Can There Be a Resurrection Without An Earthly Kingdom?

The resurrection of the dead is an essential Christian doctrine. But if our souls are already in heaven, what is the purpose of the resurrection? Can there be a resurrection without an earthly kingdom?

This is the third article in a series of articles on Amillennialism, a doctrine believed by nearly 50% of Christians and their  denominations.  In our first article we discussed the foundational theory that the Bible teaches that Christ will return 6000 years after creation and will then reign on the earth for 1000 years. If you haven’t read that article, please read about it HERE.  Our second article was about whether the Kingdom will be a literal 1000 years, or was that number figurative? Please read about that article HERE.

In that second article we examined Rev. 20 where several of the references to the 1000 years are found. We examined five separate proofs that the 1000 year Kingdom follows the return of Jesus, is a literal 1000 years and takes place on the earth. In this article we will look at one of those proofs in great detail: the two resurrections mentioned in Revelation 20.

Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their 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 on their forehead and on 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. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years. (Rev. 4:4-6)

In looking at Rev. 20:4-6 above, Premillennialists consider these two resurrections depicted in these verses to be literal and physical, both occurring after the return of Jesus; separated by 1000 years.

Amillennialists have taken two different positions on these resurrections:

  1. Some consider the first resurrection to represent the spiritual birth and regeneration that takes place during the lives of new believers during this present age when believers “come to life” by placing their faith in Jesus. These Amillennialists then believe the second resurrection is a physical resurrection upon the return of Jesus. So they argue these are different types of resurrections; one is spiritual and one is physical.
  2. A second group of Amillenialists argue the First Resurrection takes place when a believer is ushered into the presence of Jesus in heaven; that it is a resurrection to a new type of life in heaven.

Premillennial Arguments to Spiritual Birth Resurrections

Because Amillennialists have taken two different positions on what the First Resurrection in Rev. 20 truly is, we will need to present arguments for both. We will look at the predominant position first; that the First Resurrection is the spiritual birth that happens in every believer’s life when they place their faith in Jesus. This was the position of Augustine in Book 20 of his work, “City of God.”

The first arguments are same as we made in the last article (HERE). The plain reading of scripture is that the events of Rev. 20 directly follow the events of Rev. 19 and are sequential. It is then impossible for either of the resurrections to refer to events prior to the return of Jesus.  The fact that there is a man-made chapter break between chapters 19-20 of Revelation has caused this misinterpretation as Amillennialists have not considered the full context of Rev. 20:4-6.

The second argument is regarding the term “resurrection” (Gk: ANASTASIS) itself. This word means a falling only to rise again. Obviously we are born into a sin nature. We never spiritually die to rise again spiritually. Rather we are born spiritually dead and come alive. Thus the word “resurrection” could never mean spiritual birth.  In the New Testament there are 40 other occurrences of this Greek word outside of these two in Rev. 20:4-6.  In every single instance this word refers to a physical (not spiritual) resurrection. So what Amillennialists wish us to believe is that this one use that they claim is a spiritual coming to life (not physical) is different than all the others. This “unique use” of the word requires a heavy burden of proof on Amillennialists. We are to assume a physical resurrection unless proved otherwise.

Third, if we examine the wording of Rev. 20:4, it mentions seeing the souls of the beheaded who eventually come back to life. Again, this is obviously a physical resurrection as those coming to life are already dead! Then again in verse 5, the Second Resurrection refers to the “rest of the dead”, implying those raised to life in the First Resurrection were also dead. If there was any doubt the Second Resurrection was a physical one, later in Rev. 20 we see “the sea gave up her dead” and “the grave gave up her dead” for this resurrection as well.

Fourth, the passage uses the term “come to life” in regard to both resurrections (First and Second). This implies, of course, that the “coming to life” in both resurrections is the same type of “coming to life.” Both resurrections will be physical not spiritual. Nothing could be more clear.

Finally,  those in the First Resurrection reign with Christ for a 1000 years. The Greek wording is an “accusative of time”; that is, that all those resurrected in the First Resurrection begin their reign together at the same time. This is an insurmountable problem because the Amillennial view is that believers come to faith in Jesus over a 2000 year period of time.

