A Different View of the Millennium

Posted in Downloads

A Different View of the Millennium (For free ebook by Danette Davis, click here:: Rapture Rabble and Millennium Muddle: Who Hijacked the Truth?)

Much attention is given to the millennium mentioned in Scripture and how it will play into the second coming of Jesus and the end of the sinful world we now inhabit. Despite the entire Bible being full of end time prophecy, the millennium is only mentioned in one chapter of Scripture, Revelation 20. Many of the books of the Bible speak of the end time, but always use terms like “that day” (i.e.: 2 Timothy 4:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:4), “the day of the LORD” (i.e.: Isaiah 13:6, 9; Malachi 4:5; Acts 2:20; 1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Peter 3:10), or “the day of judgment” (i.e.: Matthew 10:15; 2 Peter 2:9; 1 John 4:17). Each of these phrases appears many times, both in the old and new testaments, and by many different writers. The only writer who references 1000 years is John, while everyone else seems to teach that these end time events all happen in a single day. We should be wary of any doctrine that can only be found in one place, especially if that place is the most symbol-filled book of Scripture.

Following are numerous points of evidence for a single day, rather than 1000 year, second coming and judgment event. Consider the weight of evidence of all of these points together.

1. There is no idle word in scripture. If every idle word that men speak must be accounted for (Matthew 12:36) then how much more can be we sure that no Word of the Lord will return unto Him void (Isaiah 55:11). We are told that: A day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Peter 3:8. We see a day as a thousand years in Psalm 84:10, and some see a day as a thousand years in the creation story, where each day appears to mirror the corresponding 1000 years (ie, Day 1 = year 1 – 1000, Day 2 = year 1001 – 2000, etc) and the two days that Yeshua spent with the Gentiles in John 4:40 relate to the 2000 years that Messianic worship has largely been with the Gentiles. But where do we see a thousand years as a day? Nowhere, except perhaps the millennium, which may very well be the thousand years as a day that ensure that there is no idle word.

2. Every eye shall see him at the second coming, including those who pierced him. Revelation 1:7. It is appointed for man once to die, and after that, the judgment. Hebrews 9:27. Those who pierced him died to their physical bodies about 2000 years ago. We are told they will be raised to see his second coming, and we can assume all are lost sinners (unless every one of them repented, for which we have no scriptural evidence) so they will die the eternal death after the 1000 years. But what happens to them after the start of the 1000 years? They will either have to die a second physical death at the beginning of the thousand years, or be alive those entire 1000 years (again, no scriptural evidence for them living during the millennial reign). So that means they would have to die twice, and then the judgment, which is not scriptural according to Hebrews 9:27. But if the thousand years are as a day, they died the first death 2000 years ago, and they are resurrected and die the second death on the day of his coming. What we are told about those who pierced him match a single day theory, as opposed to a 1000 year theory.

3. How does the idea of a millennium period match with the red letter words and the parables of Yeshua? Do we see any evidence of the just having a peaceful period with Him prior to the resurrection and destruction of the wicked? Matthew 13:30 – the tares are bound to burn before the wheat is gathered into the barn. Matthew 13:49, the wicked are severed from among the just. Likewise, when he tells us what to expect in the time of the end (Matthew 24) there is no reference to a one thousand year period. Would he be silent on such a significant period of time? Again, where is the 1000 year time gap in Matthew 25:31-46 when he tells of separating the sheep from the goats? When he comes to reward every man “then” in Matthew 16:27, “then” does not imply a 1000 year time period between the reward of the saved from the reward of the lost. You can search the red letters of your Bible to your heart’s content, and never see even a hint of a 1000 year period between the second coming and the white throne judgment.

4. The first coming of Jesus fulfilled the spring feasts in type and timing, and the second coming should also parallel the fall feasts in type and timing. There is no parallel to 1000 years in the sanctuary service or in the feast days to match a millennium reign. We have a single Day of Trumpets. We have a single Day of Atonement. There is nothing in the pattern we have been given to imply a one thousand year period.

5. The Exodus from Egypt is a pattern of things to happen in the end times (1 Corinthians 10:11). There is no parallel to 1000 years in the flight from Egypt.

6. God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Ezekiel 33:11. Does it seem logical that God will send his son here a second time, we have this wonderful 1000 years of peace, then all of a sudden one day out of nowhere, he’s going to raise up all the lost dead for a final showdown and eternal destruction? Wouldn’t it be far more merciful to have all of that nastiness over and done within a day, and not mar the peaceful eternity to follow?

7. Many think that at the time of the millennium, all of mankind will be raised, and that those who are not already followers of Messiah will have the opportunity to become followers of Messiah. But Rev 20:4-5 is quite clear that the first resurrection is only for the martyrs for Yeshua, and those who didn’t worship the beast, or his image, or received his mark. There is no room in verses 4-5 for anyone else to be part of the millennium experience. At the end of the 1000 years is the loosing of satan (vs 7 – 10), and only after that do we see the judgment of everyone else (vs 11-15). We are not told of any period of time for the “rest of the dead” to have a second chance. Notice they aren’t called the “rest of the living” or “rest of the resurrected” or even the “second resurrection”. It repeatedly refers to them as “dead” in verses 12-13. Although the use of the term “first resurrection” in verse 5 implies a second resurrection, many people assume (not a safe proposition, and not a word to suggest it in this passage) that people in that second resurrection are given life, and also given a period of time to learn and repent and be saved.

The above is simply my understanding and my explanation on this topic. Most (but not all) of these ideas came from a dear teacher, Danette Davis.For her detailed study, click here to read her book, Rapture Rabble and Millennium Muddle: Who Hijacked the Truth?


Judith Koch