The Millennium: Christ's Future Reign on Earth - Part 2

PDF

Whether it’s Eden, utopia, Shangri La, or Eldorado, whatever name it goes by, man longs for a perfect world. According to Scripture such a time is coming during the millennial reign of Jesus Christ—a future thousand years when Christ will rule on this planet. Last Sunday, I taught through Revelation 20, verses 4-6. If you missed that, go back and catch up—it’s important. But as I acknowledged last week, this passage is the one passage in Revelation, in fact, it is the one passage in the entire Bible that most divides Bible believing Christians. There are three primary views of that thousand-year period. They are called amillennialism, postmillennialism, and premillennialism. 

Today, I want to present the arguments for and against those three positions to show you why as a church and why you as an individual should be premillennial. Again, we are studying Revelation 20:1-10. I have already noted for you that the message of this passage is that after the second coming, Jesus will renew the earth, establish a literal world-wide kingdom and reign with His saints for a thousand years. These verses tell us what happens before, during and after those thousand years. So far, we have considered before the millennium: Christ’s binding of Satan, verses 1-3. And we have considered during the millennium: Christ’s reign with His Saints, verses 4-6. But what are the different ways that verses 4-6 are understood among Christians?

Today, I want to step away from our verse-by-verse study to consider the three interpretations of this passage. Now, you are going to have to think a little differently today, okay? This isn’t like a normal sermon. You need to think about this as a classroom and I’m your professor today and you’re sitting in Bible college. I know that it is going to be heavy sledding for some, for others of you, this will be very familiar to you. But stay with me, I want to build a case. I think it is important because even if you agree with what I taught last week, you need to know why. And

you need to know the arguments for and against the other two common views and be able to respond to those who hold them. And if you are unconvinced, I want you to weigh the arguments with me. 

Now, I am going to give you a summary, not every detail of these various issues. So let me recommend a couple of resources to you if you want to study the millennial issue in more detail. First of all, there is a great overview of it in John MacArthur’s Biblical Doctrines textbook, if you want to get a sort of overview of it. If you really want to drill down and get a detailed critique and defense, my friend, Matt Waymeyer, has written an excellent book called Amillennialism and the Age to Come: A Premillennial Critique. It both critiques amillennialism and argues for premillennialism. If you want the best summary of our church’s position on these issues, I would recommend The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism by Robert Saucy. One other note, I am going to cover far more than you can write down today. But I put it all on the slides so that they will be available to be posted later this week. So, just know that. So, buckle up. 

Let’s start with amillennialism. A definition: amillennialism says there is no future millennialism, hence that alpha privative. But the millennial promises including Revelation 20 refer instead to the spiritual reign of Christ during this church age from Pentecost to the second coming. If I were to chart it out, this is what it would look like: there would be the church age, and during the church age, for the church, there would be both tribulation and there would be the millennium, that is, Christ’s spiritual reign through His church right now during the church age followed by the second coming and then the eternal state. 

So, what are the arguments for this position? I want to look at both the pro and the con. This is not a test, but pro will be represented by “P” and con will be represented by “C.” So, let’s go. Argument number one for the amillennial position. In the New Testament, they would say, there are only two ages: this age and the age to come and that leaves no room for another thousand-year age. They would cite the verses that talk about this age and the age to come. I have listed them there for you. My response to that would be this, very briefly: the expression, “the age to come” still allows for a thousand-year millennium at its beginning. That doesn’t cancel out and so this is really not a strong argument, but it is one that is made quite often. So, I will just some of these arguments. Others I will develop. I’ll just mention that one.

Number two. Amillennialists say that Revelation 20 verses 1 through 6, is not a new event that fits between the second coming at the end of chapter 19 and the final judgment at the end of chapter 20, it’s not event like it appears that’s in the chronology, instead, it simply repeats or recapitulates an earlier event about Satan back in chapter 12. Well, that cannot be true. Revelation 20 and Revelation 12 cannot be describing the same event. Listen, chapter 12, tells us Satan is cast from heaven to earth where he begins to deceive. Chapter 20 tells us he is removed from the earth, thrown into the abyss so he will no longer deceive. Those are different events. In addition, I would argue the recapitulation view ignores clear clues in the context that Revelation chapters 19 to 22 happen in chronological order. In fact, our amillennialist friends would agree that all the other events in chapters 19 to 22, are real events, happen in chronological order, although they are described in apocalyptic language. For example, nobody believes a sword is going to come out of Jesus’ mouth. That is describing His powerful word. So, there’s apocalyptic language but they are real events, and they happen in chronological order. The end of chapter 19: the second coming; the end of chapter 20: the final judgment; chapters 21 and 22: the eternal state. Chronological order but they would say that the verses that begin chapter 20 are not. 

