The “false Jews” of Jesus day preferred the old wine of the Mosaic Age. The true Jews—the sons of Abraham by faith (Rom. 4:9–16)—wanted new wine. Jesus used a parable to describe this situation:
And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better. (Luke 5:36–39)
We wrote about the False Jews and Their Persecutions earlier. They had “drunk old wine” and were not ready to give it up when Jesus brought the new.
But Jesus was about to take the old wine and its containers away. The “containers” designed for the Mosaic-Age church kingdom would not suffice for the Messianic Age.
The Revelation contains repeated descriptions of God’s judgment of the old-wine-loving “false Jews.” We discussed this in our Repetition in Revelation post. John uses impressive imagery to describe repeatedly how God would break their Mosaic-Age bottles.1
This destruction would occur during a time of kingdom transfer. Addressing the “false Jews,” Jesus said “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (Matt. 21:43).
Revelation refers to both the taking and giving of the kingdom. Applying the wine metaphor, we can say new bottles must be used after the kingdom is taken from the “false Jews” and given to the “holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9). The “newness” theme in Revelation is strong and pervasive. This book describes the new bottles as well as the destruction of the old ones.
In the first vision, Jesus says his followers will have a new name (Rev. 2:17) and dwell in the new Jerusalem (Rev. 3:12; 21:2). In later visions, we learn the saints sing a new song (Rev. 5:9; 14:3). They dwell in a new heaven and a new earth (Rev. 21:1). Their Lord makes all things new (Rev. 21:5). Revelation is a sign-filled description of the new Messianic-Age bottles replacing those of the Mosaic Age.
What other tangible things did the kingdom transfer include? Or, to stay with the wine metaphor, what other bottles did God break and replace? Here are a few more examples:
The Temple. Inmillennialism emphasizes that the kingdom transfer occurred during the “last days” of the Mosaic Age (Heb. 1:2). Jesus linked the end of that age to the fall of the Temple (Matt. 24:1–3). The “false Jews” lost their Temple just as Jesus said. This happened in AD 70.
God had prepared a temple for the “holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9) that received the church kingdom. To those with the new name, Jesus said, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out” (Rev. 3:12; emphasis added). In agreement with this, the Apostle Paul had told the church at Corinth that they were now the temple: “ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (2 Cor. 6:16; emphasis added). The “transfer” of the Temple was a key element in the kingdom transfer; God broke the old Temple-bottle and provided a new one.
The priesthood. As we might expect, the Temple transfer required a priesthood transfer. God had ordained that Aaron and his sons serve as priests in the Mosaic-Age church kingdom (Exod. 28:1).
We have seen2 the superiority of the Messianic Age priesthood: Jesus surpasses Aaron (Heb. 4:14 – 10:18). The Revelation mentions that Christians are also priests in the new age: Jesus “hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father” (Rev. 1:6; also Rev. 5:10; 20:6). When the kingdom moved, the priesthood moved with it. Another bottle replaced.
Sacrifices. The former kingdom had many sacrifices, but they could not take away sin (Heb. 10:11). Paul describes the new-kingdom sacrifice made by Jesus:
But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. (Heb. 10:12–14)
This is the one sacrifice that removes sin.
It also sanctifies the offerings of the saints in the new temple. In Revelation, John describes one of these:
And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. (Rev. 8:3)
The sacrifice of Christ and the spiritual sacrifices of his people have replaced the animal sacrifices of the Mosaic Age.
God replaced other bottles. Outside of Revelation, we learn that the external initiatory rite of baptism replaced circumcision (Col. 2:10–12). The markers of ongoing participation in covenant life changed: for example, the Lord’s supper replaced Passover (Matt. 26:2, 17–30; 1 Cor. 11:20, 23–25). The method for excluding a person from covenant life also changed: exclusion from church membership (Matt. 18:17) replaced banishment from civil society, fines, imprisonment, and death (e.g., Ezra 7:26).
This partial list of “bottle replacements” will, we hope, help the reader think of other examples.
The Revelation dramatizes God’s smashing of the “bottles” of the Mosaic-Age church kingdom. It also shows how he provided other “bottles” to preserve the new wine of the Messianic-Age church kingdom. These continue to function after God has completed the kingdom transfer.
Now, in the Messianic Age, Christ feasts among his churches during his parousia (cp. 2 Cor. 6:16; Matt. 26:29). His people drink their preferred wine from new bottles.
2 comments
Hey Bro Mike,
Haven’t heard the term “inmellenialism” before. Is that used because people are tripped up by Amillenialism declaring a “non-literal” 1000 year reign? I know many of God’s people will say, “you can’t pick and choose which scriptures to interpret literally”, but that is a critical part of a biblical hermeneutic. There ARE passages that were not meant literally. If so, every honest believer would be eyeless and handless.
Anyway, is that a word you that you crafted, or do others use it? And what exactly does it refer to?
Blessings,
Bro Doug
Brother Doug,
It is good to hear from you and I appreciate your comments and questions.
Yes, this is a name I devised. You can see my reasoning in the glossary article on inmillennialism that provides a brief description of the end product. The list of posts on the Start Reading Here page shows the developmental steps we went through to document this prophetic framework in the Scriptures.
There are a few key differences between inmillennialism and the other prophetic systems, which you can see in the Comparison of Prophetic Models post. These include: 1.) the consistent identification of “the last days” as the final period of the Mosaic age; 2.) the consistent application of the meaning “presence” for the Greek word parousia; 3.) an emphasis on the literalness of the near-future time statements (e.g., here); and 4.) an optimistic view of the kingdom during the Messianic age.
Yours in Christ,
Mike