Eschatology in Scripture — by Keith Petersen

Eschatology in Scripture 

The subject of Eschatology in the Bible—or, end times concerning the world, man and God—has occupied Christians and scholars for many centuries.

Part of the difficulty in arriving at concrete decisions involving this area of theology is that any number of the references in Scripture as to this subject involve literality in some instances, and allegory in many others.  The result is that the entire subject has to be taken up with extreme care.  Even as a general statement, it is important to be reminded that, in taking up a consideration of any area of Scripture, an error in respect to even one particular verse can then lead to a substantial skewing of the truth on that and any related subject as subsequent reasonings can build erroneously upon that initial fault.

We must, also, take into account that there are areas of the Bible which we may not be able, at any particular time, to fully understand—especially when it comes to eschatology.  We see in chapter 12 of the Book of Daniel that he desired to understand more as to the prophecy being revealed to him—"And I heard, but I understood not. And I said, My lord, what shall be the end of these things?”  But, the word to him was, “Go thy way, Daniel; for these words are closed and sealed till the time of the end.”  The Holy Spirit records that the matter was sealed—there was to be no further understanding at that time.  In a similar way, Paul clearly establishes in 1 Corinthians 13:9 that, “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part” and “that which is perfect” is yet to come.  Paul concludes that section by saying even more directly, “For we see now through a dim window obscurely, but then face to face; now I know partially, but then I shall know according as I also have been known” (vs. 12).  So, while we recognize the merit of Ephesians 3:18 to the effect that, “ye may be fully able to apprehend with all the saints what [is] the breadth and length and depth and height”, the Bible also indicates that there might be limitations in fully apprehending certain subjects.

In reference to what is said above as to prophecies given to Daniel, we should mention that the fulfillment of much of what was spoken to him at that time can subsequently be seen.  However, this in itself does not change the principle of certain things being sealed/not-to-be-fully-known at a particular time.  We should also mention, at the other end, as it were, of the spectrum, that at the close of the Revelation it is stated, “Seal not the words of the prophecy of this book. The time is near.”  But, this statement is certainly made due simply to the fact that there is to be no further prophetic foretelling of time and events in Scripture—i.e., we are at the conclusion of the Bible Revelation 22.

A necessary key to taking up any Biblical study, therefore, is to recognize that there can be certain limitations.  Reflexively—and, in a sense, irrespective—the governing principle must always be that we must stop where Scripture stops.  This is to say that it is dangerous to try to extrapolate beyond what is shown in the Bible.  The considerable confusion and error in Christendom today is adequate testimony to the activity of man’s natural mind attempting to insert suppositions and extrapolations into Scriptural doctrine and precepts where they do not belong and do not fit.

Turning, then, to the subject of eschatology, it could reasonably be said that three of the main areas that have been in review over the years are as follows:  (1)  will the Lord actually be on earth during the Millenium; or will He be in the Heavenly Jerusalem (2) will the Church/Assembly be on earth during the Millenium or at any subsequent time and (3) involving a prophecy connected with the Millennium, is the temple shown in Ezekiel going to be a real, Jewish temple on earth at that time with most of the associated sacrifices (including blood sacrifices); or, is the language relating to the temple allegorical.  There are other eschatological issues that have been taken up over the years (the Rapture itself being one such; the literal existence of the Millenium being another; time frames relative to them both, etc.); but, the above should fairly sum up the pertinent questions.

I should add here that I am not—nor, have I ever considered myself to be—in any way a student of eschatology.  However, as Christians we should all have at least an essential understanding of end times, and, I can say that, in investigating, meditating and praying as to this subject I have felt the clear benefit of having further taken up the exercise.  The “outline of sound words” (2 Timothy 1:13) that every Christian should possess should certainly include at least a general understanding of future times.

A great amount could be and has been written in respect to what is set out above; but, let me state the following as to what I see from Scripture, and then I can enlarge upon it a bit:  (1) I do not see anywhere in Scripture that it is actually stated that the Lord (while certainly reigning over the earth) will actually be resident on the earth during or after the Millenium (I do not say that He does not appear on the earth) (2) in like measure the Assembly/Church is not said to actually descend to, and be resident on, the earth at any future time after the Rapture—including the Millennium—and (3) the temple in Ezekiel—if truly built and operable on earth in the future—results in a contradiction to any number of scriptures that not only show that blood sacrifices have ceased as being fulfilled in the Cross of Christ; but, that show that the entire, sacrificial temple system has been superceded by the effective results of the Cross of Christ (see, in particular, Hebrews 8:2,5).

