Introduction
Is the “age to come” a millennial kingdom, where upon the return of Christ He sets up His kingdom on this present earth and rules this world as its King? Or is the “age to come” the Eternal Kingdom (eternal state) of the “new heaven and new earth” (Rev 21:1-2), which we enter directly upon the return of Christ?
The idea of an earthly 1000 year kingdom of this world is the position that premillennialists hold. While amillennialists do not believe that the Bible teaches such a kingdom, but that we go immediately into the Eternal Kingdom upon our resurrection, which occurs at the time of Christ’s return. In other words, Amillennialism teaches that there is no millennial kingdom between the return of Christ (and judgment of the world) and our eternal state (Rev 21 & 22).
For most of my long life as a follower of Christ, I was a dispensational premillennialist. Through a lot of intensive study over the years, I’ve come to recognize the shortcomings of both of those positions. I say both, because most premillennialists are also dispensationalists, as I once was.
However, I’m now convinced that neither of those positions reflect a true New Testament understanding. I’ve done a lot of teaching on these doctrines (on this website), and in regard to the so-called millennial kingdom that is associated with Premillennialism, there are a large number of passages of Scripture that convincingly refute such a kingdom. In this study we’ll talk about just a few of those passages.
(Mark 10:28-31– NET) — 28 Peter began to speak to him, “Look, we have left everything to follow you!” 29 Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, there is no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for my sake and for the sake of the gospel 30 who will not receive in this age a hundred times as much—homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children, fields, all with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life. 31 But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”
Here Jesus reveals that “this age” is life in this world, and that the “age to come” is eternity in God’s presence. He speaks as though there are only two ages. To place a third age (millennial kingdom) between the two has to be assumed. We can’t build our doctrinal positions on assumptions.
As believers, we have eternal life now, but here Jesus is referring to the full possession of it in the afterlife (Heaven). This refutes the idea of an earthly, millennial kingdom upon the return of Christ. In this one verse Jesus reveals that upon His return, and our associated resurrection, we go directly into eternity—into the Eternal Kingdom of the “new heaven and new earth” (2 Pe 1:11; Rev 21:1-2).
(Luke 20:34-35 – NET) — 34 So Jesus said to them, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are regarded as worthy to share in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.
This is one of the most clearly stated verses regarding the identification of “this age” and the “age to come.” “Marrying and given in marriage” of “this age” obviously refers to life in this present world. Now note what Jesus says about the age to follow: The “that age” (“age to come”) refers to the next life upon our “resurrection.” I think it’s clear that Jesus is referring to two consecutive ages, and gives no hint that there’s an age in between the two. Furthermore, there is only one resurrection:
(John 5:28-29 – NET) – 28 “Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation.
[Also Jn 6:44; Jn 11:24; Matt 25:31-34, 41, 46; 1 Cor 15:50-52; Rev 20:11-15]
Again, this eliminates the idea of a millennial kingdom on this present, worldly earth. When Jesus returns, we’re resurrected and we then go directly into our eternal state of Revelation 21 & 22, where only “righteousness dwells” (2 Pe 3:13). Otherwise, if there was an earthly millennial kingdom, there would have to be another resurrection for those who died during that time. The idea of multiple resurrections is not taught in the Bible—not even a hint. Such an idea has to be assumed based on a positional bias. Not only that, but such a kingdom would certainly not be a kingdom where “righteousness dwells.” Sin would still be alive and well in this kingdom taught by premillennialists.
(Ephesians 1:20-21 – NET) — 20 This power he exercised in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms 21 far above every rule and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.
This verse also eliminates the idea of an earthly millennial kingdom—because the rule of Christ doesn’t stop with a so-called 1000 year reign on earth. If there was such a coming kingdom on earth, why would Paul refer to it as though Christ’s rule didn’t go any further than that? No, Paul has the Eternal Kingdom in mind when he refers to “the one to come.” He’s clearly contrasting the age of this life, to the age to come in eternity (our eternal state).
(Galatians 1:3-4 – NET) — 3 Grace and peace to you from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from this present evil age according to the will of our God and Father,
This passage is the final nail in the coffin, as they say. This completely settles any notion of an earthly and sinful millennial kingdom between the return of Christ and our eternal state.