Another response I would add to this is there is no evidence in the context of Revelation 20 that it precedes the second coming in chapter 19. There is no evidence there. And then finally, I would also say, it is very difficult to argue as they do, that Satan is currently bound. I will talk more about that in a little bit. 

Let’s move to the third positive argument for amillennialism. They say Revelation 20 does not say that the saints will reign on the earth and so they are actually reigning from heaven right now they would say. That is what this passage means. Folks, there is no proof the church is reigning now whether on earth or from heaven. Instead, Scripture teaches that believers will reign on the earth in the future. That is what Christ promised the saints in Revelation. You remember chapter 5, verse 10, “They will reign upon the earth.” The context in our passage points to the thousand years being on the earth. Think about this: the end of chapter 19, what happens? Christ comes from heaven to? You can say it. To earth. When you come to chapter 20 the first three verses, what happens there? Satan is bound during the thousand years to keep him from deceiving the nations on earth. In chapter 20, verse 9, after the thousand years, the last battle occurs where? On earth. There is every reason to believe this happens on earth. That’s where the context leads us. 

Number 4. They would argue—and this is a different argument. They would say that 1 Corinthians 15 and its description of the resurrections there in chapter 15, verses 20-28, that passage teaches, they would say, that Jesus’ second coming will usher in the end. Turn with me to 1 Corinthians chapter 15, of course, a chapter about the resurrections. Look at verse 22: “As in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits”—of the resurrection—"after that those who are Christ’s at His coming”—there is the resurrection on the saints. And then they would say to look at verse 24: “then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and authority.” They say, “Look there it is. It says when Jesus comes back in the second coming, it’s the end. Not so fast. My response to that would be this: this passage actually supports the idea of a millennium. Let me show you why. This passage doesn’t explicitly deal with a millennium but the sequence of resurrections it describes has time between them. Go back to verses 5 through 7 of this chapter. Notice, Paul uses in describing the resurrection appearances of Christ this sort of phraseology: “after that,” “then,” “then,” “then.” Now, what has happening between each of these appearances of Christ? What is between them? Time. Right? They didn’t happen at the same moment. It was time between them.

Now go down to verse 23, he uses the same language here: in verse 23, “after that,” has to be a gap of at least two thousand years between Jesus’ resurrection and the resurrection of His saints. It has been at least two thousand years, right? And it may be longer. So, the gap between those

two events is huge. So, it’s equally possible that the “then” that begins verse 24, also has a gap of a thousand years like Revelation 20 is teaching. So, this passage doesn’t teach the millennium, but it is consistent with the millennium.

Number 5. They would argue that since the church has replaced Israel, the literal millennial promises to Israel in the Old Testament will now only be fulfilled spiritually to the church. Now, there are several problems with that. First of all, I would say this, there is no biblical warrant for what is called “replacement theology,” the idea that the church has completely replaced Israel in the promises of God. A primary text for that is Galatians 6:16, where it talks about “the Israel of God,” and they would say, “See, there’s ‘the Israel of God’ used of the church.” Well, that’s not so true, because Israel, that word appears 65 times in our New Testament and every other time it refers to the Jewish people. There is no reason in context to say otherwise. In context, in fact, it is both the physical and spiritual descendants of Abraham. 

But here’s the problem, because amillennialists believe the church replaced Israel, when they come to passages about Israel’s future including the millennium, they alter the fundamental way of interpreting the Bible from the normal grammatical, historical method we always use to a spiritual hermeneutic. Although Israel obviously got all the Old Testament curses literally, they would say this, “Well, the church gets all the blessings that God promised Israel spiritually.” For example, many amillennialists teach that the Old Testament promises that Israel will inhabit her land in a future earthly reign of Messiah are actually promises to the church that the gospel is going spread across the world. Now, let me just say, that unintentionally, I believe amillennialism undermines a grammatical, historical, or normal hermeneutic in interpreting the Bible. I will say more about that in a bit. That’s a problem.

