1000 year reign literal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikeledes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mikeledes

Guest
How does the Catholic Church explain the 1000 year reign in the Book of Revelation. I know that the Church says it’s symbolic, but when you read it within the context of the visions, it seems that the 1000 years come right after the beast and the false prophet and that the Christians martyred for not accepting the mark of the Beast come back to life in a “First Resurection” and reign with Christ. How can this synbolize the Church when the millenium seems to take place after the comong of the Antichrist?

Thanks
 
No comment, I just want to tag this thread for later reading.
 
mikeledes said:
How does the Catholic Church explain the 1000 year reign in the Book of Revelation. I know that the Church says it’s symbolic, but when you read it within the context of the visions, it seems that the 1000 years come right after the beast and the false prophet and that the Christians martyred for not accepting the mark of the Beast come back to life in a “First Resurection” and reign with Christ. How can this synbolize the Church when the millenium seems to take place after the comong of the Antichrist?

Thanks
Click to expand...
These two articles from THIS ROCK should help:

catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0209fea5.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9812chap.asp
 
mikeledes said:
How does the Catholic Church explain the 1000 year reign in the Book of Revelation. I know that the Church says it’s symbolic, but when you read it within the context of the visions, it seems that the 1000 years come right after the beast and the false prophet and that the Christians martyred for not accepting the mark of the Beast come back to life in a “First Resurection” and reign with Christ. How can this synbolize the Church when the millenium seems to take place after the comong of the Antichrist?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Good question! I still dont know what to believe.:confused:
 
mikeledes said:
How does the Catholic Church explain the 1000 year reign in the Book of Revelation. I know that the Church says it’s symbolic, but when you read it within the context of the visions, it seems that the 1000 years come right after the beast and the false prophet and that the Christians martyred for not accepting the mark of the Beast come back to life in a “First Resurection” and reign with Christ. How can this synbolize the Church when the millenium seems to take place after the comong of the Antichrist?
Click to expand...
(:cool: Eschatology warning: If you dislike the preterist viewpoint, don’t bother reading further, because you aren’t going to like it. I’m not here to start another endless squabble about it, just telling you what the predominant opinion of most of the saints and writers throughout 2000 years of Catholic history, and Catholic theologians at this time is. Thank you. 🙂 )

Anyway, the 1000 year reign being symbolic is only a problem if you start with the premise that all the preceding conditions (the appearance of the beast, false prophet, these specific martyrs, etc) are necessarily to occur in the future, at the Second Coming (what Protestants call the “End Times” although the Bible makes clear we have been in the End Times since the first century). Most Catholic writers, however, take the view that the descriptions found in the Book of Revelation (which you are citing) was mostly fulfilled in the first century. In fact, none of the book, save the last two chapters, has much to do with predicting the future but, rather, was written as an encouragement to all those undergoing persecution for the sake of Christ’s name, and that God has already won in the end.

Thus, the “first resurrection” are of those who reign with Christ in heaven (especially the martyrs) for “1000 years,” i.e. a very long time, until the Second Coming and the consummation of all things. In other words, we are now in the 1000 year reign.
 
It is interesting to note, however,
that Saints Justin Martyr and Irenaeus both
took the 1,000 year reign of Christ literally, to mean
that at the 2nd coming, Jesus would rule from Jerusalem on earth for 1,000 years.

Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
 
Can this be explained without adhering to the preterist position. That position never really convinced me. Moreover, as Jaypeeto3 states, several Church fathers believed in a literal millenium. I believe that it was by the fourth century that the symbolic interpretation began to dominate.
 
And if the Beats and false Prophet already occurred, then when is the Antichrist supposed to come? Also, it says that those who had been martyred for not accepting the mark of the Beast came back to life (the First Resurrection) and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. How can they come back to life without having a resurected body? If they continued to reign as souls, then how is that a resurrection or being “brought back to life”?
 
Jaypeeto3 said:
It is interesting to note, however,
that Saints Justin Martyr and Irenaeus both
took the 1,000 year reign of Christ literally, to mean
that at the 2nd coming, Jesus would rule from Jerusalem on earth for 1,000 years.

Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
Click to expand...
That’s because they both lived before the *first *millenium ended, at which time, they speculated, the Second Coming would occur (they were, in fact, millinarists, but **not **Dispensationalist, unlike modern fundamentalists, also a very important distinction.). It should be further noted that some ECF’s contemporaneous with them disagreed.
 
mikeledes said:
Can this be explained without adhering to the preterist position? That position never really convinced me.
Click to expand...
No it cannot, unless one fabricates an elaborate scenario, as Protestant Dispesationalists have had to. That’s why you should be preterist. 😃
 
mikeledes said:
And if the Beats and false Prophet already occurred, then when is the Antichrist supposed to come? Also, it says that those who had been martyred for not accepting the mark of the Beast came back to life (the First Resurrection) and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. How can they come back to life without having a resurected body? If they continued to reign as souls, then how is that a resurrection or being “brought back to life”?
Click to expand...
Now you are mixing your books of the Bible, as the Protestant dispensationalists have to do to fabricate their pet End Times scenarios. The Anti-Christ, as you know, is no where mentioned in the Book of Revelation, from whence we get our info about the Beast and false Prophet.

