A Critique of the Premillennial View of Scripture and Review of its Historical Development with a consideration of Revelation 20:1-6Alan Nairne 1931-2009
A Critique of the Premillennial View of Scripture and Review of its Historical Development with a consideration of Revelation 20:1-6
I. INTRODUCTION "A critique of the premillennial view of scripture? With special reference to the above verses? It looks to me," you say, "perfectly comprehensible plain language and hardly admits of a challenge. Surely, everyone with a little knowledge of prophecy knows that the 1000 years millennium follows the resurrection of dead believers, or rapture of the living at the Second Coming of Christ. He will then set up His Kingdom, and with the Church reign in Jerusalem for the thousand years which will be a time of peace and plenty, Satan having been bound. The rest of the chapter tells us that at the end of the 1000 years Satan will be released when there will be the final rebellion, Satan and his hordes besieging Jerusalem. These will be destroyed by fire from heaven, followed by the final resurrection and judgment. Where's your difficulty?" Well, I must admit, it is very neat. An open and shut case, apparently. But I do have my difficulties with that interpretation. The reader who is aware of eschatological distinctions will have recognised that it is the Classic or Historic Premillennial scheme that my questioner has outlined above. It is the very barest of bones that is defined. I have not even assumed that it must include the distinctive and dominant position of Israel among the nations. Even far less have I assumed that it must include the exaggerated features of Dispensational Theology which have been superimposed upon a premillennial view of the end-times, and now dominates it. In fact, Classic, or Historic Premillenarians must be very much in the minority now. So for simplicity's sake I shall examine the foundations of Historic Premillennialism only. If these are seriously undermined by my considerations, the whole edifice, including "Dispensational Truth," ought to fall. However, unless any of its devotees are very objective and honest in their considerations, this will not happen. The reasons for this are because the Dispensational edifice is also very much a matter of the heart, it has largely filled out the details of the 1000 years, it is very pervasive of the whole of Scripture (see the prolific notes of the Scofield Reference Bible), and, because of all these features it is very binding upon the thought processes. As someone has said, "....it is consistent, logical and utterly fallacious." For release from the system a very diligent and impartial examination of the whole of Scripture is needed. Not only so, but, however undermined a doctrine may be, until something of substance is seen to replace it, no shift will be made - and that can hardly be achieved within the limited scope of this paper. As it is, the paper is rather long in examining the flaws in the millenarian interpretation of Revelation 20:1-6 before providing the framework, at least, of what I believe to a biblically based exposition of it. But for the reasons I have just given, please bear with me. I shall not consider Dispensationalism, also for the reason I gave above - that it stands or falls with the broader considerations, and it would need a paper to itself. For those readers who may wish to investigate the novelties of the Dispensational interpretation of Scripture, I refer you to Reese's The Approaching Advent of Christ and Allis's Prophecy and the Church, details of which are given in the bibliography. These, though dated, are very thorough, and, in my opinion, unsurpassed. Reprints may be available. The USA market has some careful up-to-date studies, as Dispensationalists in that country have shifted ground to try to eliminate weaknesses - the publications of The Chalcedon Foundation PO Box 158 Vallecito, CA 95251 USA or http://www.chalcedon.edu could be consulted with profit. I have not included any consideration of the nation of Israel's place in the millennium because I have sought to fully deal with that question in my paper entitled Does the nation of Israel have a distinct future apart from the church in the kingdom of God? I use the KJV, and my readers are presumed to be reasonably familiar with the terms generally used in dealing with prophetic subjects. II. AN OPEN AND SHUT CASE? Assuming that you are familiar with the book of Revelation and the Scriptures, please consider the following points which comprise hermeneutical principles, and a historical overview from the Apostolic Fathers as well as Scripture. A. Hermeneutical principles
The idea of a millennium is usually associated with a futurist interpretation of the Book of Revelation. That is, from chapter four to nineteen, everything is assigned to a period just prior to the Second Coming. This, despite the fact that three times at the beginning of his prophecy John indicates the close proximity of the events of which he will write - "things which must shortly come to pass" (v.1) and "the time is at hand" (v.3), and five times at the end of his book in similar terms, but adding "Behold I come quickly" (22:6,7,10,12 and 20) . The purpose of the book is to strengthen the resolve and comfort the Church which was beginning to suffer persecution, and would continue to suffer persecution for many years to come. Of what comfort would it have been for them if the greater part of the prophecy pointed to a remote horizon that was millennia away? Moreover, by deferring Christ's full victory until a remote period of history, his present authority in government both providentialy and through the Church is negated. The Book is all about Christ's government and victory following his death and ascension. Futurism as a primary principle of interpretation is thoroughly bad hermeneutic. Prophecy is normally rooted in the present, or near future. B. Biblical principles. The Scriptures are clear in their indication that by the time of the second coming of Christ ALL the elect will be gathered in. Who, therefore, is going to be saved after that event? Upon what principle are they saved? Where do the saints come from who theocratically rule the whole world until besieged at the end of the millennium? 1. The elect are complete at the Second Coming.
