The Question No Muslim Can Answer!

Nominal Muslims (those who are "Muslim" in name only and not by practice), continue to try and deny that Jesus is God and that He said He was God. In the New Testament, Jesus stated that He was God in a number of different ways, by words and in actions. Only God can forgive sins, and yet Jesus was forgiving sins. Only God can receive worship, yet Jesus received worship. Only God can restore sight to the blind, yet Jesus restored sight to the blind. Even the Qur'an affirms that Jesus is God.

In surah 57:3, the Qur'an states that Allah is the First and the Last.

In Revelation 1:17-18, Jesus says that He is the First and the Last.

In surah 22:56-57, the Qur'an states that Allah is the Judge of all the world.

In Matthew 25:31-32, Jesus says that He is the Judge of all the world.

In surah 22:7, the Qur'an states that Allah will resurrect the dead.

In John 5:25-29, Jesus says that He will resurrect the dead.

According to the Qur'an, only God can do these things. But Jesus said that He would do them. Clearly Muslims and the Qur'an are wrong for giving honour to Jesus. If Jesus was nothing more than a prophet, a good man, then what does Islam have to say about prophets lying and claiming to be and do the things that only God Himself can do?

Jesus had said to the people of His day, "For unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins." (John 8:24) "He" who? Who are they to believe that He is? The Jews obviously had the same thoughts, and so they asked Him, "Who are you?" (v. 25). This entire discussion lead to Jesus arguing with the Jews as to who their true father was, and stating that Abraham looked forward to seeing His day, which prompted the Jews to challenge Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" (John 8:57). Jesus replied, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I Am." (John 8:58). Immediately after Jesus said this, the Jews "picked up stones to throw at Him" (v. 59). Why did they pick up stones to stone Him, Muslims?

Before we continue, it is important to note that in John 8:24, the word "He" does not actually appear in the Greek. How it actually reads is like this: "For unless you believe that I Am, you will die in your sins."

At the Feast of Dedication, Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30). Immediately after Jesus said this, "The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him" (v. 31). Why would they want to stone Him, Muslims? Jesus even asked them that same question: "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" (v. 32). The Jews explained to Him precisely why they wanted to stone Him: "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, claim Yourself to be God" (v. 33). Did you catch that? Obviously the Jews were intelligent enough to realize and understand what Jesus had said: "You claim Yourself to be God."

In both John 8:58 and John 10:30, Jesus was equating Himself with God the Father. In other words, Jesus said He was God. When He said "I Am," He was using the name that God revealed Himself as to Moses. The Jews understood what Jesus said. Why do Muslims have such difficulty in understanding this? Muslims demand a specific verse where Jesus unequivocally says, "I am God." They clearly do not understand a single thing we have looked at thus far. So let's play their game.

Muslims...

Where does Allah unequivocally state in the Qur'an that the text of the Gospel has been corrupted?

I will give you a hint: nowhere! What the Qur'an does state unequivocally in surahs 3:3, 5:66, 5:68, and 18:27, is the affirmation of the inspiration, preservation, purity, authenticity, and continuing authority of the Gospel. The third article of Islamic faith is that Muslims "Believe in the existence of the books of which God is the author: the Quran (revealed to Muhammad), the Gospel (revealed to Jesus), the Torah (revealed to Moses), and Psalms (revealed to David)." If nominal Muslims are not believing in the Gospel, then they are Apostate "Muslims"!

Premise #1: If the Gospel is the inspired, preserved, authoritative Word of God, then Islam is false because Islam contradicts the Gospel.

Premise #2: If the Gospel is not the inspired, preserved, authoritative Word of God, then Islam is false because the Qur'an claims that the Gospel is the inspired, preserved, authoritative Word of God.

Conclusion: Islam is false.

ATTENTION: King James Only People

It is a known fact that the English language evolved from the German language. If you examine Wycliffe's English translation of the Bible from the 1300s, you can see a bit of this in some of the words. However, if you go back earlier than Wycliffe, to the Anglo-Saxon Proto-English, you can really see it. So, let me ask you a question . . .

If the English language did not exist, would the Word of God be preserved anywhere?!? Think hard before you answer.

You see, King James Only individuals like to try and argue that the King James Bible is the preserved Word of God. Some King James Only individuals will even argue that the King James Bible is the preserved Word of God in the English language, which is a far cry better than those King James Only individuals who basically argue that the King James Bible is the preserved Word of God in the entire world. The former individuals not only disqualify any English translation to come after the King James Bible, but they also disqualify any English translation to come before the King James Bible, which means that God left the world languished and without His preserved Word until the King James translators came along. Absurd, right? The latter individuals disqualify every translation in every language unless it has been translated from the the King James Bible. That is a whole other barrel of monkeys. So before the King James Bible even existed, all these other translations of the biblical manuscripts were not even preserved by God. Utterly ridiculous! If the King James Bible is the preserved Word of God, then answer me this . . .

Why does your King James Bible not contain the Apocrypha? You see, the Apocrypha was a part of the original 1611 King James Bible, which means that if the King James Bible was inspired and is the preserved Word of God, then so too are the Apocrypha. If you reject the Apocrypha, then the King James Bible could only be partially inspired, which means it is partially preserved. If the King James translators were inspired, as some King James Only individuals like to attempt to argue, then why did they include the Apocrypha? So if the translators made a mistake by including the Apocrypha, then how do you know they did not make any other mistakes anywhere else?

Since you King James Only individuals do not seem to have the discernment to figure this out, here are the facts for you to digest. God's Word promised that God would preserve His Word. Tell me, how many copies of the New Testament manuscripts do we have? I say copies because the original autographs no longer exist. There are over 25,000 copies. In other words, God has preserved His Word. Guess what? It has nothing to do with the King James Bible! God's Word is preserved even if the King James Bible did not exist!