Now what is the pull of amillennialism for many of you? Let me just say this, if you grew up an Arminian, if you grew up in an Arminian church, then in God’s goodness and grace, you eventually came to embrace reformed theology, the doctrines of grace, or you wouldn’t probably be here. And that’s wonderful but let me warn you about a danger that comes with that: because of your appreciation and confidence in the men from whom you have learned the doctrines of salvation, you may very well be tempted to embrace everything they teach including their eschatology without really studying the issue. In other words, you buy into the baby and the bath water. But folks, we must always ask what does the Bible say? And that includes on this issue. 

Let’s move on. Postmillennialism. The definition: Christ will return in the second coming after—post—the millennium. And the millennium is not going to be like you may have understood it. For them, it is a golden age in which the prophecies of universal righteousness, worship and peace will be fulfilled on earth not by the coming of Christ but rather through the preaching and acceptance of the gospel. 

Here's a timeline, sort of map it out for you. During this church age, there is tribulation for the church, but eventually that tribulation will break out into a golden age of the gospel—the millennium. After that golden age, however long that might be, then will come the second coming and the eternal state. That’s postmillennialism.

What are the arguments? The first argument they will present is this: the Old Testament includes prophecies of a time of worldwide peace and prosperity. That’s true; it does. But those same biblical texts also support a literal thousand-year reign, so they don’t demand or prove a postmillennial view. You see, the issue is not if Messiah transforms the earth, the issue is when does Messiah transform the earth. When you look at those passages, you will discover in many of them, Messiah is on the earth when He transforms it, not in heaven. 

Number two. They will say the Great Commission predicts the transformation of the nations. We just read it in Matthew 28 a few minutes ago in our Scripture reading. It is true, this passage commands and therefore predicts that the gospel will go to the nations and disciples be made of all the nations, but it does not promise most will become Christians or that the world will become Christianized. 

Number three. They would say, “Look, just look at Jesus’ parables. The mustard seed, the tiny seed that grows into a massive plant. And look at the leaven that explodes into each new cell and takes over. See there it is.” They would say that predicts the worldwide spread of the gospel and its conquering of everyone, Matthew 13. In fact, these parables do promise the spread of the gospel, but they do not promise its universal acceptance. Contrary to postmillennialism, Scripture teaches that the world will gradually, steadily grow worse before Christ returns. We saw that in Revelation chapter 6 to 18 during the tribulation what happens? Persecution so accelerates that it becomes massive on a worldwide scale with Antichrist killing millions of believers. We saw them standing before the throne in the early chapters of Revelation. 

But think about even what our Lord said in Luke 18:8, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?” Second Timothy 3:1, “In the last days difficult times” literally savage times “will come.” Second Timothy 3:12-13, “Evil men and imposters will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”

Number four and this is not a pro argument. This is another argument against postmillennialism. There’s no evidence that Revelation 20 precedes the second coming which this position requires. We mentioned that with amillennialism. Same is true with postmillennialism. 

And number five. It’s, again, very difficult to argument that Satan is bound today which their position requires. 

So why the resurgence of postmillennialism? You look at those arguments and you go, “I don’t get the appeal.” Well, let me give you the appeal. After the early 20th century, two world wars; the great influenza; the stock market collapse and all of that, postmillennialism became a hard sell—that things where getting better and that the gospel is taking over. And so, it was largely abandoned. But it has experienced a modern resurgence and I think there are several factors. I think that it appeals to those who want Christ and the gospel to win. They don’t like the idea that gradually things get worse, and Christians are more persecuted, and evil gets worse. They want Christ to win. Well, of course! We all believe that Christ wins, the question is when and how.

I think another factor in this is the modern Christian push into politics. I am not talking about voting your conscience and caring about political things, there is among the charismatic movement, dominion theology, other things that say Christians need to take over the country and that’s how things are going to become Christianized. It walks hand in glove with this view of postmillennialism. 