I might step back here and say that while, as noted, I have never in the past spent any substantial time in delving into the subject of eschatology, I also have never had, that I can recall, any thoughts at substantial variance with the statements just made in the prior paragraph.  Furthermore, in examining any number of resources I felt confirmation in reading that some others of greater spiritual stature than myself agree with the generality—or, at least, certain primary points—of what I had already concluded.  Christian viewpoints, of course, are not, by themselves, the final arbiter—they must agree with Scripture.  Nevertheless, the circumstance of two or three agreeing with Scripture is, in itself, an important Scriptural principle and carries weight.  I believe that what I am setting out on the subjects listed above is accurate according to Scripture, and, in one sense, I feel there is nothing much I can say beyond what is stated in the prior paragraph.

However, as there is much that has been said by others, and, as it seems a bit abrupt to stop here, I thought I should say something more on this subject.

When the Assembly/Church is raptured to be with the Lord according to the teaching of 1 Thessalonians 4 it is quite evident that, for those raptured, eternal circumstances will have commenced.  While, certainly, time subsequent to the Rapture will bring out fully all that God will be working out and finalizing in Heaven and on Earth—including the public display of the Church—there will be no further, formative events required in respect of the essential nature of the Church.  We see this clearly set out in Hebrews 12:23-23:  “ye have come to mount Zion; and to [the] city of [the] living God, heavenly Jerusalem; and to myriads of angels, the universal gathering; and to [the] assembly of the firstborn [who are] registered in heaven; and to God, judge of all; and to [the] spirits of just [men] made perfect”.  So, while we see in the vision given to the apostle John in Revelation 19 – 22 that the Church is presented in various aspects such as the Bride of the Lamb, the Wife of the Lamb, the holy, heavenly city Jerusalem above, and the place from which judgments are made by those who sit on the thrones—at the Rapture the character and nature of the Church  is complete—the work of God in having secured and consolidated the Church is finished at the Rapture.  The essence, the nature and the abilities, speaking intelligently, of the Assembly in all its public display subsequent to the Rapture would certainly then be intact as no scripture anywhere suggests or supports any thought that there would be any further learning or growth after the Church is raptured.  Heaven is always looked at in Scripture as the place of accomplished finality for the Church—indeed, it is that reality that should spiritually govern the Christian’s outlook and path presently in this world here—God has “raised [us] up together, and has made [us] sit down together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 2:6)—both, spiritually, a present reality, and, doctrinally, an abiding reality.

It also is clear from Scripture that the display of God’s glory for eternity is seen in and through the heavenly city, holy Jerusalem—incorporating the redeemed of our Christian dispensation as well as the redeemed of a prior dispensation (and, ultimately, the redeemed of other families as seen in Revelation chapter 20:4)—and, most importantly, we see in the heavenly city the presence of God and the Lamb (who is, we know, the Christ).  Revelation 19 shows that the 24 elders are in Heaven, and, in verse 4 it says that God sits upon “the throne” in Heaven.  Isaiah 66:1 corroborates this and adds to it in saying, “Thus saith Jehovah: The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool: what is the house that ye will build unto me? and what is the place of my rest?”  Chapter 22 of Revelation adds further by saying, “And he shewed me a river of water of life, bright as crystal, going out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.  The throne is always clearly shown throughout Scripture—whatever might be the provisional language as to an earthly throne—as a primary feature in Heaven.  This section of Revelation 22 continues by saying, “and the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it [i.e., in the heavenly city]; and his servants shall serve him, and they shall see his face; and his name [is] on their foreheads.”  All is heavenly, and remains heavenly.

When we come to the Millennium, we have what we might refer to as being a potential “wrinkle” in understanding the theology of end times and, in particular, the place of the Church.  In chapter 21 of the Revelation we commence with the eternal state—"And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea exists no more.”  This eternal state characterizes the rest of the chapter.  Millennial circumstances are subsequently brought into view; but, all is based on and presented in the character of this eternal state. 

It is obvious that the Millennium as a point in time actually precedes the new heaven and new earth.  We know this because the new heavens and new earth incorporate indwelling righteousness and full righteousness does not take place until Satan, as shown in Revelation 20, is cast into the Lake of Fire.  This takes place after the 1,000 years (Revelation 20:7,10) of the Millennium.

