Some brief thoughts on the reign of Christ and premillennialism

I think there is a difference between Christ’s present reign (his receiving of his Kingdom from the Ancient of Days upon ascent and our sharing in his reign in the here-and-now) and the future renewal of creation (i.e. the full, complete coming of the Kingdom of God). We must differentiate between the two. Christ’s reign is progressive (as in Mark 4:31, the Kingdom of God is compared with a grain of mustard seed, which, when sown on the ground, is the smallest of all the seeds on earth, but progressively grows up and becomes larger than all the garden plants): he ascends to the right hand of God and reigns in the midst of his enemies (Psa 110:1–2; cf. 1Co 15:25–26). The final enemy to be defeated is death, and when death is defeated, God’s Kingdom will be complete and set up on a renewed Earth where enemies no longer exist. I do not see how this view, however, fits in with premillennialism.

Premillennialism, in my opinion, turns Jesus into the revolutionary, Roman-slaying Messiah the first century Jews expected but did not see, rather than the historical Jesus who defeated the forces of evil that work behind earthly enemies, including Rome, establishing a Kingdom on Earth not by physical, military revolution, but by the establishment of a community – a renewed Israel – in the formation of a New Covenant (which itself is a foreshadow of the renewal of creation), by the calling of the Gentiles, and especially the sending of the Spirit, but also in the proclamation of God’s justice and love, the institution of God’s judgment on rebellious Jerusalem through the Romans (something completely unexpected by first century Jews), and finally the defeat of the early church’s most fiercest of enemies, Rome, through its conversion to Christianity (on this point, cf. Andrew Perriman). I think we must either place the 1000-year reign of Revelation in the context of the establishment of a renewed Spirit-filled community, the church, especially in relation to the conversion of Rome to the religion it once persecuted, or admit John’s vision does not correspond with the other texts (which, perhaps, is much easier).