I think another appeal frankly for a lot of young guys, they just admire the hutzpah of some of its current proponents, guys like Douglas Wilson—you know, the new Christian masculinity. “Take that”—they just like the attitude—the vibe. 

Let’s move on the third view: premillennialism. Here’s a definition: at the end of a future seven-year tribulation, Christ will return in the second coming before—pre—He establishes a literal thousand-year reign on this earth renewed. That’s premillennialism. Here’s a chart of what that would look like. You have the church age, which is now. Then the next event is the rapture of the church followed by seven years of tribulation. At the end of those seven years, the second coming of Christ followed by the thousand-year reign of Christ, the millennium, the final judgment and then the eternal state. That’s premillennialism.

So, what are the arguments? Let’s start with the “con” arguments this time. A little different. What are the “con” arguments? Let me just give them to you and then I will answer them in the “pro.” Here they are. These are the primary arguments. Number one: it’s not the primary view of church history. Number two: it is inconceivable that glorified and non-glorified humanity could co-exist together which happens in a millennium. We will talk about that next time, Lord willing. And here's the big one, number three: only one passage in the Bible, they say, Revelation 20 teaches premillennialism. This is really the crux of their argument. They say premillennialism is built on Revelation 20 and it is an obscure hard to understand passage. Now I taught through it last week, I didn’t think it was that obscure or hard to understand. But that’s their argument. Here’s Louis Berkhof, the great theologian who is an amillennialist, he says, “The only scriptural basis for this theory is Revelation 20:1-6 after an Old Testament content has been poured into it.” So those are the arguments against. Let’s move to the arguments for—the “pro” arguments.

Here's why we believe what we believe. Some of these answer those arguments against, others of them will cover new ground. Number one: premillennialism was the earliest and predominate view of the early church. Let’s start with the apostolic fathers. The men who knew and were instructed by the apostles and who lived during the first and early part of the second centuries, guess what? Those men were exclusively premillennialists. Let’s start with the first one to write about it. His name was Papias and Papias said this, “There will be a period of a thousand years after the resurrection when the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this earth.” Couldn’t be any clearer. Papias, Clement of Rome, Polycarp and Ignatius—they all hold this view, and they all argue that their view is built on three things: it is built on the Old Testament prophets; the teaching of Jesus; and Revelation 20. So, it’s not just Revelation 20. 

Move to the second century. Justin Martyr writes this: “John, one of the apostles of Christ, predicted that those who believed in our Christ would spend a thousand years in Jerusalem.” Let’s move on to Tertullian. Tertullian writes, “We also hold that a kingdom has been promised to us on earth but before heaven.” That means before the eternal state. “But in another state than this [current age] as being after the resurrection. This will last for a thousand years.” He describes exactly what I teach, what we believe. 

What about then from the third century on through the reformation? Well, many still embraced premillennialism. But during the late third and early fourth centuries, amillennialism gradually replaced it. Why? Two reasons: One, because of Constantine’s legalization of Christianity in the Edict of Milan in the year AD 313. That raised anti-Jewish sentiment and the idea of a Christian kingdom without the Jews became more desirable. Sadly. 

The other factor was the rise of the allegorical method of interpretation with Origen and other teachers out of Alexandria, Egypt. But the real star of amillennialism is Augustine. Augustine first taught premillennialism but he eventually abandoned it and he himself describes why. He said, “Because some of the people who were in favor of premillennialism in the millennium were describing it as like a thousand-year party characterized by gluttony and drunkenness.” He said that he didn’t want to have anything to do with that. So, he abandoned it and fathered amillennialism. After his book, The City of God, the church embraced a more allegorical approach to the Scripture and followed his amillennial views. By the way, that’s what the Roman Catholic Church, following Augustine, still believes to this day. But listen carefully, the early church fathers who addressed this issue, were without exception premillennialists. Here again is a quote from Louis Berkhof, I won’t read the whole quote, but I wanted you have it on the slides. Just look at the middle, he is talking about, he says, “The view of Irenaeus”—which is essentially our view. He says in the middle of this, notice where he writes: “After he”—that is, after antichrist—“has completed his destructive work and has boldly seated himself in the temple of God, Christ will appear in heavenly glory and triumph over all His enemies. This will be accompanied by the physical resurrection of the saints and establishment of the kingdom of God on earth . . .lasting a thousand years.”—premillennialism. And notice how he ends this quote: “In general outline, this . . . is typical of the eschatological views of the early Christian centuries.” So, premillennialism, then, was the earliest predominant view of the early church.

