Let's crank that down.
Y'all don't want to hear me screaming.
So David asked for the slides from last week so that everybody could have a handout to
take home.
I've printed those slides all for you.
If you're a couple, go ahead and just take one for now because I don't know if I printed
off enough.
We're going to find out very shortly.
But this is the handout from last week.
I also have one for this week that I will get to you as well.
They are not marked in any way.
So he's handing out one that has a date of the 25th.
That is from last week.
This has a date of the 26th.
This is for tonight.
I'm going to help pass these out and then we're going to recap what we're doing.
Oh, thanks, Dave.
Appreciate that, brother.
Okay, while these guys are faithfully passing out these documents, let's all do a recap.
We're not going to go back over everything I said last week because I said a lot last
week, so we're not going to do that.
But just to reorient ourselves to what we're doing, we read Revelation chapter 20 and we
said that basically there are four views of eschatology.
Everybody remember this?
There were four views of eschatology, dispensationalism, historic, premillennialism, all-millennialism,
and post-millennialism.
And so what we said we're going to do is we are going to go through each one of the four
views and here's what I'm doing.
Everybody pay attention because this is the most important part.
Here's what I'm doing.
I am making the best case possible for each view.
Everybody understand that?
Those are the guidelines.
So I'm not teaching this from my perspective or what I personally believe because I can't
hold to all four views.
That would be contradictory.
But what I'm doing is I am presenting what that view holds and I'm trying to make the
best case for that view so that anyone who holds that view would say, yes, I agree with
what he said.
Everybody clear on that?
So this is not Alex's opinion or what I believe.
This is what if you were part of this belief system, you believe.
And let's just remind ourselves.
Hey, Mazzone, can you do me a favor and go to the next slide, please?
Let's just remember I included this in both handouts.
If we can move the slide.
So this is our timeline and I provided this for you last week.
And we did this to show you what eschatology has looked like throughout church history.
And we said that at some point in church history, each one of the four views has been the majority
view for the church.
So eschatology has not been static throughout church history.
In the first through third century, it was historic premillennialism.
Fourth through 17th centuries was amillennialism.
18th through 19th was post-millennialism.
And then 20th to 21st century was dispensationalism.
That's how the church has viewed eschatology throughout church history.
So last week we covered dispensationalism.
And you might be saying, well, pastor, there's all sorts of things you didn't talk about
with dispensationalism.
That's true because dispensationalism is an entire system that we don't have time to
go through every little detail.
We're talking mostly about these things as they relate to Revelation chapter 20 and how
they understand that chapter.
Is that clear?
So there are more things that go into these systems, but we're talking about them as they
relate to Revelation chapter 20.
So tonight we're going to be discussing historic premillennialism.
And this will be on your slides.
It'll also be on the screen if you want to look there.
Historic premillennialism, the name historic is intended to distinguish itself from dispensationalism.
So they are both premillennial views.
What does that mean?
Everybody remember?
What does premillennial mean?
Yeah, Jesus comes back before the millennium happens.
So both dispensationalism and historic premillennialism believe that Jesus is going to return before
the millennium starts.
And historic premillennialists add that word in there to differentiate themselves from
dispensationalists.
Because as we said last week, dispensationalism didn't become popular until the 1900s, early
1900s, and historic premillennialism was the first view of eschatology in church history.
Now they both have a couple of things in common since they are both premillennial views of
eschatology.
Next slide, please, Mazzone.
Both of these teach that there will be two separate bodily resurrections.
Now remember dispensationalists, depending on your flavor, they either believe in two
or three bodily resurrections, but in general they believe in at least two, sometimes three.
Historic premillennialists believe in two resurrections.
There will be the resurrection of Christians or all those who are faithful to God, and
then there will be the resurrection of unbelievers.
They both teach the reality of a tribulation before the return of Christ.
So both of them believe there is going to be a time of tribulation before Jesus returns.
Next slide, please, Mazzone.
So in basic, these are the points they agree on.
Jesus is going to return, Satan will be bound for a thousand years, Christians will be resurrected,
and believers will reign with Christ for one thousand years.
Next slide, please.
At the end of the thousand years, Satan will be set free, and he will stage a rebellion,
and then Jesus will defeat that rebellion, raise the dead, and escort all to the judgment
throne of God.
Next slide.
There are some differences, though.
