WILL THERE BE A MILLENNIUM?

Will There Be A Millennium?

To some people such a question might be seen as little short of ridiculous, for their whole understanding of eschatology and the Bible hangs around the idea of a Millennium, and yet when we consider the matter further it soon becomes apparent that the New Testamen is absolutely silent on the subject. Neither Jesus nor Paul, in spite of their emphasis on eschatology, ever even give a hint of a Millennium. And while in most cases arguments from silence are notoriously unreliable, the situation is a little different here. For both dealt in some detail with the question of eschatology. And yet they never once spoke of a Millennium. Could you imagine any pre-millennialist doing the same today?

Very often their reply to this situation is, ‘Yes, but the Millennium is quite clearly mentioned in Revelation 20.1-11.’ So in recognition of this perhaps we should first of all consider those verses. The first thing to note when we look at them is that there is no reference to a ruling on earth at all. The ruling is by Christ and ‘the souls’ of the martyrs (and possibly including all who have not taken the mark of the beast), in other words by those who have died and gone to be with God. They are to rule ‘over the earth’, which is not the same thing as living and ruling on it. There is no hint of an earthly Millennial rule, or of an earthly throne. We may rather relate it to the church of the firstborn who are written in Heaven and to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant (Hebrews 12.22-24).

Scripturally God has ruled ‘over the earth’ from the beginning. ‘The Kingly Rule is the LORD’s, and He is the ruler over the nations’ (Psalm 22.28). ‘The LORD has established His throne in the heavens, and His Kingly Rule rules over all’ (Psalm 103.19). ‘Yes of a surety God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert justice. Who gave Him a charge over the earth, or who has disposed (or ‘laid on Himself’) the whole world?’ (Job 34.13). In other words He is the ruler over all things and gave Himself the charge ‘over the earth’.

Jesus has ruled ‘over the earth’ from the moment that He was enthroned in heaven after His resurrection. ‘All authority is given to me in heaven and on earth’ (Matthew 28.18). ‘Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that He is both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus Whom you crucified’ (Acts 2.36). ‘For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet’ (1 Corinthians 15.25). ‘He raised Him from the dead, and made Him to sit at His right hand in the heavenlies, far above all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come, and He put all things in subjection under His feet --’ (Ephesians 1.20-22).

Interestingly we also are seen as reigning over the earth from the heavenlies, for we read, ‘God, being rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us --- raised us up with Him and made us sit with Him in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus’ (Ephesians 2.4-7). And as we are ‘with Him’ it is at God’s right hand. In other words, as well as the souls of the martyrs ruling in Heaven, we also, even at this present time, participate in His rule over the earth from Heaven, and on dying will go to join the martyrs in their rule. The idea is not that the rule has come down to earth from Heaven, but that we have been lifted up to Heaven from earth. So in our souls we are to be active in the heavenlies, and one with the martyrs, and above all one with our Lord, Jesus Christ.

Thus taken at face value, and taken literally, Revelation 20 3-6 does not speak of Christ ruling on earth over an earthly kingdom at all. And that being so, nowhere in the New Testament does it ever say that He will.

But does Revelation 20 even speak of a coming future millennium following the coming of Christ? A careful look at the passage suggests that it does not. For if we look at what is described there we find that it is echoing what is going on in the earth now according to other Scriptures. For example the idea of Satan being bound is not a new one in respect of a coming age, for it has happened here and now. Jesus Himself claimed that He had come to bind Satan (Matthew 12.28-29; Mark 3.27; compare Luke 11.20-22), and that that was one of the signs that the Kingly Rule of God had come on them (Matthew 12.28). In other words Satan has had restrictions put on what he does at least from the time of Christ. In this present age he cannot do what he likes.

Indeed we have only to think of the situation to realise that it must be so. When we think of his huge power (Jude 1.9), it is quite clear that we would stand no chance against him unless he had been ‘bound’. That is why when he goes around ‘like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour’ we should be grateful that he can only do so through men who are persecuting God’s people (1 Peter 5.8-9), because he himself is ‘bound’. Of course the chain is not a literal one. He is a spirit being. He has no body. No literal chain could bind him. It is the authority of God and of Christ that binds him. So the encouragement found in Revelation 20.1-3 is that he has been bound in this way ‘for a thousand years’, in other words, from the standpoint of the Christians in John’s day, into the far distant future.