For all these reasons, clearly both resurrections are physical and both occur after the return of Jesus. Augustine’s “spiritual birth” concept simply isn’t biblical.

Amillennialist Objections

The Amillennialists object. Their main objection is that elsewhere in the Bible (Dan 12:2; John 5:28–29; Acts 24:15) only one physical resurrection is mentioned and it is for both the righteous and unrighteous. Amillennialist Kenneth Gentry explains:

Why should we believe that the New Testament everywhere teaches a general, singular resurrection on the last day, only to discover later in the most difficult book of the Bible that there are actually two specific, distantly separated resurrections for different classes of people? – Kenneth Gentry

My first response to this statement is that ignoring the testimony of Revelation because it doesn’t match your theory is grave error indeed! God gave us the entire bible so his full revelation to man could be known.  Revelation is difficult to understand only if you are viewing it through a theological lens that is clouded. The closer we get to biblical truth, the more clear and understandable Revelation is.

Let’s look at each of the other references to resurrections outside of Rev. 20 which Amillenialists claim are the Second Resurrection (only):

At that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.  Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. (Dan. 12:1-2)

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. (John 5:28-29)

Having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. (Acts 24:15)

The first thing we notice in all three examples is that none preclude two resurrections. As most students of the Bible know, earlier prophecies may present two separate events as appearing to not have anytime between them. Many Old Testament prophecies mix events from the first and second comings for instance. John 5 actually does mention two resurrections, but gives no specifics as to the division of time between them.

Second, each mentions the resurrections in the same order, righteous first, wicked second. This is the same order as Revelation 20. There is nothing in these earlier passages that negate two bodily resurrections.

Finally, and most importantly, progressive revelation is a method of interpretation that explains that later prophecies frequently provide more information to the student of prophecy. This is the purpose of Revelation, to tie together and explain all other prophecies in the Bible. So the Revelation prophecy is a more “complete” prophecy with more details than the others.

Ushered Into Christ’s Presence Resurrections

Amillennialism is a tradition; a tradition ascribed to primarily by certain denominations. As these older Amillennial theories about the First Resurrection were shown to be false, those wishing for their denominations to not be shown to be “wrong,” scrambled to find new proofs for their positions.

One of these is the idea that the first resurrection isn’t a bodily resurrection or the spiritual regeneration to spiritual life that happens upon conversion, but rather that it is the ushering of a believer into the presence of Jesus upon death.  Essentially, these believers claim this resurrection is a transfer of the soul from earth to heaven.

The first problem with this interpretation is that “resurrection” never means being ushered into the presence of Jesus elsewhere in the Bible.  In every instance it means a return to life in bodily form. Resurrection doesn’t mean “life after death,” but rather “bodily life from death.” Eternal life begins upon regeneration, not upon death. All that dies when a believer passes away is the body of the believer.

So the question one must ask is what is resurrected? The soul is eternally alive from the moment of regeneration on. As we mentioned earlier, a unique use of a word requires a burden of proof that Amillennialists haven’t provided.

A second problem with this view is the same as what we mentioned above in the first Amillennial view of the resurrections, that the phrase “come to life” is mentioned in regard to both First and Second Resurrections and therefore must mean they are the same type of resurrection, not two different meanings.

And just as we mentioned above as well, the Greek wording about the reign of the resurrected being a 1000 years is an accusative of time; that is, that all those resurrected in the First Resurrection begin their reign together at the same time. Believers are ushered into Christ’s presence when they die, which is constant process throughout the church age.

Souls Beneath the Altar

Additionally, those who “came to life” are souls to whom a change occurs. “Souls” is the same word found in Rev. 6:9-11, and I argue those in Rev. 20 are the self-same martyrs and witnesses. Let’s look at both verses:

When the Lamb broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained; and they cried out with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, will You refrain from judging and avenging our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”  And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a little while longer. (Rev. 6:9-11)

I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their 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 on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. (Rev. 20:4)

Notice the nearly identical quotes of who these souls are.  Use of quotes is how John identifies things that are the same. For instance there are 500 OT quotes in Revelation’s 400+ verses. This use of quotes and references is how John categorizes and explains the Old Testament prophecies. It is also how he references people and events he mentioned earlier in Revelation. It is the beauty of scripture interpreting scripture.

