Russell Fuller on Amillennialism

They were, you know, without God and without hope in the world, as Paul would describe. But with the New Testament, and with the establishment of the kingdom of God, and God sending out the missionaries and so forth, Satan is bound, now the gospel is going through all the nations.

And so now the kingdom of God is being expanded to a worldwide thing, not just located in Israel, but now located in all the nations of the earth. And so this is the great kingdom of God that I think that is being described throughout.

And so I think Satan is bound, now obviously not in a complete sense, but in a sense that now the gospel is conquering into his territory.

Amillennialism and the Kingdom of God in Church History

Welcome to the Conversations That Matter podcast. I'm your host John Harris. As you know, we are doing a mini series, if you will, on surveying some eschatological positions in the Christian tradition.

And we did premillennial dispensationalism yesterday. And today I want to do amillennialism. And I will say this up front, in my experience, which of course is limited to my experience, but in my experience on a political level, I seem to have been getting along with amillennialists pretty well.

And I think maybe it's because there is a certain kind of rigidity that can pop up sometimes in postmillennial camps and dispensational premillennial camps that I don't see with the amillennialists. Maybe we can get into that a little bit.

I myself have never held to amillennial convictions, but I am curious about understanding them more and maybe why they're so chill, or at least the ones I've met. Maybe Dr. Fuller will disagree, but that is the guess we have to represent the amillennial position so that we can gain an understanding.

Dr. Russell Fuller has been on the podcast many times before. He's taught Hebrew for years. He's pretty much the go-to person on Hebrew. You can actually learn from him theology, Hebrew. I don't know what else you're teaching.

What are you teaching right now?

This coming semester, we're going to do, of course, an advanced Hebrew and advanced Greek class. And then I'm going to teach the book of Romans, the first part of the book of Romans. But you don't need Greek for that at all.

And then I'm going to do a class on the Christian life, and we're going to do it through going through Pilgrim's Progress. And basically, you know, how do we live our Christian life? Most of theology classes, we focus on the question of what do we believe about God?

But I don't think we focus enough on, you know, how do we perform our duty to God in obeying his word and in walking in his ways? And so using Pilgrim's Progress, we're going to go through and talk about the Christian life and how to better walk in the ways of the Lord.

Man, I love that idea. I am so tempted to sign up right now. And I may honestly do that. So if you're listening and you want to be in a class with me, I'm just on a spur of the moment. I'm actually thinking about that.

That's such an interesting idea to have a class using Pilgrim's Progress. I know it's not the Bible, but it's so... Isn't it the second most published Christian book?

That is correct.

Other than the Bible? Yeah.

That's right. And what we're going to do is as we go through Pilgrim's Progress, we're going to look at the scripture that's sort of where he's coming from. And so we definitely want to make it still biblically based.

But yet the way he describes things, it goes right in line with scripture. That's what he's doing. He's really following scripture. And so we'll pull out the scripture that goes with it and talk about that as well.

Have you ever... This is random. Have you ever been to Bugaboo Creek Steakhouse? Are you familiar with that restaurant at all?

No, I've never been there.

Oh, never. Okay, it's not going to be as funny to you, but there's a restaurant called Bugaboo Creek. I think it's more in the north. And I haven't seen them as much lately, but when I was a kid, there used to be a chain that used to be around.

But they had this appetizer called the bunion onion.

Oh, yeah.

And my family is so Christian. I thought it was John Bunion. I thought this is the John Bunion onion here. Anyway, not funny, I guess, if you've never been to Bugaboo. But I would love that. So anyway, you can go to russeltfuller .com and sign up there for your theology classroom.

And I've only heard good things about this from the people who have taken your courses. So I would encourage people to do that. Maybe let's switch gears. Let's talk about this amillennial thing. This amillennial thing.

This ecological view.

This trend. No, this view that's been around for a while. I want to, as we do this, maybe focus on objections as we go through so we can survey it. But I want to also give you pushback, friendly pushback from critics.

And so I think actually, maybe the way to delve into this, if you think it's appropriate, is to start with actually a criticism, which is that I know you hear dispensationalism is more novel and new. But actually, I've heard dispensational pre-millennialists try to make the case, well, you have Kiliasm, you see, in the old, right?

In the early church. And they find some inspirations from Kiliasm because they'll say, you know, whether it's historic pre-mill or dispensational pre-mill, it's pre-mill. But you don't find amillennialism, they'll say, until Augustine.