As I said above, the “first resurrection” are of those who reign with Christ in heaven (especially the martyrs) for “1000 years,” i.e. a very long time, until the Second Coming and the consummation of all things. In other words, we are now in the 1000 year reign. The “life” they are living is the glorified life in heaven with God, awaiting the consumation of all things.

BTW, as a Catholic, per the teachings of the Church** you are not allowed to ascribe to millinarianism or dispensationalism at all**. Why are you bothering with this garbage anyway?
 
I am of the opinion that the first resurrection mentioned in Revelation 20 refers to the resurrection of many saints on the coattails of Jesus’ own Resurrection, mentioned in Matthew 27:52-53. Thus, the following millenium refers to the present indeterminate period between Jesus’ Resurrection and His Second Coming.
 
mikeledes said:
Can this be explained without adhering to the preterist position. That position never really convinced me. Moreover, as Jaypeeto3 states, several Church fathers believed in a literal millenium. I believe that it was by the fourth century that the symbolic interpretation began to dominate.
Click to expand...
I read Eusebius’ History of the Church this summer. If I remember correctly, he mentions belief in a literal 1000 years as something that had come about only recently.
 
mikeledes…I’d like to recommend an excellent fairly new book (2003) by David Currie. I think this will answer all your questions, especially his chapter on the Revelation.

Rapture: The End-Times Error that Leaves the Bible Behind.

You can read the reviews at amazon for an idea of what the book covers. Hope this helps.
 
Here’s a website with several articles from a Catholic perspective regarding this subject. The writer is Carl Olsen, the author of the best selling book “Will Catholics Be Left Behind?”

carl-olson.com/rapture_articles.html

I’d also recommend going to the Catholic Answers home page and putting “Rapture” or “Left Behind” into the “Search” feature. You’ll find several good articles there from reliable writers.

More resources:

“Introduction to Prophecy,” CD series by Steve Wood
familylifecenter.net/cart/product_detail.cfm?ID=613&user=56193243
(HIGHLY recommended 👍 )

“Rapture: The End Times Error That Leaves The Truth Behind,” by David Curie
amazon.com/gp/product/1928832725/104-9523528-4627136?v=glance&n=283155

“The Rapture Trap,” by Paul Thigpen (study guide available)
amazon.com/gp/product/0965922820/104-9523528-4627136?v=glance&n=283155

The Navarre Bible Commentary On The Book of Revelation
amazon.com/gp/product/1851820892/qid=1137435667/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-9523528-4627136?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

“The End: The Book of Revelation,” tape/CD series by Scott Hahn (study guide available)
saintjoe.com/p/prod_desc.pl?id=169

The Rapture Files, by Tim Staples
The Rapture Revealed, by David Currie
(both available from St. Joseph’s Communications)
saintjoe.com/

Will You Be Left Behind?, by Carl Olsen
(Same link as above)

Catholics & The Rapture, by Patrick Madid
surprisedbytruth.com/store/shopexd.asp?id=52

“Will Catholics Be Left Behind?” by Carl Olsen
carl-olson.com/wcblb_home.html
 
BTW, as a Catholic, per the teachings of the Church you are not allowed to ascribe to Millenarianism or Dispensationalism at all.
Click to expand...
Most notably here:
**Decree of the Holy Office dated July 21, 1944: **
"In recent times on several occasions, this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has been asked what must be thought of the system of mitigated Millenarianism, which teaches, for example, that Christ the Lord before the final judgment, whether or not preceded by the resurrection of the many just, will come visibly to rule over this world.
**“The answer is: The system of mitigated Millenarianism cannot be taught safely.” **
Click to expand...
 
BTW, as a Catholic, per the teachings of the Church you are not allowed to ascribe to Millenarianism or Dispensationalism at all.
Click to expand...
Most notably here:
**Decree of the Holy Office dated July 21, 1944: **
"In recent times on several occasions, this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has been asked what must be thought of the system of mitigated Millenarianism, which teaches, for example, that Christ the Lord before the final judgment, whether or not preceded by the resurrection of the many just, will come visibly to rule over this world.
**“The answer is: The system of mitigated Millenarianism cannot be taught safely.” **
Click to expand...
 
the we are in the 1000 year reign actually makes sense to me. The dates never had literal meaning as 40 days was never 40 days or years. Likewise, 1000 years probably means a super super long long time and at the end of it, Jesus will come again. Makes sense to me. It does not make sense to me for Judgement Day to come and then all of a sudden there is 1000 years of living after.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top