Historic premillennialists, they believe that the church will be present during the time
of tribulation as opposed to dispensationalists.
So dispensationalists, if you remember, they believe that there's going to be a rapture
before the tribulation, and the church is taken out.
You all remember that?
Historic premillennialists, the main difference is they believe the church will be present
through the time of tribulation, and then Jesus will return.
And they base this on a number of passages.
So I want to give you their defense of why they believe that.
Next slide.
Oh, no, you're good there.
Sorry, my bad.
So they often reference Revelation 1-9, where John is writing to the church in Revelation.
You remember in the book of Revelation early on, and he says that he is writing at the
time of a tribulation.
He says that he is their brother in the tribulation.
They also reference John 16-33, where Jesus warns that his followers will experience tribulation.
Next slide.
Another reference used to support their view is Acts 14-22, which says, through many tribulations,
we must enter the kingdom of God.
And one of the main arguments that I have found that they make comes from Matthew 24
verses 21-22, which says, for then there will be great tribulation.
So remember, this is Jesus in Matthew 24, Olivet discourse.
He is talking about the end times and what they will be like.
And he says, then there will be a great tribulation, such has not been from the beginning of the
world until now, no and never will be.
And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved.
It continues, but for the sake of the elect, those days will be cut short.
And so their argument is, Jesus cuts short the time of tribulation for the sake of the
elect.
Therefore the elect must be present during the time of tribulation.
So whether you agree with that or not, do you follow their logic there?
Does that make sense to you?
That's why they believe that.
So if the elect are there and Jesus cuts those days short for their sake, it means they must
be present during that time.
Next slide.
Historic premillennialists also base their understanding of the post-tribulation rapture
on various teachings from Scripture.
They claim that Scriptures that do speak of the return of Christ always speak of His return
after being the time of great tribulation.
Now I've included some references, I don't have time to read through all of those, but
you can go and read those for yourselves.
These are some of the passages that they quote to defend that view.
But they have a very particular view of the rapture.
So here's what we need to state, first of all, which is not in your notes, you can write
this down.
Every single one of the eschatological positions holds to a view of the rapture.
So I know this kind of gets thrown out there sometimes where they'll say, oh, so and so
doesn't believe in the rapture.
You might have individual Christians who have such a nuanced view that that's true of them.
But in general, every single one of the four positions believes in a rapture, but they do
not agree on what that actually means.
So thinking back to dispensationalism, their understanding of the rapture is that Christians
are going to disappear.
They will vanish from the face of the earth.
Jesus will descend halfway to earth.
He'll stop in the clouds.
He calls the church up to meet him in the clouds, and then he escorts them back to heaven
for the duration of the tribulation.
That is the dispensational understanding of the rapture.
Well, when it comes to historic premillennialists, they do not believe in a secret invisible
rapture where believers meet Jesus in the sky and escort him back to heaven, but they
believe it refers to Jesus raising the dead to reign with him on earth.
Now this view of the rapture is in essence the same as the other eschatological positions.
So there will be some nuance that we go over with each one, but pretty much from here on
out starting with historic premillennialism, going to all millennialism, and then post-millennialism,
they all believe that pretty much the rapture refers to Jesus resurrecting believers, and
they have a couple different views of what that is.
Now this is coming from 1 Thessalonians chapter 4 verse 17, which says, then we who are alive,
who are left, will be called up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the
air, and so we will always be with him, or with the Lord.
Now you read that and it sounds a lot like the dispensationalist view.
So the question is how do the other eschatological views get to a different understanding of
the rapture?
Well, the two important phrases that are found in those verses are the phrase, coming of
the Lord and meet the Lord.
A couple of Greek words for you here, coming of the Lord is the Greek word, Perusia, and
meet the Lord in Greek is Ampentesis.
Now the reason I'm including that is because they base their view on their understanding
of how these words were used in the ancient context.
So there's a great quote here from F.F.
Bruce, who explained this, and he said, when a dignitary paid an official visit, this is
Perusia, that's what the word means, an official visit, to a city in Hellenistic times, the
action of the leading citizens in going out to meet him and escort him back on the final
stage of his journey was called the Ampentesis.
Now that's where they get this view from.
So their understanding of the rapture based on how these two words were used in the ancient
world is that what's going to happen is Jesus is going to call believers to meet him in the
sky, whether they are living or whether they are dead, he is going to call all believers
to meet him in the sky at his coming.