It's later. So therefore it's more innovative based on these platonic readings of scripture. So maybe we could start with the origins here. Where did it start?

Yeah, amillennialism, the first person that really describes it in detail is Augustine, okay? So you're looking at around 400 AD for Augustine. And so he's the first one to go into details of his view.

His view has been, it's not exactly the amillennialism of Augustine, but it's very close. And so he's usually considered the father of it. But if you look at earlier church fathers, they will, there's one, it might've been Justin Martyr, but I may have the wrong church father.

But he mentions that he holds to really pre-millennialism. But he says there's other good Christians who disagree with this and who hold another view. And he's probably describing the amillennial view.

And so amillennialism does precede Augustine. I doubt he's the first one to see it. And so there was others who said they did not see a millennial before Augustine, but yet

A literal millennium.

A literal millennial, that's correct. But yet that view clearly predates Augustine. Now, how far back it goes, whether it's as old as pre-millennialism, I don't know. Now, obviously I'm an amillennialist.

I say, John's an amillennialist.

Paul's an amillennialist.

Right, right, right.

Of course, of course.

But come on. So I don't know exactly how far back it goes, but let's just put it this way. Pre-millennialism has a long historical record to it. There's no question about it. And John, just let me say, yes, I'm an amillennialist.

Now, when I was saved back in 1975, and as I was learning about the faith, I was a pre-millennial dispensationalist. That's what I was. But over time, I've switched over to amillennialism. But I will tell you, is it possible that pre-millennialism is correct?

And I would tell you, yes. It's the, you know, when we talk about things to come, I'm dogmatic on a few issues on this. One, there's going to be a literal second coming return of Christ. Two, there's going to be judgment.

Okay.

A judgment. Three, there's a real heaven. There's a real hell.

Okay.

And, you know, so new heavens and new earth. Those things I think we can be pretty dogmatic about. And I could add a few more smaller details, but they're just the small details. When it comes to millennialism, is pre-millennialism very possible in my mind?

Oh, yes. Very much so. But let me just tell you how I became an amillennialist real quick. You know, my training was really more an Old Testament. And so as I'm reading the Old Testament, of course, it's looking forward.

And what it's looking forward to is the messianic age. And it's looking forward to a kingdom of heaven, especially if you look at Daniel 2, when Nebuchadnezzar has the dream and it goes through the different kings.

And, of course, the last kings are the Roman kings. And in the days of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed. Now, what is that kingdom of heaven? Well, when you come to the New Testament, John the Baptist, the first words we have recorded of him, repent, the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

He's describing that kingdom of heaven in Daniel 2. And then when Christ comes, he says the same thing. Repent, the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Now, the kingdom that they're, again, as they're describing is what I believe is the messianic kingdom.

Okay?

The kingdom of heaven. This is the kingdom that I think the Old Testament is looking forward to. It has a kingdom and it has a king, the king being the Messiah, the kingdom being a messianic kingdom. And so when you look in the Old Testament, let me just give you an example.

Like, for instance, in Isaiah 35, if you look at that, the language looks almost like new heavens and new earth. You know, it talks about nature rejoicing. It sort of personifies nature. You know, they're clapping their hands in joy.

They're shouting. The mountains are shouting for joy. And then it says, you know, then the lame will walk and the blind will see. And it keeps going. And then when you look at the New Testament, and this is the key to me.

When the New Testament views that, they view it as fulfilled in the ministry of Christ and in the messianic age. And so as I look at the Old Testament, I don't think it's looking forward to a literal millennia.

In other words, there's a messianic age that we live in now. Then there's the millennial. Then there's a new heavens and new earth. And then again, when you come to the New Testament, that kingdom of heaven is the rule of God.

That's what we mean by kingdom of heaven, of course. And it's the rule of God in the hearts of men, but yet the physical manifestation of that kingdom of God, you know, Jesus says the kingdom of God is at hand.

Well, I believe that that kingdom is established at Pentecost in its physical form. And therefore we have what we call the invisible church. That's the true church. We also have a visible church, and that's made up of both, you know, true believers, but some unbelievers as well, you know, in the visible church.

And so I think that's the physical manifestation of the kingdom of God. And so I think the Old Testament is looking forward to this messianic age in which we live today, going from the first coming all the way to the second coming.