A second argument for premillennialism, is there is clear Scriptural warrant for glorified and non-glorified humans coexisting together. Where? In the forty days after the resurrection. Jesus glorified easily interacted with non-glorified humans and there was no issue. Read John 21. Read Acts 1. No issues at all. That’s a non-argument.

Number three and this is huge. Many Old Testament prophecies describe a kingdom greater than this age but not as great as the eternal state. Let me just give you a couple of examples because of time. Turn with me to Isaiah chapter 65, verse 17, Isaiah introduces the idea of the future, “For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth.” You might think this is the eternal state. Well, he’s going to get there but He describes something else first. Notice verse 20: 

No longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his days; the youth will die at the age of one hundred and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred will be thought accursed. They will build houses and inhabit them; they will also plant vineyards and eat their fruit.

Now, what is going on here? You have people not living like the normal lifespan since the time that Moses wrote Psalm 90 and there being seventy to eighty years. But you have them, if they die, at a hundred, it’s like they are dying as a youth. And yet, they are dying. So, you have a state that is not the eternal state where there is no death, but a state where things are so much better than they are now. That is representative of many other passages. Look down at verse 25: 

The wolf and the lamb will graze together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox; and dust will be the serpent’s food. They will do no evil or harm in all My holy mountain.

One more text in the interest in time. Go to Zechariah 14, verse 1, let’s start in verse 2, this is the end of the tribulation, the siege of Jerusalem:

For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city will be captured, the houses plundered, the women ravished and half of the city exiled, but the rest of the people will not be cut off from the city.

Now watch this, verse 3, here’s the context:

Then the lord will go forth and fight against those nations, as when he fights on a day of battle. [And it’s the second coming, verse 4] in that day, His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives.

And He initiates a kingdom, look at verse 9,

And the lord will be king over [notice this] all the earth; in that day the lord will be the only one, and His name the only one.

So, what will that kingdom described here after the second coming be like? Go down to verse 16:

Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the lord of hosts, [to Jerusalem] and to celebrate the Feast of Booths. And it will be that whichever of the families of the earth does not go up to Jerusalem to worship . . . there will be no rain.

There will be consequences for their refusal—their sin. Again, describing a period better than this age. God reigns on this earth in Jerusalem. Nations worship Him but a time when there’s still sin and rebellion as well that has to be addressed. You see, in the end, what we discover is those are only a couple of examples of many Old Testament passages that describe a kingdom greater than this age but not the perfection that will come in the eternal state.

Argument number four. The binding of Satan for a thousand years, as we find in Revelation 21:3, must be future and therefore best fits a literal future millennium. You see, the other two views, don’t miss this, they both say that Satan is bound now and that keeps him from deceiving the nations now. But Scripture says Satan is deceiving the nations now. Revelation 12:9, Satan, literally, is deceiving the whole world and I can take you through so many passages. But listen to 1 Peter chapter 5, verse 8: Peter warns the believers, “Your adversary, the devil, prowls arounds like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.” That is impossible to reconcile with a description of Satan being totally bound in the first few verses of chapter 20 and locked in the abyss. That just doesn’t fit.

Number five. The martyred saints coming to life in Revelation 20, verse 4, best fits the literal future millennium. Look at chapter 20, verse 4, “they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.” This first resurrection has to be a physical resurrection because the second resurrection in verse 5 is a physical resurrection. In addition, in verse 5, the word “resurrection” that is used in this event is a Greek word that always refers to physical resurrection. And the Greek verb translated “come to life” here is used in Revelation only a physical resurrection, Christ and the supposed physical resurrection of antichrist. Now here’s the point, listen carefully, if verse 4 describes a physical resurrection, then verses 4 through 6 cannot be happening now as the other views claim because a resurrection comes when? At the second coming. 

