. Pre-millenarians say before. Post-millenarians say after. The fact that sincere interpreters of the same text reach opposite conclusions about which of only three possible positions is correct is itself evidence of the text's ambiguity.
The summary: Christians are neither pre- nor post-millenarian. Not because the question is unimportant, but because the text will not bear the weight of a settled answer — and a settled answer is required before making a doctrine.
II. Laws of Interpretation
Before applying the text, the rules must be established. These are not rules invented for this occasion; they are the principles that govern honest biblical interpretation.
All Scripture must be either literal, figurative, or a combination of both. This is exhaustive — there is no fourth category.
In interpretation of literal Scripture, we are restricted to what is expressly revealed or declared. Literal texts mean what they say. Inference and imagination are not permitted to extend them.
In interpretation of figurative Scripture, literal language is used. This sounds paradoxical but is not: to explain a figure, we use plain language. The figure "I am the door" is explained in plain language: Jesus is the means of access to God. The explanation is literal even though the figure is not.
When two or more interpretations present themselves, if one is accepted, valid reasons must be given for it and for the rejection of the others. This is the rule against arbitrary selection. If an interpreter takes one symbol literally, he must explain why this symbol is literal when the surrounding symbols are not.
III. Revelation 20:1-10 Examined
Applying the rules:
The millennial theory is based entirely on this passage — the only passage in Scripture that mentions a thousand-year reign. If it is true, it stands on a single text. And that text is in the book of Revelation — a book that explicitly describes itself as a book of symbols: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John" (Rev. 1:1). The word "communicated" is literally "signified" — it came through signs, symbols, figures.
If the theory is true, it is the only fundamental doctrine of the New Testament taught in only one place, in the most symbolic book of the canon, in the midst of figures. Every other fundamental doctrine is taught frequently, in plain language, across multiple books. The Resurrection: Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 1 Thessalonians. The Atonement: every major epistle. Baptism for remission of sins: Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Mark 16:16, Romans 6:3, Galatians 3:27, 1 Peter 3:21. The Millennium: Revelation 20:1-10 alone.
Eighteen figures and symbols appear in this passage. "One thousand years" is one of them. Why take "one thousand years" as literal while treating the angel with the key to the abyss (v.1), the great chain (v.1), the bottomless pit (v.3), the thrones (v.4), the souls of the beheaded (v.4), the first resurrection (v.5), the nations in the four corners of the earth (v.8), Gog and Magog (v.8), and the fire from heaven (v.9) as figurative? The principle established in Rule 3 demands an answer. If the interpreter takes "one thousand years" as the one literal element in a passage full of figures, he must explain why this element and not the others.
Even taken literally, the passage does not teach the theory. A literal thousand-year reign in the text does not by itself establish a physical reign in Jerusalem, a gathering of Jews to Palestine, or a resumption of Davidic kingship. The theory exceeds even the literal reading of its own text.
IV. Objections to the Theory
Two specific objections:
The theory makes Christ and his saints reign over just the wicked. If the righteous dead are raised at the beginning of the millennium and the rest of the dead are raised afterward (v.5), then during the millennium Christ reigns over a world populated only by the wicked — precisely those who rejected him. This is an inversion of everything the New Testament says about the kingdom. The kingdom is the realm of those who obey the King. The millennial theory requires the King to reign over those who refused to obey him for a thousand years before the final judgment separates them. This is not what the New Testament teaches about the reign of Christ.
The theory makes prominent a doctrine without New Testament authority. Prominence requires warrant. Prominence without warrant is a distortion of the canon's own priorities. When a doctrine that appears nowhere in plain language in any New Testament epistle — not in Romans, not in Galatians, not in Ephesians, not in Hebrews — is elevated to a major doctrinal position and made a test of fellowship, the interpreter has given it more authority than the canon itself provides.
Application
Three applications from the methodological argument:
Apply the rules consistently. The rules of interpretation established here are not invented to defeat premillennialism; they are the rules that govern all honest exegesis. A person who uses them to reject the Millennium should also be applying them to baptism, the church, and every other doctrine. The same rules that expose the weakness of the millennial theory expose the strength of what the New Testament plainly and repeatedly teaches.
Hold speculative teaching as speculative. There are things about the end that Scripture does not clearly reveal. The humble position is to say so. The Millennium, if it exists, will happen as God planned it. Nothing in the argument prevents God from acting as he chooses. What the argument prevents is elevating speculation to doctrine — treating as certain what Scripture has left ambiguous.