That's that great messianic age that we're looking at. And so when you look at the famous passage in Revelation 20, okay, and that is, if you look, if you think of the book of Revelation, the book of Revelation is a lot of types and symbols.

And so I think there's a lot of figurative language being used there. When you look at when Jesus talks about his second coming in Matthew 24, 25, Mark 13, Luke 21, when you look at those chapters, the Olivet discourse, he describes a second coming.

Then he talks about judgment. He doesn't talk about a millennium. And you never really see in Paul's writings, in my opinion, any mention of a millennium. It's not until you get at the end of the book of Revelation, which again is a book that has many symbols, you know, sevens and, you know, 144 ,000.

I see these things as more, a lot of these things as symbolic. And then when it comes to the thousand-year reign, it describes how Satan will be bound that he will no longer deceive the nations. So how I understand that is during Old Testament times, you know, salvation was of the Jews.

And that's where the light of God was. It was with the Jewish people. The other nations, they were blinded. They were, you know, without God and without hope in the world, as Paul would describe. But with the New Testament and with the establishment of the kingdom of God and God sending out the missionaries and so forth, Satan is bound, now the gospel is going through all the nations.

And so now the kingdom of God is being expanded to a worldwide thing, not just located in Israel, but now located in all the nations of the earth. And so this is the great kingdom of God that I think that is being described throughout.

And so I think Satan is bound. Now, obviously not in a complete sense, but in a sense that now the gospel is conquering into his territory, the nations of the earth. He's the prince and power of the air.

Now the gospel is penetrating and Christ bound the strong man, spoiling his goods. Or as he would say, remember when he sent out his disciples and they come back to him, he goes, hey, I saw Satan fall from heaven.

He's seeing again the establishment of the kingdom of God. And so I think the kingdom of God is now. I think I don't like the word millennialism. Because what I see is that the kingdom of God that was being described in the Old Testament, in Daniel chapter two is in effect now.

Jesus announced it. It's near. That's what he means by, you know, and now with the coming of Pentecost and so forth, the kingdom of God is in our midst and we live under the kingdom of God. He is in heaven.

All authority has been given to him in heaven and earth. And he governs the universe and he will rule till he puts all nations under his feet. Now is the way that's described. And for instance, First Corinthians 15.

And then as I look again at the predictions of the Old Testament and how they're fulfilled in the new, it's not looking forward to a millennial period. It's fulfilled in the church age. Maybe not completely, maybe not entirely.

Some of those things may, in other words, there are some prophecies. Let me give you, for instance, in John chapter 19, they look on him whom they have pierced coming out of Zechariah. There's a fulfillment there.

But yet when you go to Revelation chapter one, the same verse is quoted again. So what that tells me is that John 19 does not exhaust that prophecy. That prophecy will be fulfilled at the end of time as well.

When they'll look on him whom they have pierced when he returns a second time. And then like it says in the book of Zechariah, they will mourn for him as an only begotten child. So it's for these reasons, basically, that I'm a millennialist.

But again, I tread on this pretty lightly. I do recognize premillennialism is very, very possible. And it could be. We'll have to wait and see for sure. I'm a little less confident about dispensationalism, though there's parts of dispensationalism I would probably agree with.

But no, I'm a covenant theology guy. I really like the notion of covenant theology, especially broke up in covenant of works, covenant of grace. So we have one covenant and God has decided to save us through covenant.

We become in a covenant relationship with him. After the fall, works is no longer possible for us. We're still justified by works, though, John. It's just the works of Jesus Christ. It's not my works.

It's the works of Christ that justifies us. And so now it's all under grace, whether you're in the Old Testament or the New Testament. Though the way God administers the covenant of grace under the Old Testament was different from the new.

But yet, at the same time, they were just looking forward to Messiah for their justification. We're looking back on Messiah for our justification. So anyway, that's why I'm a millennialist. Now, there's a lot of verses you could point to and say, what do you do with that?

And I'm going to go. It may go that way.

Symbolic Numbers in Revelation and the Meaning of the Thousand Years

Well, that's a great summary. That's a great survey. I thought that was actually one of the best surveys I've heard of what amillennialists in a nutshell believe. And there's so many questions obviously popping up in my head that you just referenced.

But there's something that actually intrigues me. This is my personal thing, because some guys really get off track on numerology. And I think that's probably more often in dispensational camps. And I don't think that should be blamed on dispensationalism per se.