If you want to use the King James Bible, that is perfectly fine. It is a good translation. But it is not the only good translation. It has its errors just like every other translation. If you knew anything about language and translation, you would know that it is impossible to translate from one language to another with 100% accuracy. You use the best words available and leave the rest in God's hands.

False Approaches to the Bible!

In the year 1227, a professor at the University of Paris named Stephen Langton added chapters to all the books of the Bible. Then in 1551, a printer named Robert Stephanus (sometimes called Robert Estienne) numbered the sentences in all the books of the New Testament.

According to Stephanus’s son, the verse divisions that his father created do not do service to the sense of the text. Stephanus did not use any consistent method. While riding on horseback from Paris to Lyons, he versified the entire New Testament within Langton’s chapter divisions.’

So verses were born in the pages of holy writ in the year 1551. And since that time God’s people have approached the New Testament with scissors and glue, cutting and pasting isolated, disjointed sentences from different letters, lifting them out of their real-life setting, lashing them together to build floatable doctrines, and then calling it “the Word of God.”

Seminarians and Bible college students alike are rarely if ever given a panoramic view of the free-flowing story of the early church with the New Testament books arranged in chronological order.’ As a result, most Christians are completely out of touch with the social and historical events that lay behind each of the New Testament letters. Instead, they have turned the New Testament into a manual that can be wielded to prove any point. Chopping the Bible up into fragments makes this relatively easy to pull off.

We Christians have been taught to approach the Bible in one of eight ways:

→ You look for verses that inspire you. Upon finding such verses, you either highlight, memorize, meditate upon, or put them on your refrigerator door.
→ You look for verses that tell you what God has promised so that you can confess it in faith and thereby obligate the Lord to do what you want.
→ You look for verses that tell you what God commands you to do.
→ You look for verses that you can quote to scare the devil out of his wits or resist him in the hour of temptation.
→ You look for verses that will prove your particular doctrine so that you can slice-and-dice your theological sparring partner into biblical ribbons. (Because of the proof-texting method, a vast wasteland of Christianity behaves as if the mere citation of some random, decontextualized verse of Scripture ends all discussion on virtually any subject.)
→ You look for verses in the Bible to control and/or correct others.
→ You look for verses that "preach" well and make good sermon material. (This is an ongoing addiction for many who preach and teach.)
→ You sometimes close your eyes, flip open the Bible randomly, stick your finger on a page, read what the text says, and then take what you have read as a personal "word" from the Lord.

Now look at this list again. Which of these approaches have you used? Look again: Notice how each is highly individualistic. All of them put you, the individual Christian, at the center. Each approach ignores the fact that most of the New Testament was written to corporate bodies of people (churches), not to individuals.

But that is not all. Each of these approaches is built on isolated proof texting. Each treats the New Testament like a manual and blinds us to its real message. It is no wonder that we can approvingly nod our heads at paid pastors, the Sunday morning order of worship, sermons, church buildings, religious dress, choirs, worship teams, seminaries, and a passive priesthood—all without wincing.

We have been taught to approach the Bible like a jigsaw puzzle. Most of us have never been told the entire story that lies behind the letters that Paul, Peter, James, John, and Jude wrote. We have been taught chapters and verses, not the historical context.

For instance, have you ever been given the story behind Paul's letter to the Galatians? Before nodding, see if you can answer these questions off the top of your head: Who were the Galatians? What were their issues? When and why did Paul write to them? What happened just before Paul penned his Galatian treatise? Where was he when he wrote it? What provoked him to write the letter? And where in Acts do you find the historical context for this letter? All of these background matters are indispensable for understanding what our New Testament is about. Without them, we simply cannot understand the Bible clearly or properly.

One scholar put it this way, "The arrangement of the letters of Paul in the New Testament is in general that of their length. When we rearrange them into their chronological order, fitting them as far as possible into their life-setting within the record of the Acts of the Apostles, they begin to yield up more of their treasure; they become self-explanatory, to a greater extent than when this background is ignored."

Another writes, "If future editions [of the New Testament] want to aid rather than hinder a reader's understanding of the New Testament, it should be realized that the time is ripe to cause both the verse and chapter divisions to disappear from the text and to be put on the margin in an inconspicuous a place as possible. Every effort must be made to print the text in a way which makes it possible for the units which the author himself had in mind to become apparent."

You could call our method of studying the New Testament the "clipboard approach." If you are familiar with computers, you are aware of the clipboard component. If you happen to be in a word processor, you may cut and paste a piece of text via the clipboard. The clipboard allows you to cut a sentence from one document and paste it into another.

Pastors, seminarians, and laymen alike have been conditioned by the clipboard approach when studying the Bible. This is how we justify our man-made, encased traditions and pass them off as biblical. It is why we routinely miss what the early church was like whenever we open our New Testaments. We see verses. We do not see the whole picture.

This approach is still alive and well today, not only in institutional churches but in house churches as well.

—Frank Viola and George Barna, Pagan Christianity?: Exploring

the Roots of Our Church Practices, (BarnaBooks, 2012), 228-232.

Ezekiel 40-48

These chapters describe a rebuilding of a temple. Many theologians and scholars seem to agree in stating that this vision was not fulfilled in the return from the Babylonian captivity. If this is the case, then what are these chapters describing?

You see, there are two main theories, both of which fail in their interpretation of these chapters.

AGE TO COME / NEW HEAVENS AND NEW EARTH

These nine chapters cannot be describing a temple and sacrifices come the new Heaven and new Earth. Why? Because sin will be done away with, therefore there is no need to make a "sin offering" (Ez. 40:39; 42:13; 43:19, 21-22, 25; 44:27, 29; 45:17, 19, 22-23, 25; 46:20) or "to make atonement" (Ez. 45:15, 17). Also, because Christ fulfilled the sacrifices "once for all" and they have been done away with (Heb. 10-10-18).