So there's the Perusia, and then the Ampentesis would be, and then believers are going to
escort Jesus on his final voyage back to earth.
So rather than him descending halfway and returning to heaven, he calls the church to
meet him in the clouds, and the church will serve as an escort on his final voyage back
to earth where the world will, believers will welcome him, the world will reject him, but
they will escort him back to his kingdom.
Did you have a question?
No, okay, sorry, I thought I saw a hand.
So that's where they get this view from, and that's their understanding of it, because
this is how these Greek words were used in their context, and so if John is writing to
a Greek audience who was familiar with these words, they would have been familiar with
the concepts behind them as well.
They also reject the idea of a secret rapture due to passages like Revelation 1-7, where
it says, behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him.
Now we won't do this at every point, but dispensationalists do not disagree with this
verse, they just believe that it refers to Jesus returning after the tribulation.
So they would say, yes, absolutely, everybody will see Jesus, but it will be after the tribulation.
All the other eschatological views say that Jesus is just going to return once, and when
he returns once, every eye will behold him.
1 Thessalonians 4-16, for the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command
with the voice of an archangel.
And so they say, how can it be a secret rapture that no one really knows what's going on
when the Bible says every eye will see him, and he's going to issue forth this very loud
command like the voice of an archangel, so everybody will hear him as well.
The other really important distinction between historic premillennialism and dispensational
premillennialism is that historic premillennialists reject the dispensationalist's hard distinction
between Israel and the church.
If you remember last week, we said one of the key hallmarks of dispensationalism is they
believe that Israel is God's national people, and the church is God's spiritual people,
and though God is only going to save those who trust in Christ, they draw a hard line
between Israel and the church.
Historic premillennialists do away with that hard distinction.
Instead, they say that all of God's promises to Israel are fulfilled in Jesus, and then
they are given to all believers, whether Jew or Gentiles, through faith in Jesus.
And they would base this on a number of passages.
For instance, Galatians 3.16, it says, now the promises were made to Abraham and to his
offspring.
It does not say, into all springs, referring to many, but referring to one, into your offspring,
who is Christ.
Also Galatians 3.22, which says, but the scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the
promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.
And then Romans 2.28-29, for no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision
outward and physical, but a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart,
by the spirit, not by the letter.
And then Romans 9.6-8, for not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and
not all are children of Abraham, because they are his offspring.
It is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the
promise are counted as offspring.
So it's important to understand with this as well, that historic premillennialists do
not believe that the church has replaced Israel.
There's a certain theology today that is pretty dangerous, which is called replacement theology.
I was talking about this with someone the other night.
And replacement theology basically says, Israel doesn't matter at all.
The church has completely replaced Israel, as if God just kind of shuns Israel and looks
away from them, has nothing to do with them, and just focuses on the church.
That would be taking this too far.
And actually, there are really two extremes that you can go through.
I've met people on both extremes.
I've got friends on both extremes.
One extreme is to say, Israel is the people of God, therefore, every single Jew is going
to be saved.
I've met people who believe this.
They're the people of God.
God will not allow his people to perish.
Therefore all of Israel will be saved.
That's one extreme that we can say is unbiblical, right?
Yes, we all agree.
Okay, I can defend that if you need me to defend that.
But the other extreme is to say, well, God doesn't care anything about Israel anymore.
He only cares about the church, and that's also unbiblical.
We see that as well, right?
So the happy medium is to look at all of the scriptures and really, I think, pay attention
to Romans chapter 11.
This is not in your notes.
This is for free.
But Romans chapter 11 makes this very important distinction and this very important clarification
because Paul is addressing this very issue because the Roman church was comprised of Jews
and Gentiles, and the Jewish people said, you should just be thankful you get to be part
of this church.
And the Gentiles said, well, y'all failed.
God loves us.
And Paul was writing to say, here's how you can exist as one people of God.
He also does this in Ephesians, Ephesians chapter 2, where he says there's no longer
two people, but there is one person in Christ.
There's no longer Jew or Gentile, but there is one in Christ.
And in Romans chapter 11, Paul addresses this issue and he says, hold on a second.
Yes, God had this vine and the vine was called Israel.
But what happened?
Israel was disobedient.
And so some of the natural branches fell off.