Rev. 6:9-11 Rev. 20:4
I saw I saw
souls souls
who had been slain who had been beheaded
because of the word of God because of the word of God
because of the testimony which they had maintained because of their testimony of Jesus

Once we realize these two groups are the exact same souls, we can see they are already in heaven and under the altar in Revelation 20:4 before the resurrection takes place! In Rev. 6:9-11, they are told to wait for God’s avenging and to wait to put on their robes. The eventual putting on of the robes is the change. This change happens at the Resurrection. In Revelation 7:9, we see this same group included with those in the Vast Multitude before God’s throne. They are now wearing the white garments, waving palm branches in their hands. They are now in resurrection bodies! These are things (stand, wave, wear garments) that bodies do not souls. They are also in wild celebration (rather than crying out, they are shouting out!). Also notice John knows who they are in Rev. 6, but has to ask who the Vast Multitude are. These are all indicative of a massive change.  That change is the resurrection and the gaining of a resurrection body.

So Rev. 6:9-11 and Rev. 20:4 are sequential parts of the story. Rev. 6:9-11 comes first and Rev. 20:4 comes second, and Rev. 7:9-17 comes last.

Can There Be a Resurrection Without an Earthly Kingdom?

Now we have done an exhaustive research into the resurrection that occurs after the sixth seal of Revelation (but mentioned in Rev. 20:4-6), we know it is a bodily resurrection. Souls of the dead are given new resurrection bodies. Bodies have only one purpose-to live upon the earth. This is completely consistent with Rev. 5:

 “You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth.” Rev. 5:11

This is not a resurrection to live in heaven forever, but to live and reign with Jesus upon the earth!

31 thoughts on “Can There Be a Resurrection Without An Earthly Kingdom?”

  1. Is it your opinion that the First Resurrection includes a much much larger group than those beheaded during the beast? Namely the rapture, etc. Rev 20 doesn’t really leave room for expansion of this group. The first shall be last and the last first.

    1. Yes, it is my opinion that the First Resurrection includes all the deceased saints of all the ages. If we solely look at Rev. 20:4 we see that this larger group is not excluded:

      I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of [a]their 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 on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life (Rev. 20:4)

      Obviously my Dad who passed away 5 years ago did not take the Mark. All the saints of all the ages up to this point haven’t taken the Mark. They are not excluded. As the article mentions the specific inclusion of the beheaded is a quote from Rev. 6:9-11 showing these two groups are the same, AND showing that the resurrection is after the great tribulation.

      Now if Rev. 20 was the only passage about the Resurrection, we could argue whether all the saints of all the ages are included, but it is not the only passage. 1 Cor. 15:23 indicates that “those who are Christ’s at his coming (parousia)” are resurrected. This is inclusive. In 1 Cor. 15:51-52, we see ALL are changed at the last trumpet at that same parousia. In 2 Thess. 1:6-7 we see Paul and the Thessalonians receive relief at the appearance of Jesus with his angels. I could go on, but these passages are enough to prove the point.

      There is danger in interpreting from one passage alone IMO.

  2. Good night brother.
    I found your page today and I loved it.
    I do not believe in pre-rapture, I think the same thing about the resurrection, that the antichrist will come from Islam and that we will dwell on the earth, because YHWH would form it? To destroy later? Our God is the winner.
    It is a pity that in Brazil most believe in a pre-rapture and do not even look at Islam.
    Very interesting is the study of the Chinese texts.
    I loved the page, I love reading. I have over 3,000 books in my library and 5,000 magazines.
    May God bless us all.

