Case for the Millennial Reign
An issue that plagues the mystery of the millennial reign is of how the millennial reign will end. In the views of the amillennial, post-millennial, and pre-millennial, it is unlikely that the people who reigns would cease to rule even if the world would be deceived by the Devil. The probable reasons why the holy leaders' reign would be cut off is if the holy people to be deceived themselves, or that the holy leaders will be killed. Of both cases, it would imply that the church would be blinded, else someone would simply take their place and authority and continue to reign and the millennial reign would not be fulfilled. What the prophecy foretold is that the holy leaders will be killed, and the church will be blinded.
Now, it is important to note the prophesied blindness is directed to Israel. So, the prophesied millennial reign would only fit to the disciples and apostles of Christ. In support to this, is that the fall of Israel coincides with God's visitation and the rejection of the nation as a whole. The condemnation of Israel nation was referring to 70 AD after Israel denied Christ; and according to Christ's parable itself.
When Christ came, the promises of God was still in effect only to Israel; and which Jesus himself said that "salvation is of the Jews" and that he is sent to the "lost sheep of Israel." (John 4:22, Matt 15:24). And note that when the apostles and disciples came about to preach, their focus is to preach "FIRST" to the Jews, and that the Jews rejection would only be the reason why the gospel will be sent to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46, Acts 28:20, 25-28).
Paul, in his farewell speech in Ephesus, had warned the church of its incoming chaos -- warning them "with tears." (Acts 20:25-38). Also in his epistle to Timothy, warned them regarding the last days (2Tim 3:1-7). Such warnings would not come if the church will remain intact.
But, I believe, what can most convince us of the eventual fate of the apostles and disciples, and of the apostasy of the church, is in regards to the command of selling the apostles and disciples of their possessions (Acts 4:32-37). Jesus himself told a rich young man, "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me." (Matt 19:21). Why would they sell their possessions if there would be a continuous existing church and the mission of proclaiming the gospel? Selling off their possessions obviously imply that there will be an end of the church and of missions.
The church and mission will end because, as the prophesy, foretold that the Devil will overcome the holy people and kill them (Dan 7:21, Rev 13:7). And Paul himself said, "...we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter." While the writer of Hebrews wrote, "For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Christ built the church through Peter (Matt 16:18), but even Peter, himself, says that he will "put off" the tabernacle/church as Christ shewed him (2Pet 1:13-14).
An issue that plagues the mystery of the millennial reign is of how the millennial reign will end. In the views of the amillennial, post-millennial, and pre-millennial, it is unlikely that the people who reigns would cease to rule even if the world would be deceived by the Devil. The probable reasons why the holy leaders' reign would be cut off is if the holy people to be deceived themselves, or that the holy leaders will be killed. Of both cases, it would imply that the church would be blinded, else someone would simply take their place and authority and continue to reign and the millennial reign would not be fulfilled. What the prophecy foretold is that the holy leaders will be killed, and the church will be blinded.
Now, it is important to note the prophesied blindness is directed to Israel. So, the prophesied millennial reign would only fit to the disciples and apostles of Christ. In support to this, is that the fall of Israel coincides with God's visitation and the rejection of the nation as a whole. The condemnation of Israel nation was referring to 70 AD after Israel denied Christ; and according to Christ's parable itself.
When Christ came, the promises of God was still in effect only to Israel; and which Jesus himself said that "salvation is of the Jews" and that he is sent to the "lost sheep of Israel." (John 4:22, Matt 15:24). And note that when the apostles and disciples came about to preach, their focus is to preach "FIRST" to the Jews, and that the Jews rejection would only be the reason why the gospel will be sent to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46, Acts 28:20, 25-28).
Paul, in his farewell speech in Ephesus, had warned the church of its incoming chaos -- warning them "with tears." (Acts 20:25-38). Also in his epistle to Timothy, warned them regarding the last days (2Tim 3:1-7). Such warnings would not come if the church will remain intact.
But, I believe, what can most convince us of the eventual fate of the apostles and disciples, and of the apostasy of the church, is in regards to the command of selling the apostles and disciples of their possessions (Acts 4:32-37). Jesus himself told a rich young man, "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me." (Matt 19:21). Why would they sell their possessions if there would be a continuous existing church and the mission of proclaiming the gospel? Selling off their possessions obviously imply that there will be an end of the church and of missions.
The church and mission will end because, as the prophesy, foretold that the Devil will overcome the holy people and kill them (Dan 7:21, Rev 13:7). And Paul himself said, "...we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter." While the writer of Hebrews wrote, "For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Christ built the church through Peter (Matt 16:18), but even Peter, himself, says that he will "put off" the tabernacle/church as Christ shewed him (2Pet 1:13-14).
Comment