Moreover the NT consistently indicates that the Second Coming is the termination of history, not the beginning of a whole new phase. This is clear from I Cor.15:23-28 -
I give some further Scriptures, originally provided in my earlier paper indicating this feature - [4] 2. The ungodly are to be judged
3. Believers are encouraged to persevere unto the day
"The Day" concludes earth's history. I would consider, also, that the parables of Jesus in Matthew chapter 13 are conclusive concerning the harvest, which, he explains is the end of the age. This is but a small selection of Scriptures from the NT. The consistent testimony is that Christ's Second Coming is not the beginning of a new time of probation for the ungodly, and a new start for Israel, or anybody else, but the termination of history with the resurrection of both wicked and godly dead, followed by judgment, and the eternal state. This is the consistent testimony of all the historic creeds. 4. The Scriptures and other means of grace for the perfection of the church will be no longer required after the Second Coming.
The "Great Commission" will have ended. 5. The Kingdom of God established between the advents.2 Again, the NT is quite clear that Jesus began to establish as part of his ministry the kingdom foretold by the prophets, and was enthroned at his ascension as the reigning sovereign who establishes his kingdom. The idea that the kingdom's full manifestation follows his second coming is also plainly contrary to I Cor. 15:23-28 quoted above.
6. The resurrection of righteous and unrighteous is practically simultaneous. The resurrections of godly and the ungodly both take place closely proximate to each other. There is certainly no room for the insertion of a 1000 years. It is vain for premillennial interpreters to plead that the day of judgment is 1000 years (plus "a little season"!) long. Vain also to plead that the "book of life" is only consulted to prove that no names are in it at that judgment! The following Scriptures are very clear.
These are the main points of my difficulties with the millenarian interpretation of prophecy. In the case of the truly Historic Premillennial interpreters there is a paucity of material available with which to fill the 1000 years because such agree with those few Church Fathers who espoused millenarianism, and they saw the OT prophecies fulfilled in the Church! (This is dealt with in section VI. below). Augustine3 systematised the non-millenarian viewpoint in his City of God (413-426AD), and the millenarian interpretation was held chiefly by groups outside of the Catholic Church until it was revived again after the Reformation. But there was still the paucity of millennial detail previously mentioned. It was John Nelson Darby's (c. 1830) Dispensational Theology which remedied this with its radical futurism, putting all OT prophecy to be fulfilled subsequent to Christ [i.e. concerning the Church) into the 1000 years, which has been adopted by Classic Premillennialism where the historicist method of interpretation is not retained. It is for this reason Dispensationalism has to be touched upon occaisionally. Interpreters, whether pre- post- or a-Millennial, (and especially Dispensational!) claim to base their understanding of Scripture upon Scripture.. Yet a little thought will tell us that tradition, or what our peers believe, or the international scene (e.g. the establishment of the State of Israel), and even our emotions persuade us to interpret Scripture one way or the other. And so, however cogent a given rehearsal of Scripture may be, there are many more aspects which must be addressed before we can be persuaded to shift our viewpoint. Another strong pull toward millenarianism is that there is a whole raft of OT Scriptures which were not fulfilled at the first coming of Christ. When, then, are they to be fulfilled? Until this question is answered there will be no shift. How did the Apostles handle the OT scriptures? This question was covered in my previous paper and is reproduced here for those who have not referred to it. III. THE NT USE OF OT PROPHECIES 1. General principles. Consider firstly Paul's testimony to King Agrippa in Acts 26 -
Secondly, Peter says:-
In the first Scripture the expression "none other things" is pretty restrictive! Paul would restrict the message of the OT to redemption. Even Peter in the second Scripture is restrictive. "UNTO US they did minister the things..." So the burden of the Spirit of Christ in the prophets of old was redemption and the Church. Of course, it ought not to be necessary to say it, but clearly the Apostles were referring to the prophecies concerning the "age to come", the "days of Messiah", the "New Covenant" age, etc. in which they were themselves ministering. In saying "not unto themselves" Peter was not, of course, denying their other main burden for their own times which concerned the apostacy of Israel and Judah, their captivities, and restoration. But even the promises of restoration in the near future often merged into pictures of glorious prospects of the true Israel under her Deliverer in the present age. In looking forward to this coming when the significance of the Old Covenant was to cease, and with it "Israel after the flesh" (I Cor.10:18), how could the Spirit of God convey the spiritual nature of the Church other than under the forms then existing? Is it not the same with ourselves concerning "heaven" described as having streets of gold, a temple a 1500 miles high cube (or maybe a pyramid) with a wall all around only 216 feet high! And those gates of pearl (some oysters!)!!! Other OT Scriptures when interpreted literally often yield just as ridiculous results. Consider Ezekiel's parcelling out the land of Israel - using cubits it is far too small, using rods there is not room for it in Palestine! To say nothing of the fact that the restrictive features of the natural terrain are totally ignored. Moreover, are we going to reconstitute nations long since vanished - Babylon, Tyre, Moab, Ammon - for them to feature in end-time drama? And as for the lion eating straw as the ox (Isa.11:7), God could do it, but are we to believe he will recreate the lion's digestive system to suit? 2. Specific examples. How did the Apostles understand and use the OT prophecies? Let us consider their use of a couple of representative NT Scriptures. James' words to the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 -
The Apostles saw the "tabernacle of David" as a picture of the new people of God which included Gentiles in this present age. That is its plain meaning. What more familiar picture of the Church do we have in the NT than that of a Temple? Take Peter's message on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter 2 -
David, "being a prophet" recognised that God's promises to him and his offspring related to none less than the Messiah himself, and that the Davidic throne was but a picture of the heavenly throne of "great David's greater Son". I believe we need to understand that these men of God in the OT had a lot more spiritual discernment than we give them credit for. They knew that they, and the history of their nation, were but shadows of the eternal substance. They did not entertain illusions of an indefinitely continuing present state of affairs. Why do so many of us ignore the Divine interpretation of these promises, and do not accept the fulfillment that even the Patriarchs, David and the Prophets saw? 3. Old Testament perspectives. Did Abraham think that he had the land for ever? No; but he knew that what it pictured was for ever. What does the writer to Hebrews tell us?