  3. Hi Nelson,

    We are getting far afield from the thread topic, but since we already are…

    I found myself pondering how the apostle John could “see” living souls when they are intangible!!!! Only physical bodies have a way of expressing the soul…pain, sadness, joy, etc. Though I do believe souls are self-aware and apparently have the ability to some how communicate as the apostle indicates.

    I wonder how this could be expressed though without physicality? Telepathically? Thoughts?


    1. How do any of us truly have answers for these questions? But I have ideas. If we read Rev. 4:1-2 we learn John is called up to heaven “in the Spirit.” He was not there in bodily form, thus what he “saw” he saw spiritually. He saw the Father on the throne and he saw angels, God’s horses, etc. So seeing “souls” does not seem a surprise. What was a surprise to John was the vast multitude. “BEHOLD, a vast multitude.” He didn’t have to ask who the souls were but did have to ask about the multitude. Why is that? Because they are in resurrection bodies, something John had never seen before.

      At least that is my take on this.

  4. Hi Carol,

    I took a discipleship class and I thought this was a good definition of what it is to have a living soul: mind, will, and emotions. In other words, the intangible part of what makes you, uniquely you…made in the image of God.

    The spirit is given to mankind and sets us apart from the animal kingdom creatures in either an unregenerate state because of sinful state resulting from the fall of Adam to all humanity or a regenerated state once we commit to following Jesus in faith by God’s grace to believe the gospel to communicate with God in our lives.


    1. What a great question. Scripture is clear that man has 3 parts (Soul, Spirit, and Body)

      I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thessalonians 5:23).

      For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow (body), and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart (Hebrews 4:12).

      Man is a living soul (Gen. 2:7). This includes the personality and desires that make us who are are emotionally and mentally. The spirit is what is regenerated and allows the soul to long for God.

      In Rev. 6:9, the Scriptures saw John saw the “souls” of martyrs. These are people who are devoid of their physical bodies in heaven yet present with the Lord.

  5. Dear Nelson,

    I never said Lord will never be on earth.

    None of your verses quote relate to millennial kingdom. None of your verses states Jesus physically rule from Jerusalem. it is only your assumption.

    Regarding holy mount Zion, in old testament books although symbol taken from hill in Jerusalem but it’s refer to the people (Israel).

    Heb 12:22
    Instead, you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to myriads of angels

    1 Pet 2:6
    See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame”

    —> Jesus start with preaching and baptist Israelis, 12 apostles were Israelis (Zion).

    Isa 52:1-2
    Awake, awake, Clothe yourself in your strength, O Zion; Clothe yourself in your beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city; For the uncircumcised and the unclean Will no longer come into you. 2Shake yourself from the dust, rise up, O captive Jerusalem; Loose yourself from the chains around your neck, O captive daughter of Zion.

    —-> do you think a real mountain/hill able to wear clothe ???

    Even today Jesus is spiritually rule His earthly people from heaven. Jesus said i have authority heaven and earth.

    David king of Israel having earthly throne (seat) but when Jesus inherit his throne Jesus didn’t inherit the seat, Jesus seat is in heaven.

    1. We have done 3 articles on Amill. The 5th article (out of 6) addresses this exact question (will Jesus and the saints reign) from the earth and quotes and explains Heb. 12:22. Let’s wait till that article to discuss this, I can see I would have to write the whole article to answer your questions. Let’s wait till then.

  6. Nelson,

    Psalm 37:29 The righteous shall inherit the earth and dwell there in it forever. A Study written by Dr. Hillel ben David concerning the rapture, and where those who are raptured are taken, supports your last sentence.
    His conclusion: The TaNaK and the Nazarean Codicil[2] agree that the righteous have their eternal dwelling on earth. We do not ever see people dwelling in heaven. The scripture all agree that only the wicked are removed from the earth. I see no justification for saying that the righteous will be raptured to heaven. The pattern of scripture is for HaShem to protect the righteous in the midst of tribulation, not to remove them. Link to the study.

    1. Ken, ben David gets most of this right, but he misses the 1 year, 10 day period that the righteous are in heaven before the throne prior to returning with Jesus. The righteous won’t dwell there, but they take their Sabbath Rest there. In Rev. 7:9, the vast multitude are in bodies, waving palms and wearing their white garments. We see them again in Rev. 15 and Rev. 19 before they mount their white horses.