As a lateral point of some interest, it is of note that Revelation 21 only uses the term “the heaven”—whereas, immediately in Genesis 1 and elsewhere the term regularly used is “the heavens”—plural.  This use of the singular certainly emphasizes God’s final thoughts—i.e. the heaven and the earth—everything brought to fruition and completion.  We can be reminded, as well, of the constancy of language in Scripture—referenced earlier in this book—as to the place of Heaven as distinct from and elevated above the earth:  “For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:9); and Daniel 4 shows full attestation to the place and supremacy of Heaven as above and ruling over the earth.

However, the “wrinkle” as we referred to it above is not a wrinkle at all if we simply, as initially emphasized, stop where Scripture stops.  As Millennial features are brought forward in Revelation 21 we see that the Holy Spirit carefully uses language to set, or, limit, the position, as it were, of the heavenly city in relation to earth.  It is never said to descend to—and, be on—the earth.  The initial language in the chapter is this:  “And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of the heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband” (vs. 2).  From verses 1 through at least 8 we have the eternal state.  The verse just quoted establishes that the eternal state shows the heavenly Jerusalem as being, positionally, an entity discernable/viewable from earth; but, not on the earth.  This is the evident, eternal character of the Church.

When the Holy Spirit moves forward in this chapter in respect to the Millennium, the language remains the same—" And there came one of the seven angels which had had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues, and spoke with me, saying, Come here, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.  And he carried me away in [the] Spirit, [and set me] on a great and high mountain, and shewed me the holy city, Jerusalem, coming down out of the heaven from God, having the glory of God” (vs. 9-11).  There is elevation throughout—the great and high mountain and, again, the display of the city in respect of its heavenly place; yet, nothing to show that it becomes resident at any time on the earth.  We can link this with the apostle Paul’s language in Galatians 4 contrasting “Jerusalem which [is] now, for she is in bondage with her children” with “the Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother.”  The Bible is careful throughout to provide distinctive language between the heavenly and the earthly Jerusalem.

Turning to the place of the Lord both for eternity and during the Millennium, we have to, again, compare Scripture carefully so as to not make a mistake.  For example, when we look at Exodus 25:8 we see this:  “And they shall make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them.”  This involves both literal and, also, figurative language.  Solomon could reiterate Isaiah 66 in saying, “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, the heavens, and the heaven of heavens, cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built!” (1 Kings 8:27).  This is an abiding statement and is suggestive of the eternal Nature of God as being outside the limits of Creation.  However, we do see that, both at the completion of the tabernacle under Moses and also of the house under Solomon that “the house of Jehovah, was filled with a cloud, and the priests could not stand to do their service because of the cloud; for the glory of Jehovah had filled the house of God” (2 Chronicles 5:13,14).  This involves a Divine presence and we must recognize this; but, we also have to recognize that it would be going beyond Scripture to say that a Person of the Godhead took up actual, persistent residence in either the tabernacle or temple system. 

We have to be conscious, then, of the relationship in the Bible of the abstract side to the practical side.  For example, the Lord’s words to the Christian Church are “Yet a little while I am with you, and I go to him that has sent me” (John 7:33) and, also, “And behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age” (Matthew 28:20).  Is the Lord present on earth at this time?  No, the first half of John 7:33 shows that He goes to the Father in Heaven.  He is in Heaven and the Holy Spirit is here.  How then can He be “with us” until the end of the dispensation as shown in Matthew 28:20?  He is indeed with us—He said that; but, we must recognize thatthere is a certain abstraction in this.  The Lord says in John 14:23, “If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him.”  This refers to an earthly setting, and, involves the abstract side.  In other instances—such as Exodus 33:11—we are told that “Jehovah spoke with Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend”—we can only take this as literal, and, of course, the Lord was here literally during His time on earth during our Christian dispensation.

So, in looking at the language here—the Holy Spirit appears careful to not say that the Lord Himself entered and sat, reverently speaking, in the earthly temple.  We see everywhere that His seated place and position invariably is shown as inherent to the heavenly realm—see also, for example, Ezekiel 1:26 and Hebrews 8:1,2 where it is said—" Now a summary of the things of which we are speaking [is], We have such a one high priest who has sat down on [the] right hand of the throne of the greatness in the heavens; minister of the holy places and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord has pitched, [and] not man.”