RESTORED ISRAEL / MILLENNIAL KINGDOM

These nine chapters cannot be describing a temple and sacrifices of a restored Israel. Why? Because, primarily, Christ fulfilled the sacrifices "once for all" and they have been done away with (Heb. 10-10-18). The sacrifices cannot be for a "memorial" because the passages clearly mention "sin offering" (Ez. 40:39; 42:13; 43:19, 21-22, 25; 44:27, 29; 45:17, 19, 22-23, 25; 46:20) and "to make atonement for" (Ez. 45:15, 17). Believers are being built up into a holy temple (Eph. 2:19-22). What would be the point in ethnic Israel returning to a system that never worked in the first place and was nothing more than a foreshadow of the sacrifice of Christ? That would not be a returning to God with their whole heart; it would be returning to idols.

These chapters have nothing to do with a rebuilt temple in a millennial kingdom nor in the age to come. So if this vision has nothing to do with the temple to be rebuilt after the return from captivity, what does it have to do with? Three literal interpretations are inadequate to explain these chapters: (1) a re-built temple after the Babylonian captivity, (2) a re-built temple in a millennial kingdom, and (3) a re-built temple in the new Heavens and new Earth. There is no mention of Jerusalem anywhere in these nine chapters. Unlike with Moses and the tabernacle and Solomon and the temple, there is no mention of construction supervisors or builders.

I do not know how to interpret these passages. But what I do know is simple, and it is this: if these passages do not describe the rebuilding of the temple after the Babylonian captivity, based on everything the New Testament has to say, they for sure have nothing to do with a rebuilding of a temple in a millennial kingdom or the age to come. Any interpretation that attempts either of these is false and they are ignoring and denying a vast portion of what the New Testament teaches in order to force these interpretations.

Perhaps it should be interpreted symbolically, emphasizing the return and permanent dwelling of the divine presence among His people?

Why Is Christianity So Narrow?

"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it." Matthew 7:13-14

Why is Christianity so narrow? Because truth, by very definition, is narrow. The equation 2 + 2 = 4 is narrow. The answer cannot be anything other than 4. There is no such thing as "your truth" and "my truth"; there is only the truth. Christianity is narrow because Jesus, the very Person many of you self-professing so-called "Christians" claim to love and follow, said that the way to God is narrow. "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me!"

Jesus declared that He was the only way to salvation, to right standing with God. You self-professing so-called "Christians" who question this, who deny this, who say there are many ways to God that even a devout Muslim, Hindu, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, etc., may get to Heaven; you call the very Person you claim to follow and obey a liar! Jesus said "the way is narrow," and you say that it is not. Jesus said "I am the way" and "no one comes to the Father but through Me," and you say that He is not, and that people can come by any way. You make Jesus to be a liar! Why? Because you are not a Christian! You do not belong to Him! You are not the Father's child!

You claim Jesus for your own, yet reject everything He said and stood for. You claim He was wrong about creation. You claim He was wrong about Adam and Eve being the first humans. You claim He was wrong about the flood. You claim He was wrong about upholding heterosexual relationships and condemning everything that did not conform to this. You claim Jesus for your Saviour and God, yet spew the denials of your true father, the Devil. Unless you repent and start believing what the Saviour said, when you die you will spend an eternity in Hell. You profess to be a Christian, but you are anything but. A Christian obeys his/her Master. A Christian does not deny what his/her Master has said and make Him out to be a liar. You call yourself a Christian, but you were sold on a false Gospel and you have never been regenerated, born again, and saved.

If you believe that any religious person can get to Heaven by observance of their religion, then you are not a Christian. If you believe the way to salvation is not narrow, then you are not a Christian. If you believe that Jesus is not the only way to the Father, then you are most definitely not a Christian.

You engage in the Devil's most successful motto: "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." The Devil's greatest victory is in having false converts and non-Christians claim to be and pretend to be Christians so that it gives the rest of the world a bad taste of what it means to be Christian. Many cults and sects claim to be Christian, yet deny the very words of Scripture and teach doctrines of men and doctrines of demons. Oh, the condemnation that rests upon your head for the day of judgment!

Christianity is narrow because truth is narrow. Truth cannot be untruth. Truth is narrow because God is narrow. God is absolutely holy and cannot be anything but. If God provides a way, then that is the only way and everyone who comes to Him must come the same way: by faith in Christ Jesus as Messiah the Saviour.

Why You Need A Bible Without Chapters and Verses

by Alex Goodwin

When it comes to reading and studying the Bible, chapters and verses feel about as essential as the steering wheel of a car. We wouldn’t quite know what to do without them. They give our Bibles a structure we can grasp. They make things easy to find and they break down long passages into manageable, relatively uniform chunks. It’s hard to imagine a Bible without chapters and verses inside.

But where did they come from? Surely the Apostle Paul didn’t write his letters with chapters and verses. Why were they added? And what unnoticed impact are they having on how we read the Bible?

A Recent Innovation

Many people are unaware that chapter and verse numbers are only about 500 years old. Archbishop Stephen Langton created the chapter system we’re familiar with in the 13th century, simply because he was writing a Bible commentary and needed a way to reference more specific portions of Scripture. Similarly, French printer and scholar Robert Estienne added verse numbers in the 16th century. His reason? He was creating a Bible concordance, so he needed a way to reference even smaller portions of passages – a sentence or two at a time.

Shortly after these numbering systems were conceived, somebody made the decision that they should be a standard feature in all Bibles. Thus, a book made for reading was turned into a book made for referencing. One of the first Bibles produced on the printing press, the Geneva Bible, turned each verse into a separate paragraph, obliterating any sense of continuity within the literature and setting the table for the volleys of verses hurled back and forth during the theological debates of the Reformation.