To be “delivered from this present evil age,” means primarily to be rescued from sin, as Paul refers to in this same verse. That’s what our salvation does for us. That’s why Jesus died, to pay our sin debt. It not only delivers us from the penalty of sin, but from the presence of sin in the next life. This “present evil age,” is characterized by sin. This present age is life in this current world of sin. If this age means anything at all, it’s an age that is associated with sin. That is primary. That means the “age to come” has to refer to an age without sin, which is the “eternal kingdom of the new heaven and new earth, where righteousness dwells,” as the Apostle Peter tells us:
(2 Peter 1:11 – NET) — For thus an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be richly provided for you.
(2 Peter 3:13 – BSB) — But in keeping with God’s promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.
This means there can be no millennial kingdom of this world, because even with Jesus on the throne in such a kingdom, there would still be the presence of sin and sinners.
Notice also that Peter doesn’t say we look forward to a kingdom of this world (where Christ would reign as a political ruler). This is significant, because that’s exactly what the Jews were looking forward to in those days, and are still looking forward to in our day. If Peter still believed in such a kingdom, would he not mention it, considering how important it was in their belief system? But he doesn’t do that. His mind is on the “Eternal Kingdom of the new heaven and new earth where righteousness dwells.”
It should be obvious that Peter was correcting the common belief among the Jews of his day about a coming kingdom of this world, where the Messiah would reign and deliver them, as God did in the glory days that we read about in the OT. The Jews believed there would be a return to the glory days of David, where the Messiah would reign upon his throne. They expected the Messiah to deliver them from the rule of the Roman Empire. But neither Peter nor the writer of Hebrews believed that such a kingdom existed. They both corrected a false belief the Jews had about it. Instead, they were both looking forward to “the city to come:”
(Hebrews 13:14 – NET) — For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come.
(Hebrews 11:10 – NET) — For he was looking forward to the city with firm foundations, whose architect and builder is God.
(Hebrews 11:13-16 – NET) — [13] These all died in faith without receiving the things promised, but they saw them in the distance and welcomed them and acknowledged that they were strangers and foreigners on the earth. [14] For those who speak in such a way make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. [15] In fact, if they had been thinking of the land that they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. [16] But as it is, they aspire to a better land, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.
[also Hebrews 12:26-28]
All these verses in 2 Peter and in the book of Hebrews obliterates the idea of a 1000 year earthly kingdom, which is an age of sin, just like the one we’re in now. An earthly kingdom would just be an extension of this one, except with Jesus as its Ruler. In such a kingdom, while there would certainly be control of crime where there’s peace and order, sin would still be present, and still very active. All these passages leave absolutely no room for such a kingdom. There are only two ages, the one we’re in now, and our eternal state where there is no sin (Rev 21:1-8).
It should be really clear that both Peter and the writer of Hebrews – who were both Jews – were correcting a false notion the Jews had about the coming kingdom. The silence about such a kingdom in Peter’s books and in the book of Hebrews is very telling. These writers add to the same understanding Paul had (which I have written extensively about). All three of these men of God are silent about that type of kingdom, which indicates they no longer believed in it. They were looking forward to “a better land, that is, a heavenly one” (He 11:16).
Yet, premillennialists still believe in such a kingdom! The fact that they share the same similar belief with the Jews (who reject Jesus as their Messiah), should be a red flag all by itself!
Conclusion
This age = life in this world throughout history.
Age to come (“the one to come”) = eternity with Christ.
These are just a few passages of Scripture that reveal only two ages—the one we’re living in now, and our eternal state. In these passages, proponents of Premillennialism must insert a third age in order to support their position. Premillennialism is built, in large part, based on assumptions. We cannot build credible doctrinal positions in such a manner.
What Premillennialism does is that it begins with an OT understanding, and it then brings that forward to interpret the NT. We cannot do that. The NT interprets the OT, because the NT fulfills the OT. We must allow the NT to shine its light upon the OT—not the other way around. Because that results not only in an erroneous understanding regarding the Kingdom of Christ, but also much of the NT overall.
I go into much greater detail about this subject in many other studies that I’ve posted on this website. Do a search in the “Select Category” box and click on “Kingdom of Christ,” and that will bring up numerous studies that reveal the flaws of Premillennialism.