As regarding the earthly setting, we can look at other scriptures such as what is contained in Ezekiel 37—especially the last three verses:  “And I will make a covenant of peace with them: it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for ever.  And my tabernacle shall be over them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And the nations shall know that I Jehovah do hallow Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for ever.”  However, again, we have to be careful in attempting to state that the Lord will actually be physically resident in the temple.  In Ezekiel 43:7 we have even more pronounced language as to the earthly side—" And he said unto me, Son of man, [this is] the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever; and the house of Israel shall no more defile my holy name, they nor their kings, with their fornication, and with the carcases of their kings [in] their high places.”  Again, however, we see that the language stops at it being only named as the place of the throne, and what we have been saying as to the heavenly side is buttressed by the further statement as to the soles of his feet (i.e., a lower position).  To attempt to place the Lord only here would be a contradiction to the entire close of the Revelation where the Lord and God are seen eternally in the Heavenly Jerusalem.

We can get additional help on this if we look at two brief sections in Exodus.  In chapter 13:21 the Holy Spirit records the following as to the presence of the Lord in leading the children of Israel out from Egypt and, subsequently, through the wilderness:  “And Jehovah went before their face by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them [in] the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; so that they could go day and night”.  In the next chapter—Exodus 14:19—we have this said, “And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before them, and stood behind them”.  Which is it?  Both.  The Lord’s presence is seen in and through His Angel.

We see the same type of language in Genesis 32 where Jacob wrestled with God, and this circumstance is subsequently shown in some contrast in Hosea 12:3-4.  In Genesis 32 we have, “And he said, Thy name shall not henceforth be called Jacob, but Israel; for thou hast wrestled with God, and with men, and hast prevailed.  And Jacob asked and said, Tell [me], I pray thee, thy name. And he said, How is it that thou askest after my name? And he blessed him there.  And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel—For I have seen God face to face, and my life has been preserved.”  In Hosea 12 we see language a bit varied on this circumstance—“He took his brother by the heel in the womb, and in his strength he wrestled with God.  Yea, he wrestled with the Angel, and prevailed”.  Again—which is it?  Did Jacob wrestle with God?  Or, was it the Angel?  Both are true—the Lord is represented in and through His Angel.  When it comes to the Divine Presence we have to carefully balance the abstract with the practical.  For example, in 1 Corinthians 15:28 the Holy Spirit records that, in a final day, God will be “all in all.”  Does that mean that He will, in some metaphysical way as Hinduism regards God, be actually present in rocks and birds and dirt and other elements of brute Creation?  Obviously not.

Ultimately, the key Scripture in respect of any question in eschatology involving the abiding presence of the Lord—whether during the Millennium or in the eternal state—is seen in what has been quoted as to Revelation 21:22:  “And I saw no temple in it [i.e., the heavenly Jerusalem]; for the Lord God Almighty is its temple, and the Lamb.”  God and the Lamb are in it—an abiding reality.  It could be conjectured that the Lord is God—and, that He can be in two places at once.  However, we would now be entering a realm as to which we cautioned against at the beginning of this paper—i.e., that of supposition and conjecture—we can only go as far as is shown in Scripture.

I am not here entering into any discussion as to what degree the general conditions shown on earth during the Millennium will be seen in the eternal day; however, it is evident both from the juxtaposition of the eternal state as seen in the beginning of Revelation 21 with the Millennial aspects which follow in that chapter, and, also, with the similarity of language as to peace and rule, that the Holy Spirit intends that we recognize a link.  During the Millennium, a sinner will die at a hundred years—in the eternal state, of course, there will be no active sin as all that would hinder God’s final thoughts will be confined to the Lake of Fire (Revelation 21:8).  However, we should be able to say with considerable certainty that the broad character of Millennial conditions, speaking generally, will merge into the eternal state—especially considering the institution of peace and rule.

In concluding as to the question of the Millennium as taken up in this paper, we should, as it has been mentioned elsewhere in conversation, allude to Zechariah chapters 12 through 14.  This entire section of Zechariah presents the Lord in movement to secure and deliver Jerusalem to Himself and from her enemies.  In this way, there is an integration of language with Revelation 19 and 20, and, also, a link with Isaiah 66 and Micah 4—ultimately pointing towards the eternal day.  In Zechariah 14:4 the Lord is seen standing upon the Mount of Olives which is shown to cleave such that half goes to the north and half to the south, and Jerusalem will be delivered.  The presence of the Lord at that moment is linked to the deliverance of Jerusalem—i.e., we cannot say that it shows anything other than his providential movements to deliver His earthly people and the beloved, earthly city. 

Finally, in this section in Zechariah, “And it shall come to pass in that day [that] living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the eastern sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.”  This agrees with Ezekiel 47 and Joel 3:18, and we see, in generally similar language, the water preceding from the Garden of Eden in Genesis, the water from the side of the altar in Ezekiel, and the “river of water of life” at the conclusion of the Bible in Revelation 22.  Some of this language carries undoubted allegorical overtones; however, in at least Genesis 2, the language is clearly literal.  Is this language as to the living water in Zechariah entirely allegorical—i.e., will there be a river, at all?  Difficult to say.

