The Narrow Path Ministries

Do millenialists see these verses as pertaining to a 1,000 yr. kingdom?
What do ammillenialists do with these verses?
Is this the new heaven and earth?

[/u]

GOD BLESS,

Bud

Thank you Michael for your reply,
I wish I had more computer time when posting questions and replies.
I guess what all I'm leading up to with this topic is if these passasges refer to a present church age then how is Isaiah 65:20 interpreted, considering that infants still die at very early ages within the church as well as without, and I'm not having any experience hearing one hundred
year olds being referred to as being youthful when they die?
I too have been reviewing everything I thought I knew regarding eschatology. I look forward to the day I am able to read Revelation Four Views.
You have been generous Michael,
God Bless You and Yours',
Bud

Bud,
Thanks for getting back on this! Some great questions for sure, especially regarding your observation: [that infants still die at very early ages within the church as well as without, and I'm not having any experience hearing one hundred year olds being referred to as being youthful when they die?]

I think Steve Gregg does touch on these scriptures & issues in one of his studies through those chapters, but to be honest, I would need to look it up, and then only if it's available to download via MP3 recordings. Perhaps Steve will get by here before too long with his "short" answer, and then maybe refer us to another resource (tapes or book) that would cover it in more detail, if available.

Meantime, I don't plan on living much past a 100 anyway, unless the Lord raptures me and gives me that brand new resurected body!
I'm too young to be an infant again, so I really don't have much choice!!

Thanks again for your input & helping keep this fellowship good & lively!
I do praise the LORD for this place!
Michael

I apologize for not jumping in here sooner. As you may know, I am trying to have input all over this forum, and there have been many topics and questions coming all the time. In addition, I have been moving and traveling most of the last several weeks.

One other reason that I have not said much is because I am perplexed myself about Isaiah 65:20—always have been. However difficult a few verses may be, the general time frame of at least Isaiah 11 can be determined beyond serious doubt. Isaiah 65 has some parallel verses to chapter 11 (i.e., 11:6-9 and 65:25), but is more problematic in its interpretation.

I believe that Isaiah 11 is typical of the many "kingdom passages" in Isaiah and in all the prophets. It has the standard features that many of these passages have: 1) the advent of the Messiah (v.1, 10); 2) an era of justice (v.4), peace and security (vv.6-9); the gathering of the Jewish remnant (vv.11-12); and victory of the people of God over their foes (v.14).

Two approaches have historically been taken by Christians to this genre of prophetic passages. The premillennialists understand them to be describing a millennial kingdom in the future that will be inaugurated by the second coming of Christ. The amillennialists apply all such passages to the present (CHURCH) age, inaugurated by the first coming of Christ.

Both camps agree that the age in question is the result of the coming of Christ, but one camp sees it as the second coming and the other as the first coming. The first camp generally bases its conclusions on a more literal interpretation of the wording of the passages. The second camp sees much of the wording as being poetic, or non-literal, and tends to apply a spiritualizing hermeneutic. Which is correct?

Speaking only for myself, I believe that I should interpret such passages as did the apostles and authors of the New Testament. I have reason to believe that these men were inspired in their understanding, and should therefore be followed.

It is clear that the New Testament writers applied these passages as do the amillennialists. In particular, Paul believed that Isaiah 11 was about the church age. He reveals this by quoting verse 10 in Romans 15:12. The "banner" raised up by God to which the Gentiles come is Christ, and this coming of the Gentiles to Him is in this present age. This is, at least, how Paul understood it.

The first phrase of verse 2 is echoed in Isaiah 61:1, which Jesus quoted as fulfilled in His first coming (Luke 4:18-21).

The gathering of God's people "a second time" (v.11—the "first time" was when God gathered them out of Egypt—v.16) is the common image of the second exodus (v.15), a concept so frequently applied to the present salvation of Christians (e.g., Luke 9:31 [Gr]; 1 Cor.5:7; 10:1-6).

