Examining the Weaknesses of Amillennialism

In this article, I will examine what I believe to be the main contention points between Amillennialism and Premillenialism. We will cover the literal or figurative interpretation and use of numbers in Revelation, what it means for Satan to be bound, what is the resurrection and when is it, whether the Gog and Magog battle is the same battle as the Kings from the East battle of Armageddon, if the timing of the first and second death rule out Premillennialism, and then a few more arguments. Finally, I shall point out that the prophecies about the throne of David necessitate that Christ’s rule must become a physical rule over the earth.

Are Numbers Symbolic or Literal in Revelation?

Amillennials and Idealists typically interpret the numbers in Revelation symbolically, while Premillennials typically interpret numbers literally. To argue for one or the other is not necessarily a death-blow to the other theological position of eschatology. I would argue that the “short time” and deception and lack of deception period of Satan is a much more important argument to be had. Nonetheless, we shall also survey through a few texts in Revelation regarding the interpretation of numbers.

Rev 5:11 The number of angels were “myriads of myriads, and thousands of thousands.” This means that there are too many to count—an innumerable sum of angels.

Rev 7:4-8 “forty-four thousand sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel,” which is “twelve thousand” from each tribe. These are specific numbers. However, the number twelve is also symbolic, so this may not be a literal number.

Rev 11:13 “seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake.” Of all the thousands of numbers that could be mentioned here, the number seven was chosen. This makes it highly probable that seven thousand is a symbolic representation of a perfect amount of people being judged in the earthquake according to God’s perfect justice.

Rev 12:6 the woman fled into the wilderness where she was “nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days.” This seems oddly specific, so it might be.

Rev 20:2-3 Satan is bound for “a thousand years,” which is also called “the thousand years.” It is the same time period where Christ reigns for a thousand years (v. 4). The martyrs and other faithful believers come to life at this point and reign with Christ during that time. These thousand years have an ending period where they will be “completed” (v. 5). Thus, thousand in this context does not have the same meaning as “without end.” Once the thousand years are completed, then the rest of the dead will be raised. That is, at the end of the thousand-year reign of Christ and thousand-year binding of Satan, the wicked will be raised from their graves. Satan will also “be released for a short time” (v. 3) to gather together the nations of the earth to make war against God and against God’s people (v. 7-8).

Amillennialism suggest that this thousand-year period is happening now either on earth or in heaven. This means that we are either reigning with Christ now on earth in our physical bodies, or when we die, we will reign with Christ from heaven, judging people and angels, and ordering the affairs of the earth. Under this view, the next and last battle to take place is the Gog and Magog war. Thus, the worship of the beast and his image is something that has been happening throughout all of church history. Also in this view, it is required to believe that Satan is currently bound, and that this happened when Jesus came to earth, died on the cross, and was resurrected. However, the binding of Satan relates to his inability to “deceive the nations” (v. 8), since when he becomes unbound, that is the first thing he begins to do—deceiving the nations to make war.

But aren’t the nations currently deceived and do they not prove their being deceived by killing believers all around the world? Yes, they are currently deceived. Thus, the Amillennialist must explain how this is so. They might say that the nations are “less deceived” because Satan is not in a position of power and authority. However, that is a nonsense answer because it still remains that thousands of believers are being killed for their faith around the world. There really is no practical difference between Satan ruling and Satan not ruling since deception continues regardless. In Amillennialism, Satan is merely a redundancy. They will say that even though Satan is bound, his minions can still deceive the nations. This essentially makes it a useless and a redundant point for Revelation to mention Satan’s binding and release to deceive the nations. I would argue that since more people are being killed now in church history for their faith than prior to the time of Christ, the nations are actually more deceived than they have ever been.

Another point to make from the text is that the martyrs who held to the testimony of Jesus are the ones who came to life and reign with Christ for a thousand years (v. 4). This is indicative of the thousand years beginning much later in church history rather than at the very beginning of it. Since, if the thousand years began when Jesus came to earth, why mention those who had been beheaded for their testimony in Jesus, since none had been martyred yet at the beginning of the thousand years? If that were the case, it would have been better to mention the saints who lived prior to Christ who died on account of their faith. However, the text does not mention people like the “prophets,” which indicates to us that this thousand years starts at a much later time.