It's just when you're looking all the time for what's going to take place in the Middle East. And I suppose this wouldn't be unique to dispensationalism. This would just be premillennialism. But when you're looking about what are the next steps and you're trying to read the tea leaves, as it were, maybe that attracts a certain kind of demographic.

And in that demographic, there are people who really get into numbers and so forth. So anyway, what I was going to ask is, as a professor of the Old Testament, Revelation is a hard book in a way. I don't think any eschatological position would deny that.

Although I have heard pastors before. There's one pastor in particular. I won't mention his name. He's very popular. But he's like, yeah, Revelation, it's easy. You just apply the grammatical, historical, or hermeneutic.

And I'm thinking, man, I've read that a bunch of times. And I get stumbled. Seven spirits of God. And I'm already digging for commentaries trying to figure out who the seven spirits of God are. And no dispensational premillennialist takes that literally.

They all see that as a figurative number because the rules. Yeah, a grammatical, historical approach, you would have to look at that and say that that is a symbolic thing. So here's my question. When you are dealing with numbers and symbols to some extent, you see these numbers pop up in the Old Testament too.

Seven, 12, 40. It seems like you have to understand that in the Old Testament to then understand what the New Testament is saying when they use these numbers. Maybe just give us a little crash course on that.

Because I think that would help in interpreting some of these things. And then we can get to 1 ,000 and what you think 1 ,000 means.

Yeah, these numbers I think oftentimes are symbolic. Now, again, when we talk about grammatical, historical, what most people really mean by that is what did the author intend? And we're talking here about the divine author in particular.

What did God intend when he gave us these numbers? So you mentioned a very good one. The seven spirits of God. And I think most everyone, whatever your position is, will come to some conclusion. We don't believe that the spirit is seven.

And so, yeah, we're Trinitarians, but maybe then we're Heptatarians when it comes to the Holy Spirit. No, no, no. And so what that is, it's a number of fullness. So it's the fullness of the spirits being described here.

And so, yeah, we look at things like this. When we come to the number 12, very important. The tribes of Israel are 12. The apostles are 12. And so

12 pillars in Revelation.

Yes.

So there's a lot. And then 40 days, 40 nights. So 40 is a very important 40 years in the wilderness. So some of these numbers are very important biblically in the sense of how Seven, of course, is the great number.

And so the Lord made seven-day week. And again, seven is a very important number. Then you'll get some numbers in the book of Revelation. I'm not going to give you the exact number, but it's like 1 ,200 and something days.

And I think it's mentioned, I think, with the two witnesses.

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Yeah, it's like 1 ,200 and something days. And that same number, but just a little different, is mentioned over in the book of Daniel as well. It's 1 ,200. But it's not quite the same number that you have in the book of Revelation.

They're just a little off there. And what exactly to do with these words, with those numbers is difficult. It's very difficult. But I do take them very symbolically. So in Revelation, of course, it'll talk about the 12 stars, which is a sign of, again, Israel there and of God protecting Israel.

And from Israel was born the Messiah. I think it's around chapter 12, if I'm not mistaken. But again, you know, it doesn't say Israel, but the description looks like Israel. It's got the 12 stars, you know, and the mother gives birth to Israel.

I mean, it's the Messiah. I'm sorry, Messiah. So again, I see these numbers quite symbolically. I don't take them. 144 ,000, I think, is a great example of this. I don't take that number literally. I know some do.

Jehovah Witnesses, for instance, at least used to. Then they got over that number. I'm not sure what they did after that. But some groups, I think, do take it literally. At the end of time, there'll be, you know, exactly this many people and so forth.

But again, it's like a 12 times 12 type, you know, thing. And I don't think that's, you know, I think there's the 12 times 12 gives you stuff.

This becomes one of the main critiques. And I think this comes from post-millennialists and pre-millennialists. Because they say, well, there have to be rules for these symbols. Otherwise, you can make them mean, I guess, whatever you want, right?

And that's the typical critique you hear. Like, what do you just say? Well, I guess 1 ,000 means a number of completion or fulfillment of some kind. And I know the retort is like, well, does he own the cattle on 1 ,000 hills?

Is Jesus literally a door, right? Of course, there's these obvious grammatical, I guess, flourishes or whatever that we know they don't mean. You know, Trump does this all the time, too, which is great, right?

Not to bring him into biblical prophecy here. But Trump, he's doing this now. This is going to drop later. But as we're speaking right now, there's a question about what happened with these nuclear enrichment uranium facilities.