This is confirmed in verse 3, ‘after this he must be loosed for a little time’. For we should note that this loosing has also already been described in Revelation as happening prior to the coming of Christ. In Revelation 9.1-11 we are given a vivid description of his loosing, along with his minions, while the ‘short time’ during which ‘he goes about in his great wrath’ is described in Revelation 12.12; 17.12. So all this is describing events prior to Jesus’ second coming.

What then of the thousand years? By the time this account was written it had become clear to the Apostles that the coming of Christ was not to happen as quickly as they had at first expected. Thus in 2 Peter 3 we are told that we are not to be surprised at the fact that He has not come, because it is due to the longsuffering of God, Who is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. And he then points out that with the Lord ‘one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day’ (2 Peter 3.8). Even therefore at this stage Peter is thinking in terms of ‘a thousand years’. Thus John in Revelation 20 is taking up the same thought. In both cases it is indicating ‘a long time’ due to the mercy of God.

But some would say, ‘a thousand years means a thousand years’. We must, however, question whther that is so. Let us consider a few uses of ‘a thousand’ in Scripture.

We do not intend to discuss the question of what a ‘thousand’ indicates when it is used in larger numbers, only its significance when used on its own. Nor will we consider its use when it means a military or family unit. There are, hoever, still a good number of examples:

1). In many cases it is used simply in order to indicate a large amount. Thus:

‘The Lord, the God of your fathers make you a thousand times so many more as you are, and bless you, as He has promised you!’ (Deuteronomy 1.11). Here it is simply the equivalent of our saying, ‘I have a thousand things to do.’ It simply means, ‘many times’.
‘And the man said to Joab, ‘Though I should receive a thousand shekels of silver in my hand, yet would I not put forth mine hand against the king's son: for in our hearing the king charged you and Abishai and Ittai, saying, Beware that none touch the young man Absalom’ (2 Samuel 18.12). This is similar to the first case and simply means a large round number.
‘And he spoke three thousand proverbs, and his songs were a thousand and five’ (1 Kings 4.32). Here we have a generalisation probably indicating a huge number of proverbs and a large number of song.’ Compare how we might say, ‘I’ve got thousands of them’, and ‘I have a thousand and one things to do’.
‘For every beast of the forest is Mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills’ (Psalm 50.10). We can safely assume that no one asks who the cattle on the other hills belong to.
‘Your neck is like the tower of David built for an armoury, on which there hang a thousand bucklers, all shields of mighty men’ (Song of Solomon 4.4). Again the significance of ‘a thousand’ is a large number.
‘And it shall come about in that day, that every place will be, where there were a thousand vines at a thousand silverlings, it shall even be for briars and thorns (Isaiah 7.23). Again the significance is a large number.
‘Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand’ (Daniel 5.1). It is doubtful if this is intended to indicate an actual number. It rather means a large number of lords.

2). But more significant in this context are the examples where ‘a thousand’ is used with a time word indicating the passage of time:
‘Know therefore that the Lord your God, He is God, the faithful God, Who keeps covenant and mercy with those who love Him and keep His commandments to a thousand generations’ (Deuteronomy 7.9). We suspect that no one would suggest here that God’s mercy would fail once the thousand generations were past, nor that it bound God specifically to a thousand generations. It simply means a great many, a long time. Note that for the Israelite ‘generation’ was a word indicating the passage of time.
‘For a day in Your courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of My God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness’ (Psalm 84.10). Again the significance of ‘a thousand’ is ‘many’, and once more it is in a time context.
‘For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night’ (Psalm 90.4). Here the idea is of a large number, (he could have used any large round number). It is important here because it refers both to how God sees time, and to a time context.
‘He has remembered His covenant for ever, the word which He commanded to a thousand generations’ (Psalm 105.8). Here again we have a reference to God’s view of time and it is related specifically to the passing of time and to a time word, ‘generations’. No one would suggest that here the idea is that after a thousand generation He would forget His covenant, nor that He is indicating that a thousand generations will actually be achieved.
‘Yes, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet has he seen no good. Do not all go to one place?’ (Ecclesiastes 6.6). Here ‘a thousand years’ signifies a long time, and interestingly the writer considers that it can without difficulty be seen as two thousand.