Y'all remember this from Romans chapter 11?
Some of the natural branches fell off because of their unbelief.
And then right next to this beautiful vine, Israel, was this wild olive shoot.
That's us.
Unless you're ethnically Jewish, in which case, good for you.
But most of us in here are going to fall into that wild olive shoot, right?
And the Bible does not say, so because the vine failed, God loved the olive shoot.
And the Bible also does not say God turned away from the olive shoot just to tend to
this vine.
What does it say?
It says he took the wild olive shoot and grafted it in to the vine.
And notice the imagery, and if I had my whiteboard here, I would draw this.
Not that it would be any better, but I would still like to draw it.
There is still one Israel, but by God's grace, the Gentiles have been grafted in to the true
Israel through faith in Jesus.
Does that make sense?
So the Jews do not go away and the Gentiles are not more loved.
There is one people of God that have been grafted in to the true Israel through Jesus,
who by the way, is the fulfillment of Israel.
We know that too, right?
Everything God says about Israel and all the ways they failed, Jesus does not fail.
He succeeds and he proves himself to be the true Israel of God.
One of the first things that God says about Israel is what?
This is my firstborn son.
And I love him.
And then they failed.
And then you look at Jesus, even in the book of Matthew, and he's reliving Israel's history,
one of the first things.
I think it's the very first thing you actually hear the Father speak in the entire New Testament.
What does he say?
This is my beloved son with whom I am well pleased.
And that's after he called his son out of Egypt, just like Israel was called out of
Egypt.
That's right after Jesus passes through the waters of baptism, just like God brought Israel
through the waters of the Red Sea.
I mean, everything that they did and right after the wilderness, what does Israel do?
Or right after they're crossing the Red Sea, they go into wilderness for 40 years and they're
tempted by Satan.
What does Jesus do immediately after his baptism?
Goes into the wilderness for 40 days where he's tempted by Satan.
He's reliving Israel's history.
And the whole point is to say, Israel has failed, but Jesus is the true Israel.
And if you want to belong to the true Israel, it is not something by ethnicity, and it's
not by your works, and it's not by circumcision, it's not by anything outward.
The only way to be part of the true Israel of God is through faith in Jesus.
That's it.
Right?
They're not throw stones at all these other eschatological views and make caricatures.
They're not saying that the church has replaced Israel.
They're saying the church has been grafted in to the true Israel.
That was a long rant that was not in your notes, so we're a little derailed.
But forgive me.
I just want to make that clarification because a lot of people get confused on that.
So they believe that God still has a plan for the Jewish people, and very importantly,
they affirm Romans 11, 5, which affirms that God always has a remnant of true believers.
I mean, do we remember that?
Like Paul's talking about that in Romans 11.
And it's amazing to see Paul's heart for his people because I believe it's in Romans
11 where Paul says, if I could give up my salvation for the Jewish people, I would do that.
He loves the Jewish people, and he affirms to the Romans as he's writing to them, it
might look like a partial hardening has come upon Israel because it has, but do not fear
because God always has a remnant within Israel, and he is going to be faithful to them.
And so their understanding of Revelation chapter 20 verses 1 through 10 is very straightforward
once you follow their guidelines of interpretation.
All right?
So remember we said this last week, every single one of these views makes sense if you
agree to the premise, the premise of their style of interpretation.
And so after the time of great tribulation, Jesus will return.
He will bind Satan in the bottomless pit for a thousand years, that's verses one through
three.
He will raise all deceased believers bodily to reign with him for a thousand years, that's
verse four.
All unbelievers will remain dead during that time, and will only be raised on the last
day, that's verses five and six.
And then after the thousand years, Satan will be set free and raise a rebellious army.
Verse eight.
Then Jesus will defeat the rebellion and cast Satan the beast and the false prophet into
hell verses nine through 10.
And then he will resurrect all unbelievers and escort all people to the throne of God
for judgment.
So the key takeaways of historic premillennialism, they affirm two resurrections, one for believers
and one for unbelievers.
They believe that Jesus returns after the tribulation as opposed to dispensationalism, which would
say before the tribulation, they reject the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture.
They believe that the church will be present for that.
And they view the rapture as Jesus raising all believers from the dead, calling all his
people to meet him in the sky and escorting him back to the earth.
And they believe in a literal one thousand year millennial kingdom here on earth.