Do not let end-times speculation displace present discipleship. The practical danger of premillennialism is not eschatological but pastoral: it focuses attention on a future that is unclear rather than on the present that is plain. What the New Testament plainly requires — repentance, baptism, faithful living in the church — is what deserves the energy.
Conclusion
"Only speculative teaching can be given for the 'Millennium.'" This is the conclusion, and it is the appropriate one for any doctrine that rests on a single figurative text in the most symbolic book of the canon, is absent from plain teaching in every epistle, and produces internal contradictions when applied.
The kingdom of God is present now (Mark 1:15; Col. 1:13). The church is the kingdom (Matt. 16:18-19). Christ reigns from the Father's right hand (Acts 2:33-36; 1 Cor. 15:25). The second coming will bring the end, not the beginning of a further earthly reign (1 Cor. 15:23-24). These are taught repeatedly, in plain language, across the canon. They are not speculative.
Invitation
The kingdom is not a future institution awaiting a later historical event. It is present now, and entry into it is available now.
"He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins" (Col. 1:13-14). The transfer happens when a person is baptized into Christ. The kingdom is not something you wait for — it is something you enter.
Believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the King who reigns now from the Father's right hand. Repent of the life outside the kingdom. Confess his name. Be baptized for the remission of your sins (Acts 2:38). And enter the kingdom that is — not the kingdom that is theorized.
Word Study
| English Term | Greek Term | Basic Meaning | Usage in This Sermon | Sermon Significance | Key Texts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Millennium | chilia etē | one thousand years | one thousand years | the Greek phrase, like its Latin equivalent (millennium), simply means a thousand years; the question is whether it is to be read as a literal period or as a symbolic number (a common OT use: Ps. 50:10, "cattle on a thousand hills"; Ps. 84:10, "a day in Your courts is better than a thousand"). | Rev. 20:2-7 |
| Signified / communicated | esēmanen | communicated by signs | communicated by signs | the aorist of sēmainō, to make known by a sign; the book explicitly announces that its communication is through signs; the literal/figurative question is therefore raised by the text itself, not by the interpreter. | Rev. 1:1 |
| First resurrection | anastasis hē prōtē | the resurrection that occurs before the millennium in the theory; but note that Rev. 20:4-6 describes "souls" (not bodies) reigning with Christ | the resurrection that occurs before the millennium in the theory; but note that Rev. 20:4-6 describes "souls" (not bodie | the absence of bodily language complicates a physical, literal reading. | Rev. 20:5-6 |
| Kingdom of God | present now | present now | Jesus announced "the kingdom of God is at hand" (Mark 1:15) and Paul says believers have already been "transferred" into it (Col. 1:13); both passages use past or present tense, not future. | Mark 1:15; Col. 1:13 |
Scripture Interlock Table
| Theme | Boles' Outline | Supporting Scripture |
|---|---|---|
| The text on which the theory is based — figures and symbols throughout | III | Rev. 20:1-10 |
| The book explicitly communicates through signs | III | Rev. 1:1 |
| "Cattle on a thousand hills" — symbolic use of 1,000 in OT | III | Ps. 50:10 |
| The kingdom present now — "transferred to the kingdom of His beloved Son" | Concl. | Col. 1:13-14 |
| "The kingdom of God is at hand" — present tense | Concl. | Mark 1:15 |
| Christ reigning now at the Father's right hand | Concl. | Acts 2:33-36; 1 Cor. 15:25 |
| "He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet" | Concl. | 1 Cor. 15:25 |
| Repent and be baptized for remission of sins — entry into the kingdom now | Invit. | Acts 2:38 |
---
Converted from H. Leo Boles, Outline 101. Primary text: Revelation 20:1-10 (stated by Boles). OCR corrections: "Rev. 20:J-JO" → "Rev. 20:1-10"; "lt is not" → "It is not"; "TH~ORY" → "THEORY." Doctrinal audit: the anti-premillennial argument retained in full as Boles's Restoration Movement position; the kingdom-present-now position developed from Mark 1:15, Col. 1:13, Acts 2:33-36, and 1 Cor. 15:25 — all plain texts repeated across multiple books; conclusion "only speculative teaching can be given" retained without softening; no physical Jerusalem/Davidic throne language used affirmatively; invitation retains full obedient response (Acts 2:38).