Continue reading...

Spurgeon's Pre-Millennialism

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, while being a gifted preacher, was not without his flaws. He apparently had a dramatic flair that offended many; pacing the platform, acting out biblical stories, and filling his sermons with sentimental tales of dying children, grieving parents, and repentant harlots. Referred to as "the pulpit buffoon," Spurgeon replied, "I am perhaps vulgar, but it is not intentional, save that I must and will make people listen. My firm conviction is that we have had enough polite preachers."

Spurgeon was apparently an energetic and oratorical individual. As gifted as he was at preaching, nevertheless he was not God. Everything he spoke or wrote was not golden, nor was it the Gospel truth. Even Spurgeon held to some erroneous beliefs, such as his position on baptism and his belief in a millennial kingdom and restoration of national Israel.

Spurgeon believed in two separate physical resurrections separated by 1,000 years based on Revelation 20:1-5. The resurrection of the just first, and the resurrection of the unjust last.

We expect a reigning Christ on earth; that seems to us to be very plain, and put so literally that we dare not spiritualise it. We anticipate a first and second resurrection; a first resurrection of the righteous, and a second resurrection of the ungodly, who shall be judged, condemned, and punished for ever by the sentence of the great King.¹

You have perhaps imagined that all men will rise at the same moment; that the trump of the archangel will break open every grave at the same instant, and sound in the ear of every sleeper at the identical moment. Such I do not think is the testimony of the Word of God. I think that the Word of God teaches, and teaches indisputably, that the saints shall rise first. And be the interval of time whatever it may, whether the thousand years are literal years, or a very long period of time, I am not now about to determine; I have nothing to do except with the fact that there are two resurrections, a resurrection of the just, and afterwards of the unjust,—a time when the saints of God shall rise, an after time when the wicked shall rise to the resurrection of damnation.²

Despite his giftedness at preaching, Spurgeon apparently failed to pay attention to the entire context of Revelation 20 and to compare the whole of Scripture. Let us look at the various fatally systemic flaws of Spurgeon's view (Pre-Millennialism).

Resurrection of Just → Millennial Reign → Resurrection of Unjust

First problem: When does Christ's judgment take place? Before or after the millennial reign? If before, then how do men escape His judgment? If after, what was the point in coming and waiting?

Second problem: After the 1,000 years, only unjust individuals are resurrected. Does that mean that there were no just individuals living during this time period? What happened to this kingdom of righteousness?

Third problem: Does nobody die during the millennial reign? If so, this sounds awfully similar to the age to come, which is eternity. Only in the age to come does nobody die.

The first sentence of the second citation is in stark contrast to the words of Christ in John 5:28-29, where He said, "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment." To imagine that there are two separate resurrections here is problematic to the judgment seen in Matthew 25:31-46. Two separate resurrections separated by 1,000 years would require two days of the Lord and two judgments. Scripture only ever mentions one judgment!

When Christ returns, He is coming as Judge. He will judge both the living and the dead. In order to do so, the dead have to be resurrected. Resurrection reverses the power of death. Both the just and unjust will be resurrected and changed. In order to be tormented for all eternity, one's body needs to be immortal and imperishable. Sin and death will be defeated at Christ's Second Coming and all will be judged. Separating all of this creates a huge problem.

According to Matthew 25:31, after Christ returns in His glory, He executes judgment by separating the sheep from the goats. You cannot do this if everyone is not accounted for. Job 14:12 says that man will be resurrected when “the heavens be no more.” Jesus said “Heaven and earth will pass away…but of that day…no one knows…but the Father alone” (Matt. 24:25-26). In 2 Peter 3:10-12, Peter states that “the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.” Jesus declares four times in John 6:38-40, 44-45 and 54 that the righteous will be resurrected “on the last day.” First Corinthians 15:23-26, 50-54 states the same truth: “But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end.” In John 11:24, Martha acknowledged that Lazarus, a Jew, would be resurrected “on the last day.” Jesus stated in John 5:28-29 that there is “a” resurrection of “both” the just and unjust. Daniel 12:2 concurs with this truth, as does Acts 24:15. One resurrection! Not two!

A plain reading of Revelation 20:1-5 would seem to support Spurgeon's theories. However, he apparently missed verse 6, 14, and 21:8. In verse 4, who does John see sitting on thrones in judgment, reigning with Christ? "The souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God." Not bodies! Souls! They are not reigning with Christ on Earth. As Anthony Hoekema points out,

"There is no indication in these verses that John is describing an earthly millennial reign. The scene…is set in heaven. Nothing is said in verses 4-6 about the earth, about Palestine as the center of this reign, or about the Jews. Nothing is said here about believers who are still on earth during this millennial reign – the vision deals exclusively with believers who have died. This millennial reign is not something to be looked for in the future; it is going on now, and will be until Christ returns."³

In verse 5, it says, "The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed." That sounds like a second resurrection of the unjust. But what does verse 6 say? "Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power." The second death has no power over those who participated in the first resurrection. What is the second death? Verse 14 says, "This is the second death, the lake of fire." Revelation 21:8 says that all sinners will "have their part in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."  The lake of fire, then, is the second death. What kind of death is this? Physical? Or spiritual? It is spiritual! The first death is physical. If the second death has no power over those of the first resurrection, what kind of resurrection is it? Physical? Or Spiritual? It is spiritual! It is the new birth! The second resurrection is physical.

In Psalm 50:10 we are told that God owns the cattle on 1,000 hills. Is this literal or symbolic? Does He not own the cattle on the 1,001st hill? To the 2,000th hill? In Deuteronomy 7:9 we are told that God extends mercy to 1,000 generations. Is this literal or symbolic? Does He not extend mercy to the 1,001st generation? To the 2,000th generation? So what does “1,000” represent in these passages? What does “1,000” represent in Revelation 20:1-5?