I assume my readers will know the Scriptures which refer to Jerusalem as the New Covenant heavenly city, but, hoping that you will read the contexts of all these Scriptures, you will find them in Gal.4:21ff and Heb.12:18ff. And, best known, perhaps, that in Revelation 21, also pictured as the bride of Christ. The true biblical significance of Jerusalem, or Zion is in its prefiguring of the corporate people of God (also pictured as the Bride of Christ) in this age. This is in contrast to Babylon of old, with the whore, prefiguring the corporate manifestations of a persecuting secular and religious world as described in the book of Revelation chapters 17 and 18. In each case there are two cities and two women It may be exciting to remember the Six Day War, and follow the career of Saddam Hussein and his visions of a new Babylon. They, as Hitler and Mussolini in their time featured in "end time" speculation, will also pass into history. But the Scriptures focus upon no such things any more than they do concerning an end-time Jerusalem located in Palestine. Then was the promise to Abraham and his people of possession of the land to its utmost borders (Gen.15:18) never fulfilled? Millenarians tell us that this is yet awaited. But the promise was utterly fulfilled, for we are told by Joshua (21:43,45 and 23:14)
Solomon in his day acknowledged this in almost identical words (I Kings 8:56). The selfsame boundaries promised to Abraham are also specified (I Kings 4:21,24). To ignore this testimony and insist that Israel has still "everlasting" title to the land is to ignore the explanation given in the NT and substitute something from Judaism. So, in addition to considering Scripture, we must also consider what these Apostolic Fathers believed. After all, it may be that in spite of the consensus of the Scriptures used above, readers may say that they have read that the majority of the early Fathers were premillennial in view, and they were closest to the apostles to know what they thought. IV. WERE THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS LARGELY PREMILLENARIAN? The facts are that for the first 150 years the concept of a one thousand year earthly reign was only occasionally referred to by the Church Fathers and then largely as a rebuttal of the doctrine as a non-orthodox notion inherited from Judaism. It was never, therefore, incorporated into any of the major historic creeds. Some Dispensational authors have made exaggerated claims that their's is the historic faith of the early church. For instance, Grier in his The Momentous Event quotes Dispensationalist Dr. Charles Feinberg as asserting it as an admitted fact that "the entire early Church of the first three centuries was pre-millenial, almost to a man." Testing the accuracy of this statement Grier quotes from the Church Fathers of that period and finds that of eleven who mention eschatology only two favour the idea of an earthly millennium! The truth of this can be tested by any reader who wishes to refer to the Library of the Ante-Nicene Fathers. I use Grier's references to the Fathers nearest the apostles up to 150AD. [5] Clement's first epistle (90's AD) refers to the coming again of Christ and a future resurrection, but has no hint of two resurrections or a resurrection of the righteous only, nor of a millennial kingdom on earth. His second epistle looks forward to the second coming, resurrection, judgment and the life everlasting, but says nothing of any millennial kingdom on earth. The kingdom to which he looks is not a thing of earth and time; in it the promises are fully realized, but in another dimension. Polycarp writes (about AD110) of resurrection and judgment, but says nothing concerning a millennial kingdom on earth. Ignatius, who wrote a number of letters is taken up with the prospect of a martyr's death, saying "These are the last times", but of end time events he says nothing. The Didache, or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, (2nd cent.) exhorts to faithfulness amidst trial and apostacy and the rising of a world-deceiver. Grier quotes - And then shall appear the sign of the truth: first the sign of the opening in heaven; then the voice of the trumpet; and third, the resurrection of the dead. Not, however, of all, but as was said: "The Lord shall come and all His saints with Him." Then shall the world see the Lord coming upon the clouds of heaven. It is urged, however, that there is a distinction between the resurrection of saints and that of sinners, and premillenarians, says Grier, are quick to insert their thousand years between the two. But, they have missed the point - a brief interval in logical conception at least must be assumed between the resurrection of believers and unbelievers; but this by no means opens the door to a rounded-off period of a thousand years. The two are practically simultaneous; they are one resurrection. The Didache teaches concerning the Antichrist and tribulation. But no claim can be made in this literature for a thousand years existing between the resurrection of the church and that of the unrighteous. The Epistle of Barnabus (2nd century) speaks of the day of judgment and rewards to the righteous and wicked. But he speaks in ways of these events which excludes any earthly millennium with unregenerate men being under the reign of Christ. The Epistle to Diognetus speaks of a future kingdom, but it is in heaven and will be given to those who love Christ. Hegesippus, a distinguished ecclesiastical writer, is referred to by Eusebius the fourth century historian. Hegesippus refers to a tradition concerning two members of the family of our Lord, the grandchildren of Jude, the brother of our Lord. When brought before the Emperor Domitian (AD 81-96) and asked about Christ's kingdom and when and where it would appear, they said "that it was not a temporal or an earthly kingdom, but celestial and angelic; that it would appear at the end of the world, when, coming in glory, He would judge the quick and the dead, and give to evey one according to his works." They were certainly no believers in an earthly millennial kingdom. In the first half of the second century, continues Grier, there are really only two to whom we can point with any certainty as holding a future reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years - Papias and Justin Martyr. There was, of course, the heretic Cerinthus also. We are indebted to Irenaeus and Eusebius for some fragments from Papias. He pictures in extravagant language the ten thousand-fold fruitfulness of the earth during the millennium. Eusebius says that Papias passed on certain strange parables of our Lord and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too fabulous...