An alternative view for the time we are now living in suggests that Satan is currently released and we are living in that “short time” where Satan gathers together the nations to make war against God’s people. However, one would have to explain how a “short time” has now exceeded almost two-thousand years of church history. One would also have to explain when the thousand years ended for Christ’s reign on earth and when the short time began for Satan’s deception. However, looking throughout church history, the same spiritual status quo has existed the entire time. No spiritual pivotal point has yet to occur. Therefore, to interpret today as that “short time” would be a very unlikely scenario.

The next thing we must examine is if the resurrection being spoken of in Revelation is merely a spiritual reality or if it is also a physical reality. The reason I don’t take the Ammillenial position is because the Bible repeatedly emphasizes bodily resurrection. From Daniel to Jesus to Paul, they all speak of bodily resurrection. It would be highly unlikely for the book of Revelation to diverge from this narrative through merely spiritualizing what the resurrection will be. If that’s the way Revelation ends, then it is a different ending from how Daniel, Jesus, and Paul tell us the story will end. This should cause us to either question our interpretation or question the inspiration of the book of Revelation.

However, since the book of Revelation heavily pulls from the book of Daniel, let’s see what Daniel has to say and how the book of Daniel ends. Daniel speaks of there being a time of great distress for Daniel’s people (Israel), and everyone whose name 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 12:2). This is said to happen at “the end of time” (v. 4). Speaking of the resurrection, the last verse says to Daniel, “But as for you, go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age” (v. 13). To enter rest is a euphemism for death. This means that Daniel will die (‘sleep in the dust’) and then later at the end of the age, he will rise from the dead to receive his inheritance (‘awake’ ‘to everlasting life’). Thus, the most assured thing here is bodily resurrection since to awake and arise from the dust means his body will rise from the grave.

This will happen for Daniel at either the first Advent of Christ, 70AD, or at the end of all things. However, since Paul mentions that we do not receive our resurrected bodies until later at the last trumpet at Christ’s coming (1 Cor 15), this means that the bodily resurrection of Daniel has not yet happened. Daniel also mentions that this will happen at “the end of time” (12:4). Also, since Revelation was written sometime after 70AD, and these things are said to have not taken place yet according to Revelation, this still leaves the resurrection event to sometime in the future after 70AD.

All of these things indicate that the thousand-year reign of Christ has not yet begun since the resurrection of the dead event has yet to occur. For these reasons, I am not Amillennial. However, I still leave open the possibility for the thousand-year reign of Christ to be either a literal thousand years or symbolic for a very long time (the fullness of an age) or representative for a certain length of time. How ever the book of Daniel interprets numbers is how I would interpret numbers for the book of Revelation.

The highest numbers in the Bible are the word for “thousand” and the word for “myriad.” Myriad means ten-thousand. Daniel 7:10 and Revelation 5:11 use myriads upon myriads and thousands upon thousands to describe an innumerable sum of angels standing before the throne of God. It might be equivalent to us saying today something like, “millions and billions,” even though we have many other words to describe higher mathematical sums like trillion, quadrillion, quintillion, […], decillion, […], and vigintillion. The point is that there are many more than can be reasonably or practically counted. However, I would certainly distinguish the plural thousands or thousands upon thousands to be different from the singular “a thousand” or “the thousand.” I do not at all think the plural and singular form can mean the same thing. Thus, a thousand in the context of the millennial reign of Christ is a fixed length of time whether that is literal or figurative to mean the fullness of time.

However, if we also consider Revelation’s use of numbers, it is most likely symbolic since there seems to be a repetition in what specific set of numbers are used like 3, 7, 12, 144 (the square root of 12), one-thousand, one-hundred and forty-four thousand (twelve 12-thousands). However, in reference to the number of beasts and heads, I do not see the likelihood of those numbers being symbolic, since Daniel does not use numbers symbolically when referring to the beasts.