      I read his article and he makes the same mistake so many make, thinking the only two choices are pre-trib. and post-trib. They ignore the Pre-Wrath rapture so they fail to see it answers all the questions.

      1. I enjoy the messianic jew perspective, however. There is value in their application of Hebrew tradition, Torah, and interpretation of symbolism and feasts to the end times and return of Jesus.

  7. And donal…what is the point of these chapters if Jesus is merely to reign in the heavenly sphere?

    Ezekiel 40-48 is all in heaven according to you? If so, what a bummer!

    So then according to you, I have a body in a glorified state like that of Jesus that is fit for earthly inhabitation yet I must remain in heaven? That makes God unfair and mean to me.

    So God then expounds eight chapters of his precious word through his prophet Ezekiel going into pain-staking detail about his plans only for it to dwell in heaven? Such a bummer! 🙁 🙁

    God’s people are earth dwellers and earth is our true home. Heaven is a temporary abode for not only God’s people but God and his entourage. Why would God “waste” so much space talking about something such as places for the tribes of Israel, the millennial temple and what kinds of activities will take place there if all of this happens in heaven and not on earth?

    Your misunderstanding is great and truly sad that you short change God and his plans for his people. So sad that you make God extremely small. God is far, far more grand and gracious that you or I understand.


  8. Awwww….Taryn! I’m actually very humbled by your extremely generous comment to a “nobody” like me. I just love God’s plan for us and his creation as outlined in his prophetic Word because it shows how much He loves me and will indeed test that love for Him as we remain faithful to Him with the outcome of blessings beyond what we can imagine.

    That’s is worth any small earthly pain or discomfort, yes, even death to know my worth to Him and what he has in store those who love Him.


  9. Dear Nelson,

    1 Cor 15:24-26 is not like what you think bro.

    As i said there are 2 kingdoms: earthly and heavenly Zion.

    When said He will hand over the kingdom that refer to heavenly kingdom when earth destroyed, so God may be all in all. BUT Jesus still reign (with Father) as He and Father are one, please remember there is only one throne that is throne of God and the Lamb.

    Jesus will reign forever (Rev 11:15, Luk 1:33), He’s ruling time is not limited to millennial kingdom.i totally reject your statement bro.

    When 2nd beast (caliphate sunni) defeated “we” the holy people (earthly) involved in world war one. So when the beast (allah) and false prophet (muhamad) captured in Rev 19 war “we” holy people (earthly) will also involved in the war. Jesus will fight against enemy bosses while we holy people (earthly) will fight against the muslim.

    1. Rev 19 never state that Jesus and His army will “touch down” on earth
    2. I never said Jesus and His army will “touch down”
    3. Jesus can destroy the beast from the sky.

    Why you said it is impossible to reign from heaven???

    The Lord’s Prayer:“Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” So they can rule upon earth from heaven during millennial (because God with them).

    As i said it is better to wait until your next article now our discussion regarding other topic will continue bit longer.

    Regarding Rev 19 & 20 overlapping theory. It is imply that Rev 19 and 20 is not continuously if you read this carefully.

    See during Rev 19 Jesus come with His army dresses in white linen, white linen given to the bride/woman (Rev 19:8). Before wearing white linen they given white robes (Rev 6:9, Rev 7:9&13-14).

    Rev 19 states they already wear while Rev 20 states their souls (not wearing)…..that’s why i think the timeline is overlapping.

    1. It takes a lot of juggling to think Jesus reigns only from heaven with such a huge amount of verses specifically saying he will reign from Jerusalem. There are literally dozens.

      Lets start with Psalm 2 “But as for Me, I have installed My King Upon Zion, My holy mountain. I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance, and the very ends of the EARTH as Your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron, You shall shatter them like earthenware.” Psalm 2:6-9. Please notice he reigns from Mount Zion on earth and gets the ends of the earth as inheritance. There is an earth and he reigns on it. This verse is quoted in Rev. 2:26-27 where he delegates this power to the saints.