And Trump is like, they're totally destroyed, right?

Like, maybe they are.

But he tends to oversell or overplay. Or he wants to bring things to completion, tidy it up, and move on when it's usually messy. And so anyway, with biblical prophecy, sometimes, I don't know, you know, were all the inhabitants of the land wiped out and decimated?

No, clearly not, because some of them remained and the Jews had to deal with them. And there are these things that seem to indicate there's a completion element, but maybe not fully. And we use this kind of expression in our daily lives.

So maybe I'm making the argument for our millennialism here. But what I'm asking is, you know, how do you tell the difference, though? Because it says a thousand years. Like, is there a key in the text that tells you this isn't literal?

Or is it just you're noticing broad patterns? Because that's what you gave us before is like there's these broad patterns, and I think it just fits these broad patterns.

That's correct. It's really the broad sweep of scripture. And when I read the book of Revelation, there's a lot of Old Testament imagery, a lot of Old Testament language there. Now, you know, when I read Revelation and it says, OK, there's seven trumpets that sound.

OK, there's seven trumpets. I don't think. But yet the notion that it was seven, there's a certain completeness to this. OK, but yeah, there's seven trumpets.

OK.

Then there's vials that are poured out as well. You know, there's seven of them. OK, seven. But yet that they're all seven. I think they're talking about, you know, some of the plagues on the earth and different.

Yes.

Yeah. So some of these numbers. I mean, the word seven there, I believe, is seven. But yet there's a certain fullness that's being described in these judgments of God that he's bringing upon the earth.

OK, there's a certain fullness to it. And again, I'm looking for. You know, some of the imagery and how it connects to the Old Testament. That's what I'm looking for. For the word thousand, of course, we are millennials.

Love that passage. And Peter for with the Lord.

Right.

It's like a thousand years. Yes, that's our get out of jail free card, I guess. You know, we're in trouble. Use that one.

But that's what the gap theory guys use, too, though.

That's right.

So with the Lord, you know, a day is a thousand years. So and again, I mean, that's a good point. I mean, what Peter's saying is correct, obviously. I mean, I believe that. And could that be?

I'm sorry. Maybe this will. You can disregard this question if you have a stream of thought. But I just thought of it. You know, how would we how would we differ between the Genesis narrative? Right. Did God create in seven days?

Because that's a big thing for both of us, I'm sure.

Oh, very big.

It wasn't millions of years. It was seven days. But then in Revelation now, you know, maybe walk me through that. Is it just because of Revelation's apocalyptic?

Well, yeah, the book of Revelation is far more symbolic in the use of. The terms that it uses a lot more symbolic. And I think most people would agree with that. I think they would. When you read the book of Genesis, it's just like normal history.

And then when you look at other portions of Scripture. So, for instance, you go to Exodus 20 and the Ten Commandments for in six days, the Lord made the heavens and the earth. I mean, that's not poetry.

That's not. And even if it was poetry, it would still be. It doesn't mean it's necessarily figuratively, you know. And so the Scriptures are looking at the days, I think, very much in a literal sense.

Where, again, when you get to the book of Revelation, it's different. Let me go back to Revelation 20, though, just for a second. Because it talks about the first resurrection. It talks about a second resurrection.

And it looks like there's a millennial in between. And that's why in millennialism, you know, you have the resurrection of the righteous. And then later on, you have a thousand years later, then you have the resurrection of the wicked.

That's right.

But, you know, when I look at what Jesus talks about and what Daniel talks about, it looks like there's a general resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked at the same time. Moreover, if you look at that passage, and again, I'm looking at the broad sweep of Scripture.

It mentions Gog and Magog and the warfare of Gog and Magog. Now, a lot of folks see, if you look at Ezekiel 38 -39, there's a battle with Gog and Magog described there as well. And most premillennialists that I know, I think all of them, would say that that's the Battle of Armageddon.

And I would agree with them on that. I think that is the Battle of Armageddon. They see that as premillennial. But the problem is, in the book of Revelation, it's clearly postmillennial, you see. And so I would look at that and say, well, you know, if we don't take the millennial literally, we have really the one resurrection, the general resurrection, which I think the Scriptures teach that.

Now, sometimes it does focus upon the resurrection of the just, because they want to focus on that. But I think it's a general resurrection.

Are you saying that each position has to shift the sequence to make their system fit in that passage? Is that what you're saying?