They also believe in a literal binding of Satan and the bottomless pit.
They reject a hard distinction between Israel and the church.
And they believe that Jesus is the true Israel of God and all who were in him are part of
the true Israel.
I hope that I have faithfully represented this view in such a way that if you hold to this
view, I would hope that you would say, yes, that adequately describes what I believe as
a historic premillennialist.
So that is historic premillennialism.
Next week, Lord willing, and if I don't have the flu, we will cover amillennialism.
And from here on out, we're not going to try to repeat as many things because a lot of
the remaining views have a good bit in common, especially about Israel and the church.
But amillennialism has a very distinct way of interpreting this passage as does post-millennialism.
So it's going to be a little bit different than our first two weeks.
So we've now covered dispensationalism and historic premillennialism.
These are the premillennial views.
Next week we'll start on the post-millennial views.
What kind of questions do you have that if I'm able to, I will answer about historic
premillennialism?
Yes, Dave?
Yes.
Yeah, you would
Yeah, I would say you you could have
on the whole none of the four views
but like none of the majority views within the four
believe that. But I would say if someone is going to believe that
you would find it more on the post-millennial side.
So this is where we want to be careful because we never want to
condemn anyone or claim that they believe anything they don't.
But when I've encountered the replacement theology view
I've encountered it most often on the post-millennial side of things.
That's that one extreme. And then the other extreme of all of Israel's going to be saved
regardless I find that more on dispensationalism.
But that is not to say that every dispensational believes that or that
every post-millennial I'm just saying when it comes up those are typically the two camps
where you find them you don't typically find them in historic premillennialism or
omillennialism. Honestly, and I should have put this in your notes
there's not a great way to draw it. Again if I had my whiteboard it would be easy.
If you want to look at like perspectives and how these views view the world
in the timeline trajectory of history. If you start with dispensationalism
they typically view the world as going like this more hard core would just
straight down like the world's going to hell in a handbasket is basically what's happening.
That is their view of history is going straight downhill. Historic premillennialism
is more kind of like this. It's more of a gradual slope downhill.
Omillennialism is like this. So imagine a straight line and
omillennial is like this. There's going to be some highs, there's going to be some lows,
there's going to be some highs and lows. And it's just going to continue ebbing and flowing like that
throughout history. And then post-millennialism views the world like this.
Everything is getting better. It's going to continue to get better. I've met some that are just straight like this.
Like this is the greatest it's ever been and it's only going to get better from here.
So those are how they kind of view where the world is going.
And there are reasons they believe that obviously. They don't just think the world's going down here
or getting better for no reason. They have reasons. A lot of my eschatology
to kind of pull back the curtain is based on Jesus' parable of the wheat and the
tears where he's like, they said, Master, you know, I thought you sowed good seed and look at all these
weeds. What should we do? Should we go and pick it up? And the master says, what?
No, let them both grow to the end. And then at the end, the reapers will come
and they'll make the distinction. Right? So what is that saying?
Good and evil are both going to continue to grow to the end.
I think it's a lot of Meschatology. Like if it was just weeds, Jesus would have said the weeds are going to overtake the wheat
and it's just going to be, even it's just wheat, then it's going to say, well, we don't have to worry about the weeds at all
because the wheat are going to outgrow them. It's like, well, both are going to grow to the end.
They're both going to be present. They'll be good and they'll be bad.
You can make your conclusions how you want on that. Christian has encouraged me to at the end of our study of these four views
to tell you where I fall and that's going to depend on the day.
There are two views of eschatology that I continue to go back and forth on pretty consistently.
I'll be here for a little bit, but at once the month changes, I'm kind of over here now and which just goes to show
that should be another example of someone who doesn't take Scripture lightly,
who studies Scripture on a daily basis and does the study and does the work, saying eschatology is really unclear.
Like if you think you've got it all figured out, kudos to you, but others of us are having a really hard time
and we're just trusting, as everyone does, that Jesus is going to come back
and His church will get to be with Him forever and that's what I'm hoping for.
So, whether you want to call me this or that, doesn't really matter. I believe Jesus is coming back and that's sufficient for me.
So, if it would be helpful to you though to tell you where I land on eschatology, I might do it.
If it's helpful for you. If it's not helpful, then yeah.
It was a stretch.