“And I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he should not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short time. And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.” (Rev. 20:1-5)

In Jude, Michael the archangel would not dare bring an accusation against Satan. Obviously Satan was created as a more powerful being than Michael was. Therefore, you need someone with more authority and more power in order to deal with Satan. Michael concurred with this by saying, “The Lord rebuke you.” If we look elsewhere in Scripture, we find that it is the Lord Jesus who has keys in his possession (Rev. 1:18; 3:7). This “angel” is either none other than the Lord Jesus Himself or, which is more likely, an angel to whom He has given the key to. Now, is the “key” in his hand a literal key or a symbolic key? When Jesus handed the keys to the kingdom over to Peter in Matthew 16:19, were they literal keys or symbolic keys? What did they look like? How did Peter use them? When Jesus spoke of a “key of knowledge” in Luke 11:52, was this a literal key or a symbolic key? Would Matthew 23:13 provide an answer?

Is the “bottomless pit” literal or symbolic? If it is literal, we would need a pit that goes from here straight through to China. Is the “great chain” literal or symbolic? In Mark 5:1-20, the demon-possessed man could not even be bound by literal chains. Since angels do not have physical bodies, what good would a literal chain do? 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 inform us of demons that have been put in everlasting chains. Once again, since demons do not have physical bodies, can these be literal chains? “Dragon” is clearly symbolic because the text goes on to tell us who it is.

So, since everything we have just looked at is obviously symbolic, it stands to reason that the “1,000 years” is also symbolic. There is no reason or justification for interpreting it as a literal 1,000 years. To do so would do violence to the text. If everything before and after is symbolic, we cannot pick one aspect of the text and decide to translate it as being literal. That is poor hermeneutics and exegesis. We must be consistent. The 1,000 years is symbolic for a long period of time. Period. It is a hyberbole—a rhetorical figure of speech in which statements are exaggerated.

Just because Spurgeon held to a particular belief does not make it true or biblical! Spurgeon is not God!

The only way that Jews can be saved is by incorporation into the Church. Jews were the first members of the Church, so interpreters who look at the Church like it is some kind of bad word are in the wrong. It was the true Israel (believing Jews) who first made up membership of the Church. Then believing Gentiles were added in with them. The Church is the only body, the only nation, of God's true covenant people. The New Covenant was not just made with Israel and Judah (the north and south kingdoms). Everything written in the New Covenant is what every Christian experiences, whether Jew or Gentile. There are not two New Covenants; there is only one New Covenant, and it applies to God's true people—believing Jews and believing Gentiles alike. Any theology that separates the Church from the end of things is an aberrant, heretical, and godless theology. Restoration Theology wants to see a distinction between Israel and the Church, but salvation offers no such distinction. The Church comes out of all that was Israel and consists of true Israel (believing Jews). Christianity is not a new religion. Its foundations were Judaism (without all the Pharisaical additions and false interpretations). Jesus and the Apostles corrected the misinterpretations and shaped the Church around its true religion. The twelve added nothing to what Paul was doing. The first 5,000+ members of the Church were Jewish. The old practices under the Law have been done away with. There is no returning to them. They were types and shadows. The Church is the new temple of God. God does not dwell in places built by human hands, but within us. The promises were for Christ and all who belong to Him, having a faith like Abraham's. To deny all this is to be willfully ignorant (dumb on purpose). The entire New Testament makes it painfully obvious.

---

¹ Charles Spurgeon, "Things to Come," MTP, 15:329.

² Charles Spurgeon, "The First Resurrection," MTP, 7:346.

³ Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future, 235.

Jewish Restoration Theology

Whether Zionist, Dispensationalist, or Pre-Millennialist, there seem to be a number of individuals who believe in Restoration Theology. They do this in ignorance and defiance of the clear evidence Scripture provides to the contrary. These individuals have turned the nation of Israel into an idol of worship and elevated this nation above Christ Jesus. They make the Scriptures to be about Israel rather than about the Lord Jesus. Restoration Theology is not only unbiblical, it it godless!

Restoration eschatology dies hard, notwithstanding fatal systemic flaws. Restoration Theology has been demonstrated to be fundamentally in error in terms of exegetical failings and theological expression. The writings of Restorationists are constantly and consistently laced with error, misinformation, inferences, presumptions, assumptions, conclusions drawn on assumptions, pretext, front-loading, and eisegetical interpretations based on his feelings and opinions. They cannot even attempt to respond to the major thrust of the argument.

In order to arrive at the belief of Restorationism, you must ignore the historical context of the Scriptures, as well as every other context your passages fall under. You must also ignore the words and teachings of Christ Jesus Himself, as well as everything taught in and by the entire New Testament. In so doing, Restorationists willfully call Jesus and His Apostles liars!

Restorationism believes in a literal 1000-year kingdom. They believe that national Israel will rule over every other nation, that the physical temple will be rebuilt, that Jesus will sit on a physical throne, that sacrifices will be re-instituted, and a bunch of other problematic beliefs. All of these beliefs must reject the natural, contextual, exegetical interpretation of numerous passages of Scripture.

Restoration Theology was first developed late in Judaism. It was revived by the heretic Cerinthus just prior to the deaths of all the Apostles. The Apostle John had even condemned Cerinthus over these beliefs. The majority of the early Jewish church did not believe in Restorationism and all it entails. The majority of the church for the past 2000 years, although the term is relatively new, were Amillennialists. Amillennialism is the only position that makes the most sense out of all the passages of Scripture without having to ignore and rip passages from their immediate contexts.

