EXCLUSION FROM MILLENNIAL KINGDOM

NOTE: EXCLUSION from the millennial kingdom, we are told by some, will be the penalty imposed on Christians who lapse into immoral practices. And in proof of this we are referred to such passages as 1 Corinthians 6:9,10; Galatians 5:21; Ephesians 5:5; etc. This assumes, however, that “the Kingdom of God” is merely a synonym for the millennial kingdom, an error which is exposed by the very first passage in which the phrase occurs in the Epistles. In Romans 14:17 we read, “The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” This reminds us of the Lord’s words to Nicodemus. The world and its religion is the natural sphere, but the Kingdom of God is spiritual; and none can enter it, none can see it, without a new birth by the Spirit. This is a truth of present and universal application. 1 Corinthians 15:50, which refers to the future, is a still more decisive refutation of the error. There we read that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God”; that is, can have no place or part in it. But, as we all know, “flesh and blood” — men in their natural bodies — will be in the millennial kingdom.

Then again we recall the exhortation of 1 Thessalonians 2:12, “that ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto His kingdom and glory.” This is explained by Thessalonians 1:5, “that ye may be counted worthy of the Kingdom of God” — a reference not to the future state, but to the place and calling of the Christian here and now. It is akin to the exhortations of Ephesians 4:1 (R.V.), “I beseech you to walk worthily of the calling wherewith ye were called.” For it is a present truth, and a fact of practical import, that the Christian has been “translated into the kingdom of the Son of His love” ( Colossians 1:13). As a matter of fact, it is extremely doubtful whether the millennial kingdom is ever referred to in these Epistles of the Apostle Paul.

This scheme of exegesis, moreover, would teach us to acknowledge an “evil liver” as a Christian. But as 2 Timothy 2:19 tells us, the Divine seal has two faces: “The Lord knoweth them that are His” is the Godward side of it; the other, which is to govern our action, is “Let everyone that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.” But, we are told, the “incestuous person” in Corinth was a Christian. The inspired Apostle so decided; but to us it is not given to read the Godward face of the Divine seal, and we are bound to judge others by their profession and conduct. To acknowledge as a Christian any one who is living in open sin is to be false to the Lord. Our responsibility is to act on 1 Corinthians 6:9,10 and similar Scriptures. But if every penitent has a claim upon Christian sympathy, surely one whom we have regarded as a fellow-believer ought to be treated with unbounded patience and pity and Christian love. And let us not forget that there are sins more heinous than immoral acts. Some of the “unfortunates” of the streets may be nearer the kingdom than are men of high repute in the Professing Church, who are patterns of all virtue, but who deny the Deity and stoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ ( Matthew 21:31). The doom of Sodom will be more tolerable than that of devout Capernaum ( Matthew 11:23,24).

What do the writers I am criticizing mean by “reigning with Christ”? Are all the many millions of the elect to sit on separate thrones? The Lord’s words in Matthew 19:28 are clear. And some commentators refer to those words as explaining the first clause of Revelation 20:4. But is it not equally clear that in the latter clause, as in Romans 5:17 and Timothy 2:12, the word is used in the secondary sense of “living royally” with Christ, or (as Grimm gives it) “to denote the supreme dignity, liberty, blessedness, which will be enjoyed by the redeemed “? And thus the word will be fulfilled for all; unless indeed we are to jettison the truth of grace, and make our heavenly calling and its blessings depend on merit. Certain it is that some will have special honors and rewards; but this truth does not conflict with the other.

In this closing section of the Apocalypse there is no element of historic fulfillment. The scheme I am criticizing assumes that “the first resurrection” is that of the “Coming” of Paul’s Epistles: to me it seems certain that it is called “the first,” with reference to the general resurrection of the 5th verse. And the language of verse 4 clearly indicates that it is the victims of the Tribulation who will have part in the first resurrection; for the redeemed of the present dispensation will have already passed to heaven in fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 15:51,52. And it is not a matter of opinion, but of faith based on the Divinely-given words, that at that Coming of Christ none of His people will be left behind — “we shall not all sleep, but we shallALL be changed.”