Now, coming to the temple in Ezekiel 40 – 47 we find an immensely detailed depiction of a new temple.  The question is whether the Lord in the Millennium actually takes up an earthly position, and, as a lateral consideration, is the temple an actual temple here on earth.  So, we need to touch upon this prophecy.

This temple is shown to be considerably larger than the original temple described in 1 Kings 5 – 6 under the hand of King Solomon, and it is shown to be outside of Jerusalem—both facts raising at least some questions in themselves as to the literality of this temple.  We find in chapter 48, as an aside, the borders for the tribes of Israel.  The original allotments for the tribes of Israel as shown in the Book of Joshua are considerably uneven—a testimony to the borders being both literal for Israel at that time and also representative in the type of the nature of our sojourn on earth as, through our own failure, not exactly meeting the thoughts of God as to Christianity being morally a system of straight lines (see 2 Timothy 2:15).  When we come to Ezekiel 48 the borders are straight and parallel—an evidence of God’s thoughts in reference to what has just been indicated above; but, perhaps, then, raising the question as to this placement being figurative.

This entire section in Ezekiel is so very detailed regarding the layout of the temple that even Biblical scholars have evidently felt it to be very stiff reading.  Almost all of the sacrifices seen in the original tabernacle system are included—incorporating the blood sacrifices, as well.  This, as stated at the beginning of this paper, raises a particular problem as Hebrews 9 shows distinctly that, through the Cross, there has been “found an eternal redemption” (vs. 12).  This is followed by “For if the blood of goats and bulls, and a heifer's ashes sprinkling the defiled, sanctifies for the purity of the flesh, how much rather shall the blood of the Christ, who by the eternal Spirit offered himself spotless to God, purify your conscience from dead works to worship [the] living God?”  Just a few verses prior to that we are told, “both gifts and sacrifices, unable to perfect as to conscience him that worshipped, are offered, [consisting] only of meats and drinks and divers washings, ordinances of flesh, imposed until [the] time of setting things right” (vs. 10).

It might be argued that, in a time such as the Millennium or beyond, in the full and proper knowledge of Christ, an earthly Israel could, perhaps, with a perfected conscience through God’s work and the presence of the Holy Spirit, “properly” offer sacrifices as essentially being a genuine, heartfelt offering as a reminder of the efficacy and known result of Christ’s work on the Cross.  Some seem to think this line of conjecture to be an appropriate understanding of the Ezekiel temple.  This, however, we think can likely be regarded as a somewhat dubious alternative.

The issue still remains that Hebrew 9 says:  “But now once in the consummation of the ages he has been manifested for [the] putting away of sin by his sacrifice” (vs. 26).  This shows finality.  It certainly appears difficult if not impossible to get around this scripture and to suggest that an earthly, sacrificial, temple system is to be reintroduced.  We also have additional language, such as, “[It was] necessary then that the figurative representations of the things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with sacrifices better than these” (vs. 23) and then, following, “Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many” (vs. 28).  We see again that the heavenly side carries the preeminence in God’s mind as seen in verse 23, and verse 26 shows that the final sacrifice in God’s mind is that of the Cross. 

The abiding question, then, is that, if the Lord put away sin by His sacrifice once and for all—what would be the purpose of reinstituting again an earthly sacrificial system?  It appears to be a total contradiction to the redemptive work fully accomplished and finalized in the Cross of Christ.

If it is true that the Ezekiel temple is only figurative and allegorical—the next question must be:  Why would God have gone to such lengths, reverently speaking, in the Book of Ezekiel to, first, even speak of a new temple and, second, once having spoken of it to enlarge upon it in such considerable detail?  My best answer to this is that in the pattern of the Ezekiel temple God would be forcing Israel to squarely look at their iniquities and departure—iniquities shown to have been in complete abrogation of all the instruction and moral features that had been so fully delineated in the original tabernacle system.  Ezekiel 43:10-11 appears to show this:  “Thou, son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be confounded at their iniquities; and let them measure the pattern.  And if they be confounded at all that they have done, make known to them the form of the house, and its fashion, and its goings out, and its comings in, and all its forms, and all its statutes, yea, all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof; and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the statutes thereof, and do them.”