Restoration Theology believes:

1. There will be a restoration of all things Jewish.
2. There will be a literal 1000-year kingdom.
3. There will be a rebuilt physical temple.
4. There will be a return to sacrifices.
5. The throne Jesus sits on is a literal, physical throne.

 Second Peter 3:10-13 says:

But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat! But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.

The coming like a thief can only refer to one thing. Either it refers to the mythical "Rapture," or it refers to the Second Coming of Christ Jesus. In either case, it presents a colossal problem for all Restorationist theologies. Both Dispensationalism and Pre-Millennialism fail and die in light of this passage. If the coming like a thief refers to the "Rapture," then immediately after this happens, "heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up." So much for the "7-year Great Tribulation" and the "1000-year Millennial Kingdom." If the coming like a thief refers to the Second Coming, then immediately after this happens, "heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up." So much for the "1000-year Millennial Kingdom."

Restorationists must explain this passage away and make its simple interpretation more difficult in order to support their system of unbiblical and godless theology. Restoration Theology turns national Israel into an idol of worship and make the Scriptures to be predominantly about Israel rather than about Christ Jesus.

Contending against the unbiblical and godless interpretations of Restoration Theology are these truths of Scripture:

1. The Cursed Fig Tree
2. True Israel
3. Will There Be A 1000-Year Kingdom?
4. The Temple
5. What Kind of Throne Was It?
6. Romans 11:17-24 
7. Expansion Theology
8. The Mystery of the Gentiles
9. The Land Promise
10. History and Truth of the Land 

Restorationists cannot and will not attempt to answer these because they are not up to the task. Until they acknowledge the proper historical context of the various passages of Scripture they attempt to use as their "proof texts," and accept what the Bible (especially the New Testament) has to say, their interpretations will continue to deviate from the truth and indoctrinate people with lies.

Scripture is not about the nation of Israel. It never was! From Genesis to Revelation, Scripture is wholly, entirely, and completely about Christ Jesus! Those who put Israel at the center of history and make Scripture Judeo-centric are ignoring clear passages of Scripture and calling the Lord Jesus a liar! You think the promises made to Abraham concerning his see were made to national Israel. They were and they were not. Paul makes it clear in Galatians that the "seed" refers to Christ and not to the physical descendants! And that the promises belong to those who have the same faith as Abraham, whether Jew or Gentile. When the Jews referred to Abraham as their father, Jesus made it clear that God could make children for Abraham from the stones, and even said that the Devil was their father. But Restorationists ignore everything taught in the New Testament and focus on a wrongly dividing false interpretation of the Old Testament that the Pharisees held to. Jesus even corrected them on their many falsely held beliefs, yet Restoration Theology aims to repeat those same errors.

As I have said before, the more I realize just how sloppily Restorationists interpret the Scriptures, their method being eerily similar to that of the Jehovah's Witnesses (ripping randomly isolated verses of Scripture from their immediate contexts and tying them to other randomly isolated verses of Scripture ripped from their immediate contexts), the more difficult I find it to call them "my brother in Christ" and "a Christian." Would a Christian distort Scripture to the extent that Restoration Theology has done? Revelation 22:18-19 warns, "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."

If you believe in Restoration Theology, you have made national Israel an idol, and you worship it as your god through your theological beliefs. You reject and deny what the Saviour Jesus had to say, calling Him a liar. You willfully and deliberately ignore, reject, and deny the plain teachings of Scripture. Repent today and believe the Lord Jesus!

Work and the Christian

Many people view work as a curse, swearing under their breath every day that they have to go in to their job. But did you know that man was created to work? "Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it" (Gen. 2:15). God worked when He made creation. Work is rooted in God's good creation, and it reflects the glory of God. Work only became a burden through the presence of sin. The curse of sin made work itself more difficult: "Then to Adam He said, 'Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, "You shall not eat from it"; cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you will eat of it all the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; and you will eat the plants of the field; by the sweat of your face you will eat bread, till you return to the ground, because from it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return'" (Gen. 3:17-19). There are three common temptations that you will face at some point in your life in and with your work.

1. You will be tempted to worship work.
   Has work become your idol? Do you gladly serve it with long hours, bowing down to its demands despite the destruction that it causes to you and your family?
    
2. You will be tempted to reject work.
   Working can be stressful and difficult. Deadlines; conflict with co-workers or management; not being compensated well for the work you do. Do you feel tired and defeated? Do you find work too challenging? Do you struggle with laziness? Has rest and leisure become your idol or worship? These may cause you to have a desire to reject work outright?
    
3. You will be tempted to twist work.
   Are you tempted to alter numbers on your quotas? Have you been tempted to take money 'under the table' in order to finalize a deal or make a deal go through quicker? No matter the kind of work you do, at some point in your life you will be tempted to twist it with sin.

There is nothing wrong with automating tasks or outsourcing responsibilities, but you will need to work yourself in some way, shape, fashion, or form. As a Christian, there are three things you need to remember about work.

1. Jesus is your boss.
   "Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance. It is the Lord Christ whom you serve." —Colossians 3:23-24
    
2. God works through your work.
   "Let the favor of the Lord our God be upon us; and confirm for us the work of our hands; yes, confirm the work of our hands." —Psalm 90:17
    
3. Trust God with your work.
   "Trust in the LORD with all your heart and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight." —Proverbs 3:5-6
   
   "Commit your works to the LORD and your plans will be established." —Proverbs 16:3
   

The Lord Jesus is redeeming everything to Himself—including work: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven" (Col. 1:15-20). It will be as it was intended in the Garden.

Do you have a boss who is similar to the character Bill Lumbergh in the movie Office Space (1999)? If you do, more than likely you feel frustrated, angry, and not compelled to do your job. I have been there a couple times in my own life. If this is the situation you find yourself in, take a moment to pray, seek God's grace in Christ, and remind yourself that it is Jesus Whom you are really working for. Do not try to impress men with your work. Do not even give them a second thought. Do all that you do for the Lord Jesus. As you work, ask yourself if Jesus would be proud of your efforts. It is Him you should be pleasing in all that you do.