All this would seem to stress that when God says ‘a thousand years’ it simply means a long extent of time, for while a case could theoretically be made in some cases for seeing it literally as a thousand, there are impoortant cases where it clearly is not.
And following on from this, as we have seen above, Christ and His martyrs are to reign over the earth over all this long period. They have taken part in a ‘first resurrection’. These dead in Christ have risen, like the Old Testament saints in Matthew 27.52. Furthermore what follows in verses 7-10 about the further activity of Satan has already been described in Revelation 19.19-21, where it resulted in the second coming of Christ. Thus there is no reason for introducing an end time Millennium into Revelation 20.
This brings home the fact that the vision in Revelation 20, which finalises with the final judgment (at the coming of Christ), is in reality a further new vision covering the same period as previous visions, commencing with the first coming of Christ and His binding of Satan, and moving on to His second coming as judge of all the world. It is repeating what has previously been described as to happen, in summary form, with its great emphasis on the drama of the final judgment.
The Book of Revelation in fact consists of a number of such visions in sequence, and in a number of cases these visions lead up to the second coming of Christ, depicted in different ways. Thus Revelation 6 leads up to verses 12-17 and to ‘the great Day of His wrath’. There is no way in which the events described in these verses could literally happen and the world survive. (It is in fact amusing how quickly the extreme literalist, who has been insisting on a literal interpretation, suddenly loses his literalism, in order to explain these verses away). Again the vision being described in Revelation 11 leads up to the rapture in verse 12, followed by God’s judgments on the earth. The vision being described in Revelation 14 leads up to the coming of the Son of Man in judgment (verses 14-16), a depiction followed by a description of His awful judgments outlined in vivid terms. The vision being described in chapter 16 ends with a similar description to chapter 6 (see especially verse 20). The vision(s) being described in chapters 17-19 ends with the coming of Christ in battle array spoken of in vivid terms (19.11-16). Thus in Revelation we have a series of visions, each of which leads up to the coming of Christ, and the vision being described in chapter 20 is thus of a similar nature and in the same way closes with Christ’s second coming in judgment. Note how that judgment results in eternal life and eternal punishment for those judged, just like the picture of the judgment in Matthew 25. They are depictions of the same judgment from different viewpoints.
But then the premillenialist declares, ‘yes while we agree that it is not mentioned in the New Testament, the kingdom age is made clear in the Old Testament, for we are only prepared to take the promises there literally’. But the truth, of course, is that they only take them literally as far as it suits them. Thus, for example, when Ezekiel prophesies the coming of the future king and of the new permanent sanctuary of God in Ezekiel 37.24-28, following on the restoration of His people, he describes the coming prince as ruling ‘for ever’, and the sanctuary as being in the midst of them ‘for evermore’. If taken literally this clearly cannot refer simply to a Millennium. What is being described is to be everlastingly permanent, and can therefore only be fulfilled in eternity. So if we do take it literally it cannot be speaking of a Millennium. Compare also Micah 4.7-8; Daniel 2.44; 7.14, 18, 27; Isaiah 9.7; Psalm 45.6; 145.11-13; 146.10; Ezekiel 37.22-28, among others.
When the early missionaries went to the eskimoes with the Gospel they had to speak of it in terms of the great Igloo in the sky. They had to portray the truth in terms that the people could understand. And the same was true of the prophets. So when they spoke to a people who had no conception of a heavenly kingdom above they had to do it in earthly terms.
Thus when we look over other Scriptures we will discover that the same applies to them. For the truth is that the prophets, who were speaking to a people who had no conception of Heaven, were actually describing a picture of the heavenly glories yet to come, in terms that the people who had no conception of Heaven would understand.
Indeed we do not just have to argue about this from nothing, for the Scriptures themselves make absolutely clear that this is so. In Genesis 15.14-17 God says to Abraham, ‘Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, for all the land which you see, to you will I give it and to your seed for ever. --- Arise walk through the land, for to you I will give it.’ Now what could be clearer? There are two definite points that arise from it. Firstly that Abraham himself was to receive the land, and secondly that it would be passed on to his seed for ever. It was to be an eternal possession. Now it is true that to a certain extent this did receive a physical fulfilment. Abraham did obtain a small portion of the land (Genesis 23) and his seed did for a time rule over part of the land. But both were partial fulfilments only, and came far short of the promise. His seed did not have if ‘for ever’, nor ever will. How then was it to be fulfilled? The New Testament tells us.