[concerning] a certain strange millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined...not understanding correctly,...for he is very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses. Eusebius does not think very highly of the pre-millennarian views of Papias, apparently. It was through Papias, according to Eusebius, that Irenaeus and many others "were carried away by a similar opinion." Albertus Pieters quotes Papias' extravagant language as given by Irenaeus -
Pieters asks from where did Papias get his information? Irenaeus thinks it came originally from Jesus. But he points out that the source was from Jewish apocalyptic literature, quoting very similar language from both The Apocalypse of Baruch, and The Book of Enoch [6]. In addition to these, Oswald Allis points out that chiliastic (Gk.=1000) views were extensively circulated in the Early Church through such Jewish or Jewish-Christian writings such as 4 Esdras, Assumption of Moses, Ascension of Isaiah, and Psalms of Solomon, writings which neither Jews nor Christians regarded as canonical. [7] Justin (died c. AD 166) certainly says that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, and "that thereafter the general and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place." Justin's millennium would have no special place at all for the Jew, for he tells us over and over that Christians "are the true Israelite race." He tells us that he and others who are right-minded Christians on all points hold to this notion of a millennium, but he admits that "many who belong to the pure and pious faith and are true Christians think otherwise." But elsewhere, Justin's teaching seems to preclude the idea of a millennium, and to that extent he is not consistent. These, then, are the only two of all the writers in the first half of the second century who may with any certainty be called pre-millenarians, though later, Irenaeus espoused this view and became influential in propagating it. Certainly, there have always been those who held the earthly millennial doctrine, but the majority did not accept it. Pieters' conclusion on the source of Papias' ideas is significant.
Again, almost universally, the Fathers saw the church as the fulfillment of OT prophecy, and did not see a Jewish character to the 1000 years. Pieters, as always, gives illustrative quotations. These we will provide after the next section. V. THE WRITER WHO LED OTHERS ASTRAY We may well ask why, with the above evidence available for any author to research, the claim was made that millennialism was the historic view of the early church? In part at least, it was because authors quoted from an earlier writer, G N H Peters, without doing their own research. Gentry gives us details. He writes,
The errors in Peters' work, Gentry continues,
Gentry concludes his quotations from Boyd's work by quoting his statement
VI. THE EARLY FATHERS - "REPLACEMENT" THEOLOGIANS! It is quite clear that most of the Apostolic Fathers saw the Church as the inheritors of the OT prophetic promises. This is in keeping with Paul's writings in Romans chapter four and the Galatian epistle. Pieters continues [18]
[JND was the founder of the modern dispensational scheme of interpretation]. I really do need to emphasise the last paragraph - it is quite clear that most of the Apostolic Fathers saw the Church as the inheritors of the OT prophetic promises....the whole church, millenarian and antimillenarian, agreed with them... Pieters, as I have said, does not fail to corroborate his statements, and quotes Justin Martyr-
Quoting Irenaeus-
Hippolytus, quoting from Isaiah says, 'For it is not of the Jews that he spake of old, nor is it of the city of Zion, but of the church.' [19] VII. THE NON-MILLENARIAN VIEW OF REVELATION 20:1-6 It is a sound principle of interpretation to work from a more easily understood section of text towards an understanding of that which is more difficult. The 1000 years is the expression that has been most difficult to interpret because it is not anchored in Scripture. I propose, therefore, to consider first "the first resurrection", followed by the "thrones", and the "binding of Satan", because these themes are referred to throughout Scripture, We shall then be in a position betterto understand the meaning of the 1000 years. 1. The First Resurrection. We first need to ask ourselves, "what is the first death?" Well, surely, the first death is that which passed upon Adam, and upon all mankind because of his sin. We remember that God said to Adam concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,
The immediate result was surely in his personality, his soul and spirit. Estrangement and separation took place; his body did not die until centuries later. Spiritual death is a common concept in the NT . Paul describes the Ephesian Christians before they came to the Lord as,
To Timothy he wrote
Christ to the same effect -
This, then, of the soul and spirit, is the first death. And it is, therefore, this spiritual nature of man that must be raised first. This is a major major concept in Paul's theology, as the following verses show - In Ephesians chapter two, to which we have just referred, verse five Paul writes,
The soul which was dead has been made alive, resurrected. We are already beginning to understand verse four which speaks of saints living and reigning with Christ. So we see that the first resurrection, for Christians, is their being made alive in Christ. Colossians 2:12-13 and 3:1-2 are to the same effect -
John, who wrote the Revelation, uses the same thought in his first letter,