What Kind of Work Ethic Ought a Christian to Possess?

"You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your countrymen or one of your aliens who is in your land in your towns." —Deuteronomy 24:14

"Go to the ant, O sluggard, observe her ways and be wise, Which, having no chief, officer or ruler, prepares her food in the summer and gathers her provision in the harvest. How long will you lie down, O sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep? 'A little sleep, a little slumber, A little folding of the hands to rest'—Your poverty will come in like a vagabond and your need like an armed man." —Proverbs 6:6-11

"Poor is he who works with a negligent hand, but the hand of the diligent makes rich." —Proverbs 10:4

"He who tills his land will have plenty of bread, but he who pursues worthless things lacks sense." —Proverbs 12:11

"The hand of the diligent will rule, but the slack hand will be put to forced labor." —Proverbs 12:24

"The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, but the soul of the diligent is made fat." —Proverbs 13:4

"In all labor there is profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty." —Proverbs 14:23

"Commit your works to the LORD and your plans will be established." —Proverbs 16:3

"Laziness casts into a deep sleep, and an idle man will suffer hunger." —Proverbs 19:15

"The sluggard says, 'There is a lion outside; I will be killed in the streets!'" —Proverbs 22:13

"I passed by the field of the sluggard and by the vineyard of the man lacking sense, and behold, it was completely overgrown with thistles; its surface was covered with nettles, and its stone wall was broken down. When I saw, I reflected upon it; I looked, and received instruction. 'A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest,' then your poverty will come as a robber and your want like an armed man." —Proverbs 24:30-34

"Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might;" —Ecclesiastes 9:10a

"He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need." —Ephesians 4:28

"But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." —1 Timothy 5:8

"For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies." —2 Thessalonians 3:10-11

Paul's Work Ethic as an Example

"After these things [Paul] left Athens and went to Corinth. And he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, having recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome. He came to them, and because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and they were working, for by trade they were tent-makers." —Acts 18:1-3

"You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my own needs and to the men who were with me. In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'" —Acts 20:34-35

"Now as to the love of the brethren, you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another; for indeed you do practice it toward all the brethren who are in all Macedonia. But we urge you, brethren, to excel still more, and to make it your ambition to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you, so that you will behave properly toward outsiders and not be in any need." —1 Thessalonians 4:9-12

How Ought a Christian to Deal with Work Problems?

"Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, But he who hates reproof is stupid." —Proverbs 12:1

"Deceit is in the heart of those who devise evil, But counselors of peace have joy." —Proverbs 12:20

"So do not worry about tomorrow; for tomorrow will care for itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." —Matthew 6:34

"But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He Himself is kind to ungrateful and evil men." —Luke 6:35

"Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them;" —Ephesians 5:11

"But we urge you, brethren, to excel still more, and to make it your ambition to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you, so that you will behave properly toward outsiders and not be in any need." —1 Thessalonians 4:10b-12

Christians Working in the Church

"And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;" —Ephesians 4:11-12

"So then, while we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith." —Galatians 6:10

"But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another." —1 Thessalonians 5:12-13

"It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do." —1 Timothy 3:1

"Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory." —1 Peter 5:1-4

Will There Be A 1000-Year Kingdom?

Where did the belief in a 1000-year millennial kingdom come from? Well, the theory of a millennial reign proceeded from Judaism, where the Jews believed that the Messiah would establish a literal, physical earthly kingdom. However, as Philip Schaff wrote:

Nowhere in the discourses of Jesus is there a hint of a limited duration of the Messianic Kingdom. The apostolic epistles are equally free from any trace of Chiliasm.

At the beginning of Jesus' ministry, He announced, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand" (Mark 1:15). What time is He referring to? For the good student of the Word, the answer is simple. Daniel had predicted four empires: Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Then, "in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom" (Dan. 2:44). In the days of which kings? In the days of the Roman kings. Jesus later said, "There are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of god after it has come with power" (Mark 9:1). When the Pharisees asked Jesus about this kingdom, He stated clearly to them, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed" and "behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst" (Luke 17:20-21). He said to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36).

As Karl Hagenbach wrote:

There is no trace of a Millennium in: Clement of Rome (died in 101), in Ignatius of Antioch (died in 115), in Polycarp of Smyrna (died in 155). Iranaeus says that Polycarp taught the things which "he had learned from the Apostles and which the church handed down."

Quite clearly, early Christians did not believe in a millennial kingdom. So where did this unbiblical theory and doctrine of a "1000-year millennial kingdom" come from? This Jewish myth was revived by the ungodly heretic Cerinthus, even before the deaths of all the Apostles. As John Egerdahl writes:

In Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History is preserved a fragment of the writings of Caius, who lived during the close of the second century. This excerpt gives us the following account of Cerinthus' heresy: "But Cerinthus, by means of revelations which he pretended were written by a great apostle, also falsely pretended to wonderful things, as if they were shown him by angels, asserting, that after the resurrection there would be an earthly kingdom of Christ, and that the flesh, i.e., men, again inhabiting Jerusalem would be subject to desires and pleasures" (Eusebius, bk. III, chp. 28). Eusebius says of Cerinthus, "Being also an enemy to the scriptures, with a view to deceive men, he said, 'that there would be a space of a thousand years for celebrating nuptial festivities. One of the doctrines that he taught was that Christ would have an earthly kingdom'" (Ibid.).
Irenaeus, who was born circa A.D. 120 and who was acquainted with Polycarp, the disciple of John, states that while John was at Ephesus, he entered a bath to wash, but when he found Cerinthus was there he refused to bathe there, left the building, and exhorted those with him to do the same, saying, "Let us flee lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, the enemy of truth is within" (Ibid., bk. V, chp. 24). Riggle states, "Let this be a rebuke to modern millennial advocates. They claim their doctrine is well founded in the revelation of John. But John called the founder of their theory, 'that enemy of truth'" (Riggle 1899, p. 26).