In Hebrews 11.10 we are told what Abraham was seeking, ‘he looked for the city which has foundations whose builder and maker is God’. He was not looking earthward, but heavenward. And we are also told what his seed looked forward to. ‘Having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims in the earth, for those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking after a country of their own -- they desire a better country, that is a heavenly, wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared for them a city’ (Hebrews 11.13-16). Thus the New Testament saw them as seeing the fulfilment of the promises that God had given to Abraham in terms of a heavenly inheritance.
Or we can compare Haggai’s prophecy, ‘for thus says the Lord of hosts, “Yet once more, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land, and I will shake all nations, and the desirable things of all nations will come, and I will fill this house with glory”. How was this to be fulfilled? The writer to the Hebrews in 12.26-28 cites from these verses and tells us. ‘Yet once more will I shake, not the earth only but also the heaven. And this word ‘yet once more’ signifies the removing of those things which are shaken, as of things that have been made, that those things which are not shaken may remain. Wherefore receiving a Kingly Rule which cannot be shaken let us have grace whereby we may offer service wellpleasing to God, with reverence and awe”. And what he is speaking about is made clear in verses 22-24, “You are come to Mount Zion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, to the general assembly of the firstborn who are written in Heaven, --- and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant --’. Here then is the final fulfilment of Haggai’s prophecy, and it is in heavenly terms. As in Revelation 20 His people are to rule with Him in Heaven. Note how to the writer ‘Mount Zion’ of the Scriptures is the heavenly Mount Zion, and Jerusalem is the heavenly Jerusalem. (Compare for the latter Galatians 4.26, 28). And the desirable things of all nations coming into His house of glory (Haggai 2.7-8) is described in Revelation 21.26, and there the everlasting kingdom is undoubtedly in mind.
So the New Testament, which knows nothing of an earthly kingdom apart from the Kingly Rule of God introduced by Jesus Christ, specifically sees the Old Testament promises as fulfilled in the heavenly kingdom.
And when we look at some of the Old Testament promises we discover that this must necessarily be so. When Isaiah in chapter 11 describes the coming ‘kingdom’ (verse 1-4) in terms of a cessation of all violence even in the animal world (verses 6-8) he finishes by saying, ‘they shall not hurt nor destroy, in all my holy mountain’. Can we then seriously conceive of this idealistic state of perfect peace and non-violence being disturbed only by the activities of men butchering lambs in the Temple as ‘memorial offerings’, a kind of offering which is unknown anywhere in the Old Testament? And yet that is what is often taught. But in fact Isaiah makes the position even clearer, for he repeats his picture in Isaiah 65.25, where it specifically relates to the ‘new heavens and a new earth’ (65.17). In other words it is the new earth which will enjoy these things and will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea. (And we should further suggest that it is not taking the Scripture literally to speak of memorial offerings, for that is not what the prophets actually meant).
So the fact is that just as the offerings and sacrifices of the old covenant were a shadow of things to come, and found their fulfilment in the offering of Jesus Christ once and for all, so the Old Testament prophecies are shadows of what is to come, finding their final fulfilment in the heavenly realities presented in the New Testament.
In fact when considering such prophecies we need to recognise that they cover situations both near and far. The prophets were speaking to their own times as well as to the later times. And we must especially recognise that part of the fulfilment of many of the promises took place in the inter-testamental period, regularly overlooked by interpreters. For in that period God did bring His people back to their land, and establish them there, eventually making them independent and the land prosperous and fruitful. Zadokite priests did function then. So prophecies concerning this kind of thing can be seen as fulfilled then. For the fact is that we must not just apply everything to ‘the end times’.
In other words we should recognise that the fulfilment of many prophecies covers three periods:
Firstly the time when God brought Israel back to its land prior to the coming of Jesus, and gave them prosperity in a new kingdom.
Secondly the period of the Kingly Rule of God established by Jesus over the new Israel of God, which ‘replaced’ the old (Galatians 6.16; John 15.1-6).
And thirdly the period of the everlasting kingdom, given in language that the people at the time could understand.