      Psalm 110 says ” he Lord says to my Lord: Sit at My right hand UNTIL I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet. The Lord will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying, Rule in the midst of Your enemies.” Again, Jesus is reigning from Mount Zion in the midst of his enemies. Obviously they are NOT in heaven.

      Isa 24:23 says “Then the moon will be abashed and the sun ashamed, For the Lord of hosts will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, And His glory will be before His elders.” Notice in Jerusalem

      Joel 3:16-17 says “The Lord roars from Zion and utters His voice from Jerusalem,And the heavens and the earth tremble. But the Lord is a refuge for His people
      And a stronghold to the sons of Israel. Then you will know that I am the Lord your God,Dwelling in Zion, My holy mountain. So Jerusalem will be holy,
      And strangers will pass through it no more.” Here Jesus qualifies this is absolutely the earthly Jerusalem because strangers once passed thru it.

      Zeph. 3:15-17, 19-20 says “The King of Israel, the Lord, is in your midst; You will fear disaster no more. In that day it will be said to Jerusalem:
      “Do not be afraid, O Zion; Do not let your hands fall limp. the Lord your God is in your midst, . . . And I will turn their shame into praise and renown
      In all the earth. At that time I will bring you in even at the time when I gather you together; Indeed, I will give you renown and praise Among all the peoples of the earth.” Again, Jesus is in the midst of his people ON EARTH.

      I could go on and on and on. One must ignore a great deal of the testimony of the bible to not see that the Lord will be on earth.

      And Zech 14:1-9 clearly teaches his feet will touch the Mount of Olives. Saying he won’t descend to earth is not possible.

      BTW, white linen and white robes are the same thing.

      1. Good comment Nelson.
        I see things a bit differently on the verses you cited. My understanding of scripture tells me that there are two Jerusalems. One earthly and one heavenly. When I see the word Zion, to me it is always in reference to heavenly Jerusalem, not earthly Jerusalem.

        As you know I believe Babylon the Great is earthly Jerusalem, also called Sodom and Egypt in Revelation.
        The Devil is a consummate imitator and much of his success in deceiving men is due to his marvelous skill in counterfeiting the things of God. Below is a list of some of his imitations: —

        Do we read of Christ going forth to sow the “good seed” (Matt.13:24), then we also read of the enemy going forth to sow his “tares” — an imitation wheat (Matt.13:25). Do we read of “the children of God,” then we also read of “the children of the wicked one” (Matt.13:38). Do we read of God working in His children “both to will and to do of His good pleasure” (Phil.2:13), then we are also told that the Prince of the power of the air is “the spirit that now woreth in the children of disobedience” (Eph.2:2). Do we read of the Gospel of God, then we also read that Satan has a gospel — “Another gospel, which is not another” (Gal.1:6, 7). Did Christ appoint “apostles,” then Satan has his apostles too (2 Cor.11:13). Are we told that “the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God” (1 Cor.2:10), then Satan also provides his “deep things” (see Greek of Rev.2:24). Are we told that God, by His angel, will “seal” His servants in their foreheads (Rev.7:3), so also we read that Satan, by his angels, will set a mark in the foreheads of his devotees (Re.13:16). Does the Father seek “worshippers” (John 4:23), so also does Satan (Rev.13:4). Did Christ quote scripture, so also did Satan (Matt.4:6). Is Christ the Light of the world, then Satan also is transformed as an “angel of light” (2 Cor.11:14). Is Christ denominated “the Lion of the tribe of Judah” (Rev.5:5), then the Devil is also referred to as “a roaring lion” (1 Peter 5:6). Do we read of Christ and “His angels” (Matt.24:31), then we also read of the Devil and “his angels” (Matt.25:41). Did Christ work miracles, so also will Satan (2 Thess.2:9). Is Christ seated upon a “Throne,” so also will Satan be (Rev.2:13, Gk.). Has Christ a Church, then Satan has his “synagogue” (Rev.2:9). Has Christ a “bride,” then Satan has his “whore” (Rev.17:16).