William Shedd writes:

Premillenarianism was the revival of the pseudo-Jewish doctrine of the messianic kingdom, as this had been formed in the later periods of Jewish history by a materializing exegesis of the Old Testament (see Neander, History 1.650-51). Its most flourishing period was between 150 and 250. Its prevalence in the church at that time has been much exaggerated. That it could not have been the [universal] and received doctrine is proved by the fact that it forms no part of the Apostle's Creed, which belongs to this period, and hence by implication is rejected by it. "Chiliasm," says Neander (1.651), "never formed a part of the general creed of the church. It was diffused from one country [Phrygia] and from a single fountainhead." In the preceding period of the apostolic fathers, 100 to 150, it had scarcely any currency. There are no traces of it in Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp. In Barnabas, Hermas, and Papias it is found; but these are much less influential names than the former. The early apologists Tatian, Athenagoras, and Theophilus do not advocate it. Alford (on Rev. 20:4-5) is greatly in error in saying that "the whole church for three hundred years from the apostles understood the two resurrections in the literal premillenarian sense."

John Calvin even wrote:

Not long after [the days of Paul] arose the Millennarians, who limited the reign of Christ to a thousand years. Their fiction is too puerile [childish] to require or deserve refutation.

So which view is consistent with the biblical record?

Post-Millennialism:

This view is the quickest and easiest for us to dismantle. There are two different groups of post-millenarians. The first group believes that the 1000 years are literal and yet future, and that there will be 1000 years of peace and righteousness prior to the second coming of Christ Jesus. The second group believes it is symbolic for a long period of time, which will gradually get better and better before the second coming of Christ Jesus. However, there is nothing in Scripture that depicts or hints at the world getting better before the return of Christ. In fact, there is much evidence to the contrary. Jesus asks the question, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8). Scripture informs us that men will grow more and more wicked (1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 3:1-3, 4:3-4). Paul tells us that the day of the Lord will not come until the apostasy takes place (2 Thess. 2:3). So this view is a fail.

Pre-Millennialism:
Historic pre-millennialism and pre-tribulational pre-millennialism both fall together. First, you need to establish whether the only text that speaks of 1000 years is supposed to be literal or symbolic. Second, if there is a literal 1000-year Millennial Kingdom, we have certain passages that we need to deal with. When Jesus Christ returns, He is going to judge the world in righteousness (Acts 17:31), dividing the sheep from the goats (Matt. 25:31-46), and casting the wicked into Hell. There will be nobody that bypasses this judgment, except for the Lord’s elect who will inherit the kingdom. Flesh and blood cannot enter or inherit this kingdom (1 Cor. 15:50). The wicked cannot and will not enter or inherit this kingdom (1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-20; Eph. 5:3-6).
Only God’s children will inherit and enter this kingdom, which means there is only righteousness in this kingdom, as the Scriptures teach. Because there is nobody except the righteous in this kingdom, the concept of there being a rebellion against Christ at the end of it is extremely problematic. You end up with a second fall of man—glorified man—into sin: the righteous, redeemed, blood-bought saints of the Lord Jesus rebelling against their redeeming Lord and Saviour. This implies that His blood was not sufficient enough to cleanse us from our wickedness, even with our glorification, and implies that God is not powerful enough to keep us. This is heresy! So this view is a fail.

Amillennialism:
This view is the most consistent with what the Scriptures reveal. It is also the view that has been predominantly held by the church throughout her history, seconded only by historic pre-millennialism, although "Amillennialism was not recognized as a distinct position until around the turn of the twentieth century. Until then, amillenarians called themselves post-millennial because they believed Christ would come back after the millennial age, but they were different from traditional postmillenarians in that they did not believe in an earthly millennial age yet to dawn." (Kim Riddlebarger, A Case for Amillennialism, p.31)
Apart from Revelation 20, there is not a single passage in Scripture that describes a 1000-year kingdom here on Earth. When we look at the language of Revelation 20, we may note that everything in that passage is symbolic. We cannot translate the first bit symbolically and the last bit symbolically but choose to translate the 1000 years as literal. It does not work that way. Since Scripture does not support a literal 1000-year kingdom, this view would be the correct one.
Lewis Sperry Chafer argues, "This view interprets many passages in the Old and New Testaments that refer to the millennial kingdom as being fulfilled in a nonliteral way." No, Amillennialism interprets them in a very literal way, a way the Dispensationalist is incapable of doing in their literalistic approach because they deny the literal fulfillment in place of their fictionalization. To recapitulate, it is taught by Dispensationalists that Ezekiel 40-48 refer to the Millennial Kingdom and the Millennial Temple; but the literal and correct interpretation is that these chapters spoke in regard to the times and temple that would come after their Babylonian captivity.

If Dispensationalists, Zionists, Pre-Millennialists, and Jewish Restorationists bothered to do their homework and research things correctly, paying attention to not only Scripture, but also history, they would not make such colossal blunders in their belief systems. The Pro-Judaic Restoration theology is unbiblical and anti-Christ. This does not consent to hating the Jews, from whom salvation came through Christ Jesus, a Jew. Scripture makes it abundantly clear that both Jew and Gentile are come to salvation by faith in Christ the exact same way. If Jew and Gentile do not come through Christ, then they are condemned to eternity in Hell. Scripture is Christ-centric—not Judeo-centric. It was never about Israel; it was always about Christ Jesus!