Having this in mind we will now consider examples from the Old Testament which illustrate this fact (I was given this list as a refutation of what I had said by a pre-millennialist. If you feel a reference is missing which supports your case, please let me know. I do not want to be thought of as dodging difficult passages).
The first prophecy cited was in Joel 2.21-27. But there the undoubted restoration of the land comes BEFORE the pouring out of the Spirit, and we should recognise that Peter applied the latter to Pentecost in Acts 2.18. That would tie in with seeing an application to the restoration which took place during the inter-testamental period, followed by the fulfilment in Acts 2 of Joel 2.28. On the other hand we may certainly see its final fulfilment as pointing forward to the everlasting kingdom for we are told in 2.20 that 'Judah will be inhabited for ever, and Jerusalem to all generations'. That requires everlastingness. There is thus a partial fulfilment on earth, followed by a final fulfilment in Heaven
Similarly in Isaiah 35 we can see verses 1-2 as fulfilled prior to the coming of Jesus, for Jesus Himself tells us that verses 3-9 were fulfilled in His coming (see Matthew 11.3-5). Verse 10 may the be seen as looking forward to the everlasting kingdom, the only place where everlasting joy could possibly be obtained.
In Isaiah 2.2-4 we find something that was initially fulfilled in the coming of Christ, when the word of the Lord issued out from Jerusalem to the ends of the world. It describes how Jerusalem would be the place where God revealed His blessing, followed by the establishment of the new Temple of God's people which would become the source of life to the world. The language is clearly not intended to be taken absolutely literally, for the Temple is depicted as being established on a uniquely high peak with the nations having to be transported up to it in order to worship there. In contrast when God sought to dwell among His people, He did not isolate Himself in that way, but dwelt in the midst of them, and besides it would contradict Ezekiel 43 where the Temple was to be situated in a sacred spot, surrounded by a large area of holy ground, both of which were outside Jerusalem. But if the new Temple is His people both pictures could apply, giving different emphases. It is far more likely, therefore, to be intended to indicate the exaltation of His new Temple consisting of His people to which all who wanted to know the truth about God would flow.
In Amos 9.9-12 we have a prophecy which the New Testament sees as specifically fulfilled in the early church (Acts 15.16-18). And it will then be finally fulfilled in the heavenly kingdom, for we note again the clear indication of this in that 'they will never again be plucked up out of the land'. That requires everlastingness, not just a millennium.
In Micah 4.1-7 we have a parallel prophecy to Isaiah 2.1-4, which then continues with the idea of ‘walking in the name of the Lord our God for ever and ever’, while the Lord Himself will ‘reign over them in Mount Zion henceforth even for ever’. Both descriptions require an eternal kingdom. Thus we must see in this Mount Zion the heavenly Mount Zion of Hebrews 12.22.
Zephaniah 3.20 was fulfilled when Israel was restored prior to the coming of Christ, and verse 19 was fulfilled in the calling out of His true people in Acts, although again both may be seen as pointing ahead to final fulfilment in the heavenly kingdom.
Habakkuk 2.14 is in process of fulfilment now, and will receive its final fulfilment in the everlasting kingdom. Compare on Isaiah 11 above.
Haggai 2.7-9 had a partial fulfilment in the Temple of Herod, but comes to further fulfilment in the new Temple of God which will be composed of His people, which will then result in its final fulfilment in the heavenly Temple in Heaven.
Zechariah 8.3-5 is pictured in a slightly different way in Revelation 21.22-27.
Zechariah 14.16-21 is a picture, in terms in which the people could understand, of the establishment of everlasting worship, stressing why it will be universal. It cannot be taken literally because even given the decimation of the peoples of the world in the final days of this age it would be a logistical impossibility, and there would not be room in the area to take all the people. An attempt is made to get over this by saying that only representatives would need to be sent, but the truth is that that was not what Zechariah had in mind. He was speaking of all the males of these nations gathering to renew the covenant. And that would just not be possible.
Furthermore the suggestion that, with Christ ruling on earth, any nation that was required to would not attend at the Feast of Tabernacles, is quite frankly ludicrous in an age which would surely be characterised by instant communications and complete openness. Their intention not to do so would be known immediately, and such refusal to attend would be an open act of rebellion. Can we really see them as being contacted and not responding to an instruction given by word of mouth over the latest method of communication when they knew Who was speaking? The account is therefore clearly given in terms of the prophet’s own day when it would have been a possibility. And in those terms it is a picturesque and clear indication that none would refuse to worship the Lord for ever, because the price would be too great.
Jeremiah 31.31-34 speaks of the new covenant made by Christ and fulfilled in the Kingly Rule of God (Hebrews 8.8-12), while Jeremiah 33.12-26 cannot possibly refer to a period that will end for it promises 'there will NEVER lack a man to sit on the throne of Israel', while the covenant with David is considered to be so everlasting (compare Isaiah 55.3) that it cannot ever be broken. This requires an everlasting kingdom.
Ezekiel 36.33-38 can be seen as having taken place during the restoration period. In Ezekiel 37.24-28 'David my servant will be prince for ever' and 'my sanctuary will be in the midst of them for evermore', both again requiring an everlasting kingdom.