        There are two cities, the city of God (Zion, the New Jerusalem) and the city of Satan or man (Earthly Jerusalem, Sodom, Egypt, the harlot).

        I think by looking for an earthly kingdom of the Christ we will end up only finding the kingdom of the Antichrist, the perfect imitation of God.
        Remember we are told to think on things above not things below (earthly things).

        1. Christopher, there are two Jersusalems and two zions, one set earthly, one set heavenly. Of that you are correct. I think I opened this topic too soon. The fifth article in the series (out of six) addresses these questions of yours and answers how we can prove Jesus and the saints will reign from the earth. Let’s wait until that article to further discuss this. That will be the proper place. The sixth article btw addresses replacement theology. You can look forward to that as well.

      2. Also Nelson

        Jesus said blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the EARTH.

        Although I think some may say this means the eternal state.

        1. Yes, that is the difficulty in the argument Linda. We have the 1000 year reign of Christ and the eternal state; and we have a heavenly Zion and Jerusalem and an earthly set. There are dozens of verses that apply to the years after Jesus returns but only a few are specific to which period and which set of Zion/Jerusalems. It requires a through Bible wide investigation. In 1 1/2 weeks, I’ll show you what I discovered doing that.

  10. In fact, Christopher, a great many of us not only believe that the rapture takes place before the physical 1000 year reign of Christ on earth but that three events take place on prophetic “that day”. One, the bodily resurrection of all the dead saints in Christ; two, the rapture of the living church, and three, the beginning of the wrath of God being poured out upon the wicked. The trifecta of biblical prophecy which all the prophets speak about “in that day”.


    1. good4you1: I have to tell you that I’ve evolved into looking forward to your comments as much as I do reading Nelson’s vital and amazing writings.

  11. Bro Nelson,

    1. Rev 20 didn’t mentioned they will rule from earth only said they will rule with Christ for 1000 years.
    2. Rev 5:11 didn’t refer to 1000 years ruling but to Rev 21/22 (Rev 22:5)

    Jesus has authority heaven and earth (Mat 28:18).

    Isaiah 66:1
    “Thus says the Lord, ‘Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool.

    Why they can’t rule upon the earth from heaven ?

    Why bride of God come to life then rule from earth just to die again??? illogical

    1. Donal, first let me address the misconception you have about the bride dying again. No…once a believer is resurrected in the First Resurrection they are resurrected into an immortal resurrection body (like Jesus’s)-they never die again. They return to the earth with Jesus in Rev. 19:11-16, rule on the earth, but never die again. They are different than the human survivors of the 70th Week who are in mortal bodies.

      Rev. 20 doesn’t mention ruling on earth. Rev. 5 doesn’t mention the 1000 years. Both of your comments are correct, however, your conclusion is wrong.

      First, the saints return to the earth with Jesus at the physical second coming. This is abundantly clear by the use of the term “fine linen, white(bright) and clean” describing both those on white horses and the garments of the bride. So first, your theory requires the saints to descend to the earth with Jesus and then ascend again. This is never depicted in scripture or even alluded to.

      Second, we will rule with Jesus (Rev. 2:26-27, 2 Tim. 2:12, Rev. 5:11, Rev. 2:4-5), but Jesus surrenders the Kingdom to God the Father after the Millennial reign as it says:

      ” then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death.” (1 Cor. 15:24-26)

      So Jesus’s reign ends when the eternal state begins (Rev. 21). It is impossible for the saints to reign from heaven. Jesus is reigning from the earth. Jesus only reigns during the Millennial Kingdom. The saints are always with the Lord (1 Thess. 4:17). Thus by logic they must be on the earth when they are reigning with Jesus.

  12. Nelson,
    You are a great engineer, mechanic. You can take it all apart, piece by piece, and explain why it can only be put back together in one fashion. The Creators cube…………..

  13. Nelson,
    Am I correct in understanding that you believe the rapture occurs before what you believe the 1,000 year reign of Christ?

Tell us what you think