Number six. A normal historical, grammatical interpretation of the Old Testament and New Testament prophecies leads to premillennialism. In other words, if you just interpret them the way you interpret everything else you read. You say, “Tom, that’s just you saying that.” Okay, let’s listen to postmillennialist Lorraine Boettner, “It is generally agreed that if the prophecies are taken literally, they do foretell a restoration of the nation of Israel in the land of Palestine with the Jews having a prominent place in the kingdom and ruling over the other nations.” Or let’s listen to amillennialist Floyd Hamilton “Now we must frankly admit that a literal interpretation of the Old Testament prophecies gives us just such a picture of an earthly reign of the Messiah as premillennialism pictures.” 

Number seven. The chronology of Revelation 20:1-6 only fits the premillennial view. Look at Revelation 20, verse 1. This is how it begins. “Then I saw.” The Greek text is literally, “and I saw.” That phrase in Greek throughout Revelation marks a progression of chronological time. I have more than a dozen notes or references in my notes that I won’t take you through. I did that when we studied the first three verses. You can go back and listen. In both post and amillennialism, the millennium is followed by the return of Christ. But the text says here the chronological order based on the language is that the second coming in chapter 19 happens, then the millennium in chapter 20. 

Now you have been very patient. By why does all this matter? Why have I taken the time to do this? Let me give you very quickly five reasons a literal millennium matters and should matter to you. Number one, now I’m just going to really list them. The integrity of a consistent biblical hermeneutic. You need to be able to read the Bible the same way in every passage. In fact, let me say this, to say without any clear biblical warrant that a passage that gives every appearance of describing literal events like Revelation 20 the Old Testament prophecy of the millennium, to say that those are only spiritual is a dangerous precedent. What keeps a person who says that from saying the same thing about Genesis 1 and a literal six-day creation. It’s just spiritual. What keeps a person from saying that the person of Adam in Genesis 2 and Genesis 3 is a real person and not just representative of the beginning of mankind and evolution. What keeps a person from saying that the miracles of Scripture didn’t really physically happen, they are really spiritual events? Nothings keeps a person from saying that except his own conscious. It’s a dangerous precedent. We believe in the integrity of the Scripture and therefore, a consistent biblical hermeneutic is the right way.

Number two. The millennium matters because of the exaltation of Christ on earth where He was rejected. Think about it. The last thing the unbelievers in this world saw of Jesus was what? Hanging on a cross dying as a terrorist. Humiliated, naked, covered with dried blood and crawling flies. He will return again. As Psalm 2 says, the Father “will give the nations for His inheritance.” He will be exalted on this earth the very place where He was humiliated. And He will be for a thousand years.

Number three. The vindication of God’s people also on earth where they were persecuted and killed. They cry out before the throne of God, “How long O God? How long?” And when Christ returns, He will establish His kingdom and they will rule with Christ, they will be vindicated on this very planet where their blood was spilled.

Number four. The completion of the creation mandate on earth where man failed so miserably. In Genesis chapter 1, after the creation God said to man, to Adam and Eve, to mankind, “Listen, rule the earth in righteousness.” Man failed miserably; Adam failed. Then we have all failed since. But Christ, according to 1 Corinthians 15 is the second Adam—the last Adam. He’s our representative and guess what? During the millennium Jesus as the perfect Man, the second Adam will carry out the creation mandate that Adam failed so miserably to do by ruling over this world in perfect righteousness and we will rule with Him in complete fulfillment of what God commanded to be done in Genesis chapter 1. 

And number five. It matters because of the vindication of God’s faithfulness on the earth keeping promises He made about what would happen on the earth. God said these things would happen. His very faithfulness is at stake. If God doesn’t keep those clear promises in the Old Testament about a millennium kingdom, then believer, you can have no confidence that you’ll keep His promises to you about anything. His faithfulness matters and that’s why the millennium matters.

Let’s pray together. Father, thank You for our time together this morning, Lord, so much that I pray that everyone here would be left, if they forget all of the details, with a larger picture and that is, that “Jesus shall reign where’er the sun does its successive journeys run.” Thank you, O God, that You will vindicate Your name. You will vindicate Your Son. You will vindicate Your people and we will rule with Him for a thousand years. We thank You and praise You in Jesus’ name. Amen.