Passing from death unto life is resurrection. And it takes place, not in heaven, but here and now upon earth. What else can we expect John to mean, but that which he has already described in his Gospel (5:24) and Epistle? To suggest something else is flying in the face of what is obvious. Can we believe that his original readers would have thought he meant "dying, and the soul being translated into heaven?", or "the first stage of his two stage separated-by-a-thousand-years coming?" The resurrection of the body, which takes place at Christ's second coming is clearly not the "first resurrection." The resurrection of the body takes place "in the last day" as Jesus himself taught, as John records in his Gospel, chapters 6: 39, 40, 44, 54 and 11:24. The first resurrection is the believer being "made alive", "raised from death to life" by regeneration of the Holy Spirit. 2. The Thrones. The next feature which is reasonably easy to identify with Scripture, both in this book and throughout the NT is that found in verse 4 of our twentieth chapter. "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them." The Dispensationalist certainly, and possibly the Historic Premillennialist will both think of these thrones as being upon earth. What? Do we expect millions of little thrones in the earthly millennium each with a believer (or maybe, for the Dispensationalist, a Jewish-ex-tribulation-saint), each ruling his little patch? To put it this way is to reveal the folly of believing that they are literal thrones. But whilst it may be in keeping with Jewish expectations, not only is it not in keeping with the NT, it is, in fact, plainly contrary to it. Did not Jesus, himself, say
Did he not also say,
The whole concept of a material, earthly kingdom with thrones, warfare, besieging hordes (Rev.19:14-16, 20:8-9) is carnal, Jewish, and should never have gained a lodgement in the minds and hearts of New Covenant Christians. Thrones in the NT is clearly a figure of speech suggesting rulership of the saints. We have it in Rev.3:21
Clearly, not a literal single throne.But it is, neverthless a sharing of the Messianic rule of Christ. Paul wrote to Timothy (II.2:12)
To the Romans (5:17)
To the Corinthians he wrote
This is spiritual dominion over everything, over the world, the flesh and the devil. Sin has no dominion over the Christian.(Rom.6:14). We bruise Satan under our feet. (Rom.16:20). We overcome the world.(I John 5:4). We share Christ's present throne and victory now. (Eph.2:6). Whilst we share the victory of our Lord Jesus Christ, yet it is here and now. This is where our rulership is located. Thus we read in Revelation 5:10
Read again that tremendous piece of inspired revelation from the pen of Paul in Romans 8:31-39 - it concludes
3. Satan bound. It hardly needs to be said that the "key", "chain" and "binding" of Satan, though real, are nevertheless figures of speech. What, then, is this binding? Again, for those familiar with their Bibles, there should be little difficulty in interpreting this feature. The identity of the angel does not affect the interpretation. But the use of the terms "key" and "binding" give a clue to his identity being that of the Lord Jesus Christ. After all, in Rev.1:18 Christ says that he is the one who has the keys of hell and of death, and in 3:7 that he has the key of David with power to open and shut. Keys speak of authority in Scripture, as when Christ committed to Peter the keys of the Kingdom of heaven, connected with "binding and loosing" (Matt.16:20). In Matt.18:18-20 Christ gave this authority to the Church. But, even if this personage is an angel, the authority came from the Lord of all, and the "binding" of Satan was effective. When did this binding take place? Matthew helps us again (12:28), writing,
Clearly, had Satan not been bound by Christ, he would not have had the liberty to spoil his goods. Did not John write in his first letter (3:8)
The banishing of Satan from heaven has not to await the Second Coming. Jesus tells us
When the seventy disciples returned from their tour of preaching and reported to Jesus their success in the casting out of demons he replied,
But, alas, some of us would prefer to believe what our newspapers and observations tell us rather than believe the testimony of Scripture. The trouble, really, is that such folks do not understand what the binding of Satan means. They look at the national and international scene and interpret it as getting steadily worse. Perhaps the very reason that it is getting worse is the fault of the church, because we are ignorant of Scripture and we say in our hearts "it will be like this until Jesus comes again to bring us into victory." This is why the futurist genre of premillennial interpretation of Scripture needs challenging. It deprives us of the knowledge of Christ's present powerful ministry not only in the Church, but through the Church to affect society. So then, the fall and binding of Satan took place during the ministry of Christ through the preaching of the Gospel. That a mighty change took place in heaven and earth is indicated by the sphere of the binding of Satan. We are told that
Up until that time the Gentile nations and empires - Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome had been in bondage to idolatry. They were completely under the dominion of Satan. But following the ministry of Christ, culminating in his death, burial, resurrection and ascension to the right hand of God, and the pouring out of the promised Holy Spirit, the whole Roman Empire was evangelised within a generation. The effect upon society provoked reaction -
Paul could write to the Romans (10:18)
Is it not clear, even today, that the Gospel has had a tremendous effect on every continent? The Word of God is being published every year in an ever increasing number of languages, and its effects are very powerful in many areas in the "third world" today. In fact it is sending missionaries to re-evangelise us in the West! So we have solved our problem. The duration of the 1000 years is this present Gospel age. It is coeval with this binding of Satan, and extends for the duration of the Church's ministry. The chain then, surely, is the Gospel which is preached and which allows the prisoners to be released from the thraldom of their sins.
