Subnostr

No, not precisely. I believe the "1000 year reign" is to be read within its apocalyptic context, that it is not literal but "a very long time." I believe it began at the resurrection or perhaps the ascension, that--as Paul said--we're in the "last days" now, and have been since Christ ascended.

Weatherall 2y ago

ok. allow me to play #^%*% advocate...

if the bible says 1000-year reign, yet people interpret that in various ways, for you "a long time", is that violating the "dont change one word" admonition ?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

freeborn | ἐλεύθερος | 8r0gwg 2y ago

We're talking about apocalyptic literature here, which gets interpreted differently than, say, an Epistle. Was Daniel's statue with clay feet literal? No, but it was...true. Will a giant Serpent in corporal form be literally bound (with what?)? Most likely not, but the enemy's power will be somehow restrained. The use of types, figures, analogy, symbolism, and metaphor is heavy in apocalyptic.

So, to answer your question, I don't think I'm adding to or taking away if I'm getting at what the word (in context) is actually meant to communicate.