It is of interest that the measurements as to the Ezekiel temple are done by a man with a flax cord and a reed.  This is earthly language—when the measurements are shown as to the heavenly Jerusalem the measurements are done with a golden reed as suiting the Divine character of the Heavenly city.  Also, the language as to the temple in Ezekiel—while embodying certain spiritual overtones—is largely, if we can phrase it this way, mechanical.  The question of worship, per se, is really only properly addressed in a few verses at the beginning of chapter 46—which is, then, towards the close of the section.  Relative to this, an aspect to be highlighted is that there is a glaring absence of any detail as to the rich, typical features of both the tabernacle under Moses and, especially, the house of God under Solomon in which the blue, the twined byssus, the considerable carvings, the incense, the silver and, especially, the use of gold (particularly in the house under Solomon in which the entire house of God was overlaid within and without with gold—see 1 Kings 6:21,22) figure prominently.  Can it be said, then, that the much detail of most of this section in Ezekiel regarding the temple is, as indicated in the paragraph above, meant by God to reiterate to, and reinforce in, the minds and hearts of the Israelites in a coming day how greatly they strayed from the particulars of the relationship instituted by God with them—especially according to the requirements of the original sacrificial system of the tabernacle and the temple?

We could go on at some length as to the question of the Ezekiel temple being literal or allegorical; but, in the end result, there is a question whether we can, with 100% certainty, arrive at a conclusion either way.  No earthly temple, of course, could belong to the eternal state as, at that point, no temple is mentioned anywhere at all (Revelation 21:22).  Of further interest is that, in the earthly setting prior to the eternal state, Zechariah 14:17 shows that the nations bring gifts, offerings and their glory to Jerusalem (i.e., in Zechariah 14 the focus is on Jerusalem and not the temple)—and the Bible establishes in Revelation 21 and 22 that it is in respect of the heavenly Jerusalem that we see the final, eternal side of such worship and gift giving.  The temple is no longer in existence in Revelation 21:22 because in the eternal day God will have come out fully and directly in the Heavenly Jerusalem both in the display of His glory and His availability to men.

In summation, I see from Scripture that the Heavenly Jerusalem/Church/Bride descends from Heaven but is not said to arrive/abide on the earth during the Millennium or subsequent to it, and, similarly, the Lord is not in some way during the Millennium or subsequent to it leaving the Heavenly Jerusalem to take up residence, per se, on the earth—He is viewed as in and, speaking reverently, inherent to, the Heavenly Jerusalem.  1 Thessalonians 4:17 anchors the place of the Lord and the Church together—it says that we shall, at the Rapture, "meet the Lord in [the] air; and thus we shall be always with [the] Lord.”  This, of course, doesn’t limit His sovereignty in respect of His movements in His universe; but, we must note that the Holy Spirit never uses words casually in Scripture.

In closing I might add that my exercise in looking more closely at the part and place of the Church and the Lord Himself during and after the Millennium was essentially triggered by a comment made by a well-known Christian pastor from California who made a statement to the effect that the Lord and the Church would be reigning/ruling (together) on earth during the Millennium.  This caught my attention at the time, and, then, a subsequent conversation with another brother on the same subject led me to examine further what should be the best understanding as to Scripture’s position on the issue.

Of course, as a further statement, neither understandings nor  misunderstandings on the above subject matter do not, by themselves, determine—or, impact one way or another—a Christian’s salvation[1]; however, as stated at the beginning of this Addendum, it is well to have as broad an understanding as possible of all Scriptural teaching—including that of end times.  As a result of—particularly in this case—a further understanding of our Heavenly calling we should expect a further distinction to our Christian path.  I can, also, say that, in taking up the great subjects as discussed in this paper, I have very much felt my own smallness in venturing into eternal realities—and, I have looked to the Lord to help me to approach these matters only to the limit in which they are approached in Scripture.  Volumes have been written on the subject matter of eschatology—I have tried to limit this paper to a more condensed length.  I submit all the above, therefore, to the saints for their own prayerful consideration.

Last, I can strongly recommend a reading with Mr. James Taylor, Sr. on this subject of the Millennium.  It is available online at the following URL:  http://www.mcclean.me.uk/mse/jt/jt78.htm and is titled “Readings on Daniel (4)” (scroll down to page 269).  As seen in the link above, in the printed ministry it is in ministry of JT, Sr. volume 78 N.S. under the above title.

[1] There is no detriment to a truly redeemed Christian’s salvation if such lacks a full understanding of all that the Bible teaches as to eternity; unless, of course, such a person(s) were to hold teaching that is subversive or heretical to foundational Christian truths.