4. The thousand years. Having looked at "The First Resurrection", The "Thrones" and the "Binding of Satan", all of which are clearly referred to in Scripture outside of the Book of Revelation, and having seen that it is the period between the two advents, we are now in a position to investigate the symbolism of the thousand years. The term "thousand" is used a number of times in the OT.
It is used in a figurative way of vastness of numbers. Very familiar to us is God's statement in Psalm 50:10 that
No one is foolish enough to think that the cattle upon the one thousand and first hill is not his! It is recognised as an expression of comprehensive inclusion of all cattle upon all hills. In terms of bible numerology (in the realm of which we need to be careful) ten stands for totality, or completeness, and this is the cube of ten, signifying vastness. In the book of Revelation it is added to 144 to signify the totality of God's people, and to 12 furlongs indicating that the City occupies all significant space in God's purposes. The trouble for many of us is that such an explanation seems rather prosaic against the pictures which have been painted of a universal glorious "Golden Age". But the trouble really is that the glories of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ are not believed as being applicable to this age, but await the "age to come". Another of the glories of the church is that we are not only enthroned and share Christ's reign, but, we are told, "judgment was given unto them." 5. The saints judging. Perhaps we ought to think of judging in terms rather wider than that of adjudication in a court. For, certainly, it cannot be sharing in the final judgment, for it is to Christ that this is committed. We note that the function extends for the duration of the thousand years, and, is therefore continuous. This would make sense if we also bear in mind that the word "judge" is used in Scripture in the sense of, as in the book of Judges, one who rules, or delivers from oppression, or is a saviour among his people, restoring the backslidden. We are reminded of Paul's words
One can think of the whole ethos of our Christian life in relation to our ministering to the people of God - all this will come under this particular aspect of "judging". But, is there not also the thought of "ruling" within the community of God? One remembers the verses in Matthew chapters sixteen and eighteen that we have already considered concerning authority to "bind and loose" demonic powers, but it was given for the exercise of authority within the Church for discipline, as well as for use in the wider sphere of the Kingdom of God. Would that the Church always obeyed the instructions of Paul to the Corinthians in cases of immorality.
Can we not also exercise authority in the realm of prayer and intercession concerning ungodly situations in our communities?
This, surely, is possessing the kingdom
This section could be expanded considerably, but readers familiar with their Bibles will not find this necessary, they will readily identify with these themes. 6. The Martyrs We have already seen that "thrones" signify the reign of those who are "in Christ". All true believers allowing the life of Christ to work in and through them are included in this reign. The fact that we now have a specific group mentioned does not negate this. We need to remember that for the majority of its existence the true body of Christ has been persecuted, often unto death, by the Papal authorities, usually in association with secular rulers. Reference to any martyrology with confirm this. And, whilst this source of persecution may have diminished, we are thanful for the many Christian Agencies that identify and campaign for the release of prisoners, and report the destruction of churches and often deaths of many ordinary believers. This takes place frequently under fundamentalist Islamic rule, and one has only to think of East Timor (still), and the genocide of Christians in Burma and Southern Sudan. Occurring also throughout the Middle East, it is now extending to India from Hindu fundamentalists. But we need not be surprised. For Christianity was birthed in persecution from the Jews, as we read so frequently in the book of Acts. Jesus, himself, reminded us -
Paul, to the same effect -
Persecution, even unto death, must, therefore not be considered something exceptional for the Christian. But, neither can those of us who escape such tribulation be penalised - it is the committment to the cause of Christ in our daily lives, and the intention that is to be honoured. So, both those who were beheaded (a Roman form of punishment), and those
And so,
7. Satan loosed and the siege - verses 7-11. We have already seen under #3. above, Satan being bound, is in the sphere of his ability to "deceive the nations". Certainly, God allows judicial blindness to those who wilfully do not receive the Gospel, as Paul tells the Corinthian Christians (II Cor.4:4). But it would seem, for reasons that he has chosen not explicitly to share with us, God gives the Devil liberty to deceive those who will not receive the truth. But note three things. Firstly, it is God who gives him permission. The situation is entirely within his control for the working out of his purposes, which theme is covered on page 22. Secondly, the people of God were never in any danger. We read that Satan's agents merely
Thirdly, (and, at the end of this paper I should hardly need to say this!) we are not to think of the scene in carnal physical terms. Clearly the scene is symbolic. a). The assault is a result of Satan's loosing, and he is allowed to "deceive", doubtless concerning the knowledge of the true God. b). how could hordes "the number of whom is as the sand of the sea" (v.8) be accomodated in little Palestine, to say nothing of the immediate surrounds of Jerusalem? How could that little land sustain such an army? c). The reference to Gog and Magog (v.8) and the whole picture has been taken out of the similar picture found in Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39. Except that in Ezekiel the assault precedes the era of peace and stability, whilst in Revelation it follows the 1000 years. Are we to alter the text of Ezekiel? Or are we to alter that of Revelation? Surely the implication is that we are not dealing with history either in the Old or New Testaments. Reasons for not interpreting this section literally The whole idea of interpreting this scene literally needs to be looked at more closely. Unless one is blinded by a detemined committment to interpret everything literally, the elements shout out their need to be interpreted symbolically. Fairbairn has provided the following useful insights.[20]. where applicable they are equally valid for Rev.20.
