Basic HTML Version
694
established the Kingdom and referred to it more than once as a present reality, Matt. 11:12;
12:28; Luke 17:21; John 18:36,37; (comp. Col. 1:13). This whole postponement theory is a
comparatively recent fiction, and is very objectionable, because it breaks up the unity of
Scripture and of the people of God in an unwarranted way. The Bible represents the relation
between the Old Testament and the New as that of type and antitype, of prophecy and
fulfilment; but this theory holds that, while the New Testament was originally meant to be a
fulfilment of the Old, it really became something quite different. The kingdom, that is, the Old
Testament theocracy, was predicted and was not restored, and the Church was not predicted
but was established. Thus the two fall apart, and the one becomes the book of the kingdom,
and the other, with the exception of the Gospels, the book of the Church. Besides, we get two
peoples of God, the one natural and the other spiritual, the one earthly and the other heavenly,
as if Jesus did not speak of “one flock and one shepherd,” John 10:16, and as if Paul did not say
that the Gentiles were grafted into the old olive tree, Rom. 11:17.
c. This theory is also in flagrant opposition to the Scriptural representation of the great events
of the future, namely, the resurrection, the final judgment, and the end of the world. As was
shown in the preceding, the Bible represents these great events as synchronizing. There is not
the slightest indication that they are separated by a thousand years, except this be found in
Rev. 20:4-6. They clearly coincide, Matt. 13:37-43,47-50 (separation of the good and the evil at
“the end,” not a thousand years before); 24:29-31; 25:31-46; John 5:25-29; I Cor. 15:22-26; Phil.
3:20,21; I Thess. 4:15,16; Rev. 20:11-15. They all occur at the coming of the Lord, which is also
the day of the Lord. In answer to this objection Premillenarians often suggest that the day of
the Lord may be a thousand years long, so that the resurrection of the saints and the judgment
of the nations takes place in the morning of that long day, and the resurrection of the wicked
and the judgment at the great white throne occurs in the evening of that same day. They
appeal to II Pet. 3:8... “one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as
one day.” But this can hardly prove the point, for the tables might easily be turned here. The
same passage might also be used to prove that the thousand years of Rev. 20 are but a single
day.
d. There is no positive Scriptural foundation whatsoever for the Premillennial view of a double,
or even a three- or fourfold resurrection, as their theory requires, nor for spreading the last
judgment over a period of a thousand years by dividing it into three judgments. It is, to say the
least, very dubious that the words, “This is the first resurrection” in Rev. 20:5, refer to a
physical resurrection. The context does not necessitate, nor even favor this view. What might
seem to favor the theory of a double resurrection, is the fact that the apostles often speak of
the resurrection of believers only, and do not refer to that of the wicked at all. But this is due to
the fact that they are writing to the churches of Jesus Christ, to the connections in which they