Oh, somewhat, yes.

Yes.

If you go through that passage, or whatever view, it's a difficult passage for everyone. I know the premillennialists, in some ways, they have the advantage there. But what I would say that even if you follow the premillennialists view down there consistently, they've got some issues they have to deal with.

Like, it looks like Gog and Magog is premillennial. And Ezekiel, but now it's postmillennial. Is there two battles of Gog and Magog? I don't think so. Is there two resurrections? Jesus talks about on the last day, the righteous and the wicked are raised from the dead.

It looks like a general resurrection. And so I think the first resurrection is more talking about a spiritual thing. The second resurrection is the resurrection of, you know, of everyone physically. Okay.

So anyway, but again, Revelation 20 has difficulties for everyone, for every position. There is difficulties there. Now, I'll admit, if you take it literal, you probably have less difficulties.

Okay. Yeah.

I think that's probably true. But you do have some major difficulties with what I think is like the general resurrection, the battle of Gog and Magog, even the binding of Satan. I think there's a bit of a problem there because I think Satan is bound now in the sense, again, he's not deceiving the nations in the way he was in the Old Testament.

Now the gospel is going to all the nations. That's going on now, you see.

So again, yeah. Because you believe he's still active and he's still...

Oh, hell, very much so.

Right. And even the Puritans had the old deluder Satan act, right? They would have been covenantal, but they thought he's still at work.

Oh, yes. There's books written by the old Puritans about, we're not ignorant of his devices. And that's right.

That's right.

That's right.

So they thought he was engaged in deception. They just didn't think he was captivating people groups. And that's the difference in your mind.

That's correct. In other words, with the coming of Christ, as it says, he fell from heaven. And that Jesus bound the strong man is now spoiling his kingdom. And the gospel is now going out to all the nations.

The great promise of the Old Testament, whosoever will believe on the Lord, or the great promise in the Old Testament is, and in you, all the... Abraham. In you, all the nations of the earth will be blessed.

That is now being fulfilled. And again, Galatians 3 really emphasizes that as well.

So, I mean, there's so many questions. I'm trying to even think where to... This has been really, really good so far. And we're only half an hour in, so we got time. So are you then a partial preterist then?

Do you have to be to be amillennial?

I think so. Yes, I think so. I'm a partial preterist. I think some of the things in the Olivet discourse is fulfilled with the coming of the Romans and destroying the temple in Jerusalem. But I think those things were types of the great destruction that's going to come at the second coming at Armageddon.

So even though I see it, some of the Olivet discourse was fulfilled in 70 AD, I still even see that section as typological of what's coming at the second coming. But then some parts of the Olivet discourse is clearly future.

I'm not a full preterist because I talked to a preterist once and I said, so really sin will continue for us for all eternity. And he had to say, yeah, that's correct. I'm like, no, I can't do that.

Yeah, I think Gary DeMar, as I understand, became a full preterist. So I guess, I mean, that seems like a really discouraging... So like everything happened, everything that Revelation talked about. I mean, that's insane to me a little bit.

Yeah, I can't go there.

The Olivet Discourse, 70 AD, and Partial Preterism

So maybe let's talk about 70 AD real quick. So because the Revelation has these very specific bold judgments, for example, right? And my dad, who's a pastor at the church I attend, right? He's preaching through this right now.

And he's going into very specific detail about each one of these judgments. And it seems like the passage goes into detail about how many people are going to die and what is going to happen to kill them.

And by the time you're done with that, you're just like, boy, I hope the rapture is real because I don't want to live through any of that, right? But here's the thing, you asked the question, I guess, why would Revelation go into such granular detail about these things if it's symbolic?

And if it is symbolic, I mean, are there at least things in 70 AD? Because I'm assuming that's what the bold judgments would have been 70 AD. I don't know where you can look at and say, okay, this was talking about this or...

Well, go ahead.

That's very difficult. Let me just say this.

Okay.

And I'm talking in very broad terms because if you give me specific passages sometimes, I'll just kind of say, I'm not sure what it talks about here, John. I mean, I'd have to just tell you that. Okay.

But in the broad sweep of Revelation, the way I understand it, is it's really talking about that spiritual conflict that's going on right now in this earth between Christ and His kingdom and the devil and His kingdom.

And yes, there are temporal judgments that Christ sometimes pours out upon this earth, upon people. And so, yes, there's great judgments that sometimes fall upon a people.