I trust that we have seen from this section, what we have seen from the other sections, that there is no "golden age" subsequent to the second advent, but, the period of 1000 years is to be located between the advents, when, whatever tribulation and persecution the Church of God has suffered, and may yet suffer, nevertheless even in this she rules and reigns, not only in the heavenlies, but also upon the earth. There are sufficient Scriptures to warrant the conviction that the Church will experience a period when her influence throughout the earth will be powerful. Perhaps this will have to form the subject of a separate paper, as it is outside the remit of this one, examining, as we have, the whole concept of Pre-millennialism. Nevertheless, as I have said earlier, although God has not chosen explicitly to reveal the reason for his release of the powers of evil immediately prior to the second coming we should be able to tentatively gather a little more than we have in Revelation from the similar account in Ezekiel. We notice from Ezekiel 38 verses 10-13 that the people of God are enjoying a time of unparalleled prosperity -
I take this OT picture of the end time to reflect the success of the gospel of Christ throughout the world. Material prosperity is a by product of the success of the gospel in bringing people to a saving, converting, purifying knowledge of the Lord. But, as has been seen so often, peace and material wellbeing, the offspring of spiritual wellbeing, draws out the envy and malice of the enemy. One has only to think of, for example, the terrible persecutions under Simon de Montford which wiped out whole communities of those peaceful, industrious Waldensian Christians living in Southern France, at the instigation of Pope Innoent III from 1209AD which continued for twenty years. But such a picture was repeated for centuries in this, and other areas in Europe, wherever there was Papal influence. Which student Church History can forget that infamous period in Paris in 1572 starting with the massacre which began on St Bartholomews Day? The signal for the butchery to begin was the early morning ringing of the church bells. Thousands of peace-loving Huguenots men, women and children, were cruelly butchered, many in their beds at the instigation of the Pope and the Queen-Mother, Catherine de Medici? Thousand of bodies lay stren in the streets which ran with their blood. In 1685 the Edict of Nantes was revoked, and all male Huguenots were to be sentenced to death if they would not convert to Rome. Risking such a sentence these industrious business and crafts people fled the country to the economic loss of France and the gain of those countries in Europe, including Britain, and America, which gave them sanctuary. [21] And so it seems likely that at the end of the age will take place the last great final avaricious, covetous attempt to expropriate the heritage of believers, and wipe out the truth of the Gospel of christ from the earth. But, as has already been noticed, the initiative has come from the Lord himself, ch. 38
God chooses not judge before evil has fully developed,
So, in keeping with well defined principles revealed in Scripture it is hardly surprising if the utter irreconcilability of good and evil shall be thus revealed and utterly and finally dealt with.
8. The Great White Throne We have already spent time demonstrating from the Scriptures that the resurrection of the righteous and the unrighteous takes place practically simultaneously at the coming of Christ. There is a total universality that is described in this stupendous vision.
Clearly, two classes are described. "Whosoever was not found written in the book of life" and, obviously, those whose names were found written. It is futile for the Scofield Reference Bible to say of these verses "the 'dead ' can only be the wicked dead.". Of course, having built a whole doctrine upon the separation of the resurrections, what else can be said? But such an idea does not come from the Scripture, but rather the requirements of the system. 9. Conclusion. And so, my dearly beloved brothers and sisters in Christ, I commend this exercise to your careful and prayerful consideration. I do not think that I can finish this paper better than by quoting what I wrote in my earlier paper.
