03/06/2026

 

Samuel Clifford

The central disagreement between premillennial and amillennial interpreters concerns the meaning of the thousand-year reign in Revelation 20. Premillennialists understand the thousand years as a future earthly reign of Christ that occurs after His return but before the final consummation. Amillennialists, however, view the thousand years as a symbolic description of Christ’s present rule during this age. Because of this, premillennialism affirms an intermediate earthly kingdom between the present age and the eternal state, while amillennialism denies such a kingdom and holds that the present age will transition directly into the new creation.

 

One of the most challenging passages for the amillennial position is Isaiah 65:17–25. In this prophecy, the Lord looks ahead to the coming age and describes a time of joy, blessing, and renewal:

 

“For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying. There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the LORD, and their offspring with them. And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear. The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.”
Isaiah 65:17–25 KJV

 

Within this depiction of the “new heavens and new earth,” verse 20 stands out because it describes extraordinary longevity. Infants will no longer die in early childhood, and the elderly will live out their full days, to the point that someone dying at one hundred years old will still be considered a youth, while anyone dying earlier will be viewed as cursed. The picture resembles the extended lifespans of Genesis 5 as death still exists, but its power is dramatically reduced.

 

Premillennialists argue that the conditions described in this passage cannot fit either the present age or the eternal state. Human lifespans today average seventy to eighty years (Psalm 90:10; cf. Genesis 6:3), which does not match the longevity Isaiah describes. Yet the presence of death in Isaiah 65:20 also prevents the passage from referring to the eternal state, where death is abolished entirely (Isaiah 25:8; Revelation 21:4). Since the prophecy cannot be fulfilled now and cannot be fulfilled in the final state, it must refer to a future intermediate kingdom in which death still occurs but lifespans are dramatically extended.

 

Most amillennialists nevertheless maintain that Isaiah 65:17–25 speaks exclusively of the eternal state. To address the difficulty posed by verse 20, they argue that the language of long life is poetic and symbolic, expressing the idea of everlasting life in terms familiar to Isaiah’s original audience. According to this approach, Old Testament prophecy communicates future realities through imagery drawn from present experience. Since the people of Isaiah’s day had no direct frame of reference for a world without death, the prophecy expresses eternal blessedness in the only categories they could understand. Thus, in the amillennial reading, Isaiah 65:20 does not teach that people will live for centuries and then die; rather, it uses the imagery of long life to convey the joy and permanence of the eternal state.

 

The main difficulty with this interpretation is that it assumes Isaiah’s audience could not comprehend the idea of death being abolished. Yet Isaiah himself explicitly teaches the complete removal of death in another passage:

 

“He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.”
Isaiah 25:8 KJV

 

This shows that the concept of death’s total defeat was not beyond the understanding of Isaiah’s contemporaries. If Isaiah could plainly describe a future in which death no longer exists, then there is no reason to assume that Isaiah 65 must use symbolic language to communicate the same idea. Instead, the straightforward reading of Isaiah 65:20, that death still occurs, should be taken seriously.

 

Isaiah 65:17–25 therefore presents a significant challenge to the amillennial position because it clearly portrays a future era in which death remains but lifespans are greatly extended. This does not align with the present age or the eternal state. When Isaiah 25:8 is considered alongside this passage, the amillennial explanation loses coherence, since Isaiah was fully capable of describing the complete abolition of death when that was his meaning. The premillennial interpretation, by contrast, accommodates all the details of the text without strain, making an intermediate kingdom the most natural reading of the passage.