Also, the common Isaianic image of a highway (v.16), is clearly applied to the first coming of Christ by all four Gospels when they quote similar words from Isaiah 40:3-5 (Matt.3:3/ Mark 1:3/ Luke 3:4-8/ John 1:23).

Many would have a problem applying the words of Isaiah 11:6-9 to the present age. The idea of "the lion lying down with the lamb" (taken from, but not exactly stated in this passage) has long been cherished as a literal description of the transformation of animal nature in the millennium. However, this very passage has much in it that seems to be echoed in New Testament passages about the present age (especially, compare vv.8-9 with Jesus' comment in Luke 10:19).

Throughout the prophets, Israel is likened to a flock of sheep (e.g., Ps.77:20; 78:52; 80:1/ Jer.13:17; 23:2-3/ Ezek.34:8, 12) or other domesticated livestock (e.g., Hosea 4:16; 10:11/Mal.4:2), whereas the Gentile nations are like ravenous predators, such as lions, bears, leopards and wolves (e.g., Isa.56:9/ Jer.4:7; 5:6/ Ezekiel 34:25, 28/ Dan.7:3-7/ Hosea 134:5-8/ Amos 3:12). It would appear that Isaiah 11:6-9 (as well as 65:25) is using the same imagery to predict the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles in Christ (Eph.2:11-16).

Just as the exodus of verses 15-16 is spiritual, so are the defeated enemies of God's people—characterized as "Philistines," "Edom," "Moab," and "Ammon" (v.14). These nations are now extinct, removing any possibility of a future, literal fulfillment.

So much for chapter 11.

Isaiah 65 is more difficult. The chapter opens with a verse that Paul applies to the present salvation of Gentiles in the church (Romans 10:20), suggesting that, again, in this chapter, we are looking at a poetic description of the present age. Verse 17, however, introduces a "new heaven and a new earth." This may refer to the literal new creation (not millennium) that will be established at the second coming (2 Pet.3:10-13/ Rom.8:19-22), or it may be another way of speaking about the present day of salvation (e.g., compare Isaiah 65:17 with 2 Cor.5:17). The repetition of the "wolf and the lamb" motif (v.25), which I showed to be about the present age in Isaiah 11:6-9, may also point to this identification.

I personally believe in a literal new heaven and new earth to be created at the second coming, but I also believe that the "powers of the world to come" have already been "tasted" by the believer in the present age (Heb.6:5). Thus, the realities to be physically established in the end of this world have already come into being as spiritual realities to the believer in Christ. Isaiah could have either or both of these fulfillments in view in chapter 65.

Isaiah 65:20 is most difficult. It speaks of a child dying at 100-years-old. If this is the literal new heaven and new earth, death will not occur to infants or anyone else, at any age (Rev.21:4). If it is talking about the present age, it cannot be literal, since a person dying at 100-years-old is not "a child."

I take this verse as a poetic picture of eternal life in the new creation. By any interpretation, it speaks of LONG life! I think eternal life is what is here in view. The prediction is:

"No more shall an infant from there live but a few days" (i.e., no more premature deaths);

"Nor an old man who has not fulfilled his days" (another way of saying there will no longer be any premature death);

"For a child shall die one hundred years old" (that is, were a person to die after only a century in this place, he would be accounted a mere child—not that anyone really WILL die there);

"But the sinner being one hundred years old shall be accursed" (the sinner, who will not be in this new world, will, after the same hundred years, be no better off than before, since he will be experiencing eternal judgment).

I realize that this is not the easiest application of the words to swallow, but, given the impossibility of other explanations, I think we are left with some such interpretation as this.

Isaiah 65:19 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people; and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.
20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man, that hath not filled his days; for the youngest shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner being a hundred years old shall be accursed.

As I see this, no longer will the old with their wisdom of age and experience be accepted as the priviledged which comes from age but the youngest shall be considered equal in wisdom.