Is the Gog and Magog battle the same battle as the Kings from the East?

In Amillennialism, they argue that the Gog and Magog battle is the same battle as the Kings from the East battle (Armageddon). They defend this point by saying that Gog and Magog is a recapitulation of the Kings from the East battle, just as Revelation has had previous recapitulations of the trumpets overlapping the bowl judgements. By saying that it is the same battle, they defend their position that we are currently living in the Millenium. However, I disagree with Gog and Magog being a recapitulation.

Here are the similarities and differences between the two battles:

The Kings from the East battle is against the nations, the beast, the false prophet, the kings of the earth, their armies, and demonic spirits (16:13-16; 19:15, 19-20); whereas, the Gog and Magog battle is composed of Satan and the nations (20:7-8). In the time that battle takes place, the beast and false prophet had already been thrown into the lake of fire (20:10).

The East battle happens before the thousand years, whereas the Gog battle takes place after the thousand years. An organized beast empire no longer exists at the end of the thousand years because that time is the physical reign of Jesus and His kingdom on earth. The Gog battle is the last-ditch attempt effort to rebel against God and His kingdom, and that rebellion with the devil only exists for a very “short time” (20:3). Meanwhile, the beast kingdom rules have existed throughout all of history, which is a long time. Revelation speaks of a discontinuity and then resumed continuity of Satan’s deception and influence over the nations. However, if the two battles are a recapitulation of one another, there would be no discontinuity, which would contradict what the text indicates. Thus, one battle begins the Millennium while the other ends human history to bring in the eternal state.

With the Gog battle, Israel is living in peace and security after the sword had previously devastated them many years ago (Ezek 38:8-14), while in Armageddon, Israel is living in a time of great tribulation during a time of cosmic judgements, plagues, and global chaos (Dan 11:41; 12:1; Zech 14:1-2), while the beast is actively persecuting the saints and the world is under the tyranny of the Antichrist.

The Gog battle comes from the north to attack Israel (Ezek 38:15), while the Armageddon battle comes from the east across the Euphrates (Rev 16:12).

In the Gog battle, there is a great earthquake, and the nations are defeated by turning against their own army, while also being destroyed by hail, fire, and brimstone raining down on them (Ezek 38:19, 21-22). This is the fire which comes down from heaven to devour them while they surround the camp of Israel (Rev 20:9; Ezek 39:6).

However, in the battle of Armageddon, a great earthquake causes the cities of the nations to fall to destroy Babylon the great. Along with this, there is a thunderstorm with huge hailstones (Rev 16:17-21). But before they are destroyed, they are able to kill a third of mankind (9:18). But when they are destroyed, it is from the sword that comes from the mouth of the Lord (19:15, 21). Thus, it seems as though the East armies are able to wreck great havoc on the earth before they are destroyed, while the Gog armies are destroyed before even touching the inhabitants of Israel.

Additionally, after this war against Jerusalem in the battle of Armageddon, people who had fought against her and did not die in battle, will remain on the earth. They will go up year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts. But if they decide not to do that, then they will receive the plague of no rain for their crops (Zech 14:16-19). However, this is the same time as the Millennial reign of Christ, since He will be the only King reigning during that time (Zech 14:9). Verse 11 says that there will no longer be a curse. But that has to apply to Jerusalem only, since other nations can still be cursed with no rain. Thus, the no death rule in Revelation 21:4 does not take affect in the events of Zechariah 14 (for Jerusalem at least). Therefore, either sinners and saints will live together on the same earth during that time, or Zechariah 14 is speaking of a battle and time prior to the final battle of Gog and Magog. I opt for the second option and rule out the first option because Revelation describes a new creation with no curse (22:3), no death, or pain (21:4). Meanwhile, all these things are still present in the geography and world of Zechariah 14. Also, the Gog and Magog war in Ezekiel 38-39 implies no survivors while Zechariah 14 includes survivors.