Bibliography A list of works, some of which are in the references above, is given below. These I have found to be invaluable, and are recommended to the serious student of prophecy. Some, though dated, deal in depth with principles of interpretation, and are, in the writer's opinion, unsurpassed. If they have been reprinted or can be obtained secondhand, the investment will be worth while. However, prophetic insights, as other biblical areas, move on, and judicious choice of modern works is also recommended. For some supply sources see below. Oswald T Allis Prophecy and the Church - An Examination of the Claims of Dispensationalists James Clarke & Co Ltd London 1945 (nonmillenarian). Lorraine Boettner The Millennium Presbyterian and Reformed Pub.Co. 1966. Sets out the three major viewpoints. David Chilton The Days of Vengeance - An Exposition of the Book of Revelation Dominion Press PO Box 7999 Tyler TX 3rd printing 1990 (Preterist/Post-Millennial). David Chilton Paradise Restored - A Biblical Theology of Dominion Reconstruction Press PO Box 7999 Tyler TX (Preterist/Post-Millennial) Dr. Patrick Fairbairn (1805-1874), Free Church of Scotland, Professor of Divinity Aberdeen (1853-1856) and Principal of Glasgow College (1856-1874). Typology of Scripture (1854) 900pp. Oliphants, London 1953, The Interpretation of Prophecy (1856) Banner of Truth Trust London 1964, An Exposition of Ezekiel (1851) Sovereign Grace Pub. Evansville, Indiana 1960 The Revelation of Law in Scripture (1869) Zondervan Pub. House Grand Rapids Michigan. (Post-Millennial. For the serious English reader. For lifetime reference). W. Hendricksen More Than Conquerors - An Interpretation ofthe Book of Revelation Baker Book House Grand Rapids Mich. 20th Printing 1975 (A-millennial In print. A popular author). J Marcellus Kik. Revelation Twenty. Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co. Philadephia, Pen. 1955. This, with Matthew 24 P & R 1948 was reprinted under the title An Eschatology of Victory (Post-Millenial) Albertus Pieters Studies in The Revelation of St. John (1939) Reprinted under title The Lamb, the Woman, and the Dragon. Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. Grand Rapids. 1954. Discusses key sections of the book as Preterist/Historicist/Futurist/non-millenarian. Favours combination, but non-millenarian. Valuable. Alexander Reese The Approaching Advent of Christ - An Examination of the Teaching of J N Darby and his Followers. Marshall Morgan & Scott London c.1937. (Pre-Millennial). Michael Wilcock The Message of Revelation Inter-Varsity Press Leicester England, and Downers Grove Illinois USA (The Bible Speaks Today series) n.d. Published in 1975 as I saw heaven opened. (A-Millennial) Milton S Terry Bible Hermeneutics - A treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. Zondervan Academie Books Grand Rapids Mich. Reprint of useful 19thC. volume. The Chalcedon Foundation's web site is http://www.chalcedon.edu. Although they are Reformed/Post-millennial, their books devoted to "Reconstructionism" otherwise known as "Dominion Theology", or "Theonomy" should, in my opinion, be considered only very judiciously. But the books in their catalogue dealing with prophetic subjects (e.g. Chilton and Gentry's works) are inspirational and scholarly expositions, particularly challenging the Dispensational viewpoint. A UK source of supply is James A Dickson Books, Christian Bookshop, 25, Eldin Industrial Estate, Edgefield Road Loanhead, Edinburgh EH20 9QX. Tel. 0131-448-0701 Second hand stock also. Fairbairn's Typology, Prophecy and Law are in print (they may be USA reprints and therefore available in US.) and can be obtained from Tabernacle Bookshop, Metropolitan Tabernacle, Elephant & Castle, London SE1 6SD. Tel. 020 7735 7076 e-mail Bookshop@MetropolitanTabernacle.org New books, heavily discounted. Footnotes. 1. Whilst this is true, I would like to add a rider to say that what Pieters has said should not be taken as synonymous with the liberal dictum "the Bible should be interpreted the same as any other book." The Bible must be interpreted according to its own claims, and according to the spiritual principles which, as a Divinely inspired book, lie embedded within it. For instance when the Lord said that Moses wrote of him, and how he would suffer and enter into his glory, - we ask, "where in the Pentateuch did Moses write of these things?" The answer must be in the accounts of the sacrificing of Isaac, Joseph's betrayal and exaltation, the Paschal Lamb etc, etc. Dispensationalists, who are great literalists, accuse non-millenarians of being "spiritualisers" in a very pejorative sense. But they themselves are very strong on the "typology" of the Old Testament, which is allegorical in style. Within biblical limits (e.g. see Patrick Fairbairn's (1805-1874) Typology of Scripture) it is valuable. But, inconsistently, Dispensationalists, so strong on spiritualising OT history, are rigid in their insistence on a literal interpretation of prophecy. 2. Strictly speaking, Classic or Historic Premillennialists who interpret the book upon a continuous historicist basis would not disagree with this proposition. But the influence of Dispensationalism has caused the majority of premillennialists to adopt a futurist mode of interpretation which deprives the proposition of its force. 3. The fact that the non-millenarian interpretation was espoused by Augustine (a "Catholic"!) is sufficient to condemn it in the eyes of, for instance, Paul Bailey in his The Supreme Irony. Pub. by Penfold Book and Bible House Bicester UK 1996. The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edn. also draws attention to this feature. p.989. 4. 'These participants include both the martyred saints in heaven ("the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness") and the persevering saints on earth ("...And those who [oitines] - a second class of persons) had not worshipped the beast." Given the time frame concern of John (cf. Rev.1:3,9), his focus is particularly on those martyrs and other saints of the first century era. But it also involves all those who are martyred for Christ and those who live for Him apart from being martyred, for the blessings spread throughout the millennial era.' Gentry, Ibid, p.416 referring to H B Swete, Commentary on Revelation (Grand Rapids:Kregel [1906] 1977) p.262. Alan Nairne, Witney, England, Easter 2000 Part I