It's going to be recorded. It's going to be on the website so you can go back and watch it, pause it, all that kind of stuff.
You also have my slides. I'm a visual learner. I like pictures and graphics and videos and things.
If that's helpful, I can get the whiteboard back out too and draw y'all some pictures.
I'm known for my artistic abilities. It's one of the first things they say about me.
So, everybody's okay.
I mean, if y'all are going to twist my arm, I'll get the whiteboard back out.
But yes, everything that I say will be recorded. It'll be put online.
And again, because I know I'm going to get hate for this, I already have.
But it's one of those things where you shouldn't fight about this.
Let people believe what they want about eschatology. It's not worth getting up in arms about.
And I'm not endorsing any one of these views. I'm just trying to accurately represent them in a fair manner without bias.
So, I'm a switzer when here.
Yes, ma'am.
Is Revelation 20 verses 1 through 10.
Yes, ma'am.
Yes.
Yes, no, that's a good point.
Yes.
Yes. Yes. It's as simple as that.
We're going to get into that passage more with the next two views.
But no, no, no, you're fine.
Way to look ahead because that is going to color the interpretation of how
millennials and post millennials understand the literalism or some symbolism of the millennium.
But yes, at the end of the day, everybody, the point is Jesus is coming back and no one has it figured out.
There are a lot of people who have books on Amazon right now that are literally titled.
My buddy sent me one before tonight.
Bless his heart. If you're listening, you know, I love you, Brad.
But I think the book is literally titled like a timeline.
It's like a timeline of the end times in chronological order.
And I'm like, when did God speak to you?
Because we've been all trying to figure this out for a while.
But like so to be so dogmatic is to say, I know the day, the time and how it's going to happen.
No, you don't just have the humility to say very smart people with more letters behind our names than anybody in this room.
And that's just one of the four views. And that alone should humble us and say, all right, maybe we don't know everything.
Any other?
Dig deeper.
Yes, ma'am.
Yes.
Be ready.
Well, you and.
Yes.
Yeah.
Yes.
Yeah. And there's so right after Jesus finishes talking about eschatology and the end times in Matthew 24 after this whole long discourse,
Matthew 25 starts with the parable of the 10 virgins and the parable of the talents.
And both of those parables are about being ready when Jesus returns.
Hey, he's coming back. So don't don't sit idly by and just have your bags packed.
That's what the Thessalonians literally did. By the way, they quit their jobs, which is why if you read Thessalonians, it talks about eschatology.
And Paul then says, by the way, if a man doesn't work, he shouldn't eat.
Get to work because they literally quit their job.
They're like Jesus coming back.
So our bags are packed.
We're ready to go.
And the Bible's consistent teaching is actually since you know Jesus come back, be ready.
But be working actually do something good for the kingdom and for God while you're here.
Don't just sit and do nothing.
Yes.
Yeah.
Well, I mean, same thing happened with my sister.
I shared the gospel with her.
I can't tell you how many times and and then she went to a church and the Lord saved her and I was praising the Lord.
And then she called me and she said the Lord saved me and I was like, well, what did what what the pastor say?
And she told me something that I had told her that week.
And I was like, I just said this to you.
What are you but but she couldn't hear it from me.
It needed to be so.
So yes, if the Lord isn't going to use you, you should pray that the Lord would use someone else in the life of someone that you haven't been able to reach.
Doug, did you have a question real quick?
Yes.
Yeah.
Yeah, God's time.
I mean, I know this is hard for us to understand.
God does not experience time as we do to experience time.
You have to be subject to time.
And that's a hard concept to understand as well.
God is not subject to anything because he is God.
God is outside of time.
So God experiences everything at all times at the same time, which will literally blow your mind trying to wrap your mind around that.
So so for that's why the Bible says, yeah, a thousand years or like a day in the days like that, because what is time for a timeless eternal God?
It is nothing is something that we are subject to.
And one day, praise the Lord, we won't be when time is done away with, which is another thing to try to wrap your mind around the idea of eternity.
So I think that'll be it for tonight because we had a couple of questions.
We went over.
That's my bad.
But if you have questions next week, I think that'll probably be the newest one for you hearing about all millennialism.
You're pretty familiar with dispensationalism, historic, premillennialism, all millennialism probably be different.
So we'll try to save a little bit more time at the end for questions then.
Michael, you want to close this in prayer?