In view of the multiplicity of prophecies we cannot claim to have covered them all by any means, but the same principles can be applied to them as those above. Thus there is nothing in the Old Testament that requires a Millennium. It was rather an idea that sprang from pagan and Jewish teaching. Indeed both Papias and Irenaeus obtained it from 2 Baruch where we read, ‘The Messiah will then begin to be revealed, -- the earth also will yield its fruit ten-thousandfold, and on each vine there will be a thousand branches, and each branch will produce a thousand clusters, and each cluster produce a thousand grapes, and each grape produce a cor of wine, moreover also they will behold marvels every day' (2 Baruch 30.4-6). And another source of the idea was 2 Enoch, 'And I appointed the eighth day also, that the eighth day should be the first created after my work, and that the first seven revolve in the form of the seventh thousand, and that at the beginning of the eighth thousand there should be a time of not counting, endless, with neither years, nor months, nor weeks, nor days, nor hours' (2 Enoch 33.1-2). So the source of the idea of the Millennium was, as we have seen, not the New Testament. It was just a nice idea from Jewsish literature that took on in the West (but not so much in the East) until eventually the church dropped it.
IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BIBLE THAT PUZZLES YOU?

If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus.
Return to Home Page
Other FREE scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
THE PENTATEUCH
GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS 1.1-7.38 --- 8.1-11.47 --- 12.1-16.34--- 17.1-27.34--- NUMBERS 1-10--- 11-19--- 20-36--- DEUTERONOMY 1.1-4.44 --- 4.45-11.32 --- 12.1-29.1--- 29.2-34.12 --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- PSALMS 1-17--- ECCLESIASTES --- ISAIAH 1-5 --- 6-12 --- 13-23 --- 24-27 --- 28-35 --- 36-39 --- 40-48 --- 49-55--- 56-66--- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL 1-7 ---DANIEL 8-12 ---
NAHUM--- HABAKKUK---ZEPHANIAH ---ZECHARIAH --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- 1 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-16 --- 2 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-13 -- -GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- HEBREWS 1-6 --- 7-10 --- 11-13 --- JAMES --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- REVELATION
--- THE GOSPELS
Millennium,Rapture,Revelation,Great,Tribulation,Millenium,Second,Coming,Advent,
seven,church,,Bible,overcomers,Satan,bound,tribulation,great,Christian,faith,facts,
repent,forgive,forgiveness,love,Holy,Spirit,Creation