So far, all of these differences point to there being two separate battles. If that is the case, then this means there is a battle then the physical millennial reign of Christ on earth, and then another final battle right before all things are made new, and death will be no more.

The Timing of the first and second death

Beale argues that the casting of the beast and false prophet cannot happen until the final judgement at the lake of fire; otherwise, their judgement would be described as the first death rather than being cast into the lake of fire. For this reason, Beale believes Premillennialism cannot be true, and he thinks that the millennium is the church age.

Beale writes: “The ‘second death’ cannot begin until all have died the first physical death. On any millennial view, the first death will cease at the annihilation and renovation of the creation. This is why the casting of the beast and false prophet into the lake of fire in 19:20 cannot occur before the period of the millennium, as premillennialism suggests. The reason for this is that the second death, which initiates the punishment of the lake of fire, does not, on any millennial view, occur until after the great white throne judgement in vv. 11-15. It is as that judgement, following the millennium, that death and Hades give up the dead in them, who are then judged and thrown into the lake of fire (v. 15)” (Beale, Revelation: A Shorter Commentary, 457).

In response to this argument, I do not see the contention to be a legitimate problem. Since I believe in Annihilationism, the lake of fire simply means to be destroyed and done away with forever. As the final judgement, it means that once something is put in there, it will not come back out. This will be a true reality for the beast (the kingdoms of this world) and the false prophet (false religions) during the physical Millennial reign of Christ on earth. Those things do not come back, not even for the final battle. The lake of fire is not an actual place—it is just a symbol of divine judgement for God to destroy. Secondly, the beast and false prophet are symbols, not individual people. Therefore, they don’t actually die like people do in what is termed “the first death.” Thus, I have no problem with them being defeated at the beginning of the Millenium before the eschatological time of “the second death.” Third, the text in Revelation contradicts Beale’s assumptions that the first death is required before being thrown into the lake of fire, since the beast and the false prophet are described as being thrown into the lake of fire “alive,” meaning, they were vanquished without experiencing any prior “first death.” Overall, I believe the Premillennial view reads the text more naturally as it is written rather than having to reorder the listed sequence of events.

Other Arguments Against Ammillennialism

Another reason I put into question Amillennialism is that Christ is said to become the one true ruler over all others, and that He will put an end to all the other kingdoms (Zech 14:9; Dan 2:34-35, 44; 7:11-12, 26-27). This is also when the beast is destroyed and thrown into the fire (Rev 19:20). So then, how does Christ rule over all these kingdoms if they are still standing and persecuting the saints? How is their dominion destroyed and handed over to the saints if they continue operating and killing Christians? For these reasons, I do not believe the Millennial reign of Christ has begun, and nor do I believe the beast has been defeated yet. This means that the kings of the East battle of Armageddon, along with the Gog and Magog war, have not taken place yet either. Christ reigns in heaven now but His reign has not yet become physical.

When the apostles asked Jesus if He was going to restore the kingdom to Israel at that time (Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?’), Jesus did not correct their understanding of the kingdom by saying they were thinking about it all wrong and it’s actually supposed to be a spiritual kingdom rather than a physical one. No. Rather, Jesus addresses the time issue of their question instead (Acts 1:6-7).

If the Millennial kingdom is now, that means Satan is bound so that he cannot deceive the nations. But if this is so, why did Satan fill Annanias’ heart to lie to the Holy Spirit? (Acts 5:3). Other verses that need to be explained for Satan’s present deception: Acts 10:38; 26:18; 1 Cor 5:5; 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:14; Eph 6; 1 Thess 2:18; 2 Thess 2:9; 2 Tim 2:26; James 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 12:9; 13:2. Also, why are the nations so deceived to attack Israel and believers around the world? Why are Christians a minority in the world? Why since Christ came to the earth does it seem the world’s deception is greater than it has ever been? Why are there divisions within the church? What did the binding of Satan actually accomplish in a tangible way? And if it didn’t accomplish anything tangible, why even mention it? How is it actually relevant? If there is no real effect of this binding as having happened, then we need to question if it has truly happened. I don’t think it has.

The Throne of David

The New Testament presents Jesus’ future physical reign on David’s throne as the direct fulfillment of the Davidic covenant, not a present spiritual reality. In Luke 1:32–33, the angel promises that God “will give Him the throne of His father David,” a throne David never occupied in heaven but in Jerusalem. Peter’s sermon in Acts 2 argues that the resurrection proves Jesus is the promised Davidic heir, but he never identifies Jesus’ present position at the Father’s right hand with David’s throne. Instead, Peter quotes Psalm 110, where the Messiah sits at God’s right hand “until” His enemies are subdued—implying a future phase of rule distinct from the present heavenly session. The resurrection qualifies Jesus for the Davidic throne; it does not relocate the Davidic throne to heaven.

Acts 15:16–17 also cites Amos 9 to describe the future rebuilding of “the fallen tent of David.” Amillennialists spiritualize this as the church, but James quotes a prophecy about the restoration of David’s royal house, not a worship tent, and he applies it to the eschatological order in which Gentiles stream into a restored Davidic kingdom. James sees present Gentile salvation as the beginning of Amos’s prophecy, but the prophecy itself culminates in a restored Davidic rule over Israel and the nations.

The early church did not collapse the Davidic monarchy into a metaphor; they saw the resurrection as the guarantee of its future physical manifestation. If the fallen tent of David is going to be rebuilt and restored “as in the days of old” (Am 9:11), then this requires a physical restoration. Verse 14 also indicates the same thing, since it is prophesied that the captivity of the people of Israel will be restored, and they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them, and cultivate the land.

The Old Testament reinforces this expectation by describing a geographical, political, and physical reign. Isaiah 9:6–7 declares that the Messiah will sit “on the throne of David” and rule with the government on His shoulders. Jeremiah 23:5–6 and 33:14–17 promise a future “Branch of David” who will reign as king… in the land. Ezekiel’s visions portray a Davidic shepherd‑king ruling Israel forever in a restored territory (Ezek 34; 37).

Amillennialists often cite Jesus’ words, “My kingdom is not of this world,” but Jesus is not denying a future earthly reign; He is saying that His present mission is not advanced by worldly methods (His servants were not fighting for Him). This is the same Jesus who will sit on His throne “in the renewal of all things” (Matt 19:28; CSB). Amillennialists claim this is His heavenly throne, but Matthew distinguishes between the Father’s throne and the Messiah’s throne, which is the restored Davidic throne promised in Luke 1 on earth (read Rev 3:21). Jesus locates this enthronement at the time of cosmic renewal which occurs in Isaiah 65, not at His ascension. The time of this cosmic renewal in Isaiah 65 is both earthly and historical, which precedes the eternal state (since death still occurs in Isaiah 65).

Revelation 3:21 indicates that when Jesus overcame and resurrected, He sat on His Father’s throne but in the future, He will sit on His own throne which is the Davidic throne on earth. It will be where He returns one day as His feet touch down at the Mount of Olives as He descends from heaven to earth (Zech 14:4; Acts 1:11-12).

In conclusion of all these things, the biblical witness affirms that Jesus’ Davidic kingship is not merely spiritual or symbolic but will be physically realized in a restored earth. The resurrection qualifies Him as the promised Davidic heir; the present heavenly session anticipates a future earthly administration; and the prophetic promises consistently describe a restored people, restored land, restored earth, and a restored king over all the governments of the earth. This He will do once He comes back physically to the Mount of Olives, and His kingdom will be an eternally physical one. His descent to the Mount of Olives is the moment He transitions from His Father’s throne to His own Davidic throne to receive His full inheritance over the earth to rule with a rod of iron over all the earth with no competition, since He will be the only king.

“And the Lord will be king over all the earth; in that day the Lord will be the only one, and His name the only one” (Zech 14:9).