This is a good article to contrast with “The Millennium“, where I touch on Warfield’s thoughts on the matter, and is the (official?) position of Chalcedon. An optimistic amillennialism – God will gain victory over the world, before the Second Coming, even though there is no literal millennium – is the traditional understand of the millennium.
The main problem with Warfield is his view of the binding of Satan. He writes:
What actually happens is that the saints described are removed from the sphere of Satan’s assaults. The saints described are free from all access of Satan – he is bound with respect to them: outside of their charmed circle his horrid work goes on. This is indicated, indeed, in the very employment of the two symbols “a thousand years” and “a little time.”
But Jesus said,
No man can enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house. (Mark 3:27).
Satan was not bound to protect the saints in heaven. Satan was bound so Jesus can more efficiently and complete loot the strong man’s home.
Satan was bound in Christ’s First Advent and thus prevented from prematurely instigating the eschatological War (pp. 499-508). The “Millennium” is Christ’s Kingdom, which began at the Resurrection/Ascension and continues until the end of the world (pp. 494-98, 508-19). The “new heaven and earth” is a picture of salvation: brought in definitively by the finished work of Christ, developing progressively throughout the present age, and coming finally, in absolute fullness, at the consummation of all things (pp. 535-45).
PMW 2021-069 by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr.
Although the vast majority of Revelation focuses on events that will occur “soon” (Rev 1:1, 3), the Revelation 20 section on the thousand years begins, but is not completed, in the first century. It projects itself into the distant future, allowing a glimpse of the end result of the events beginning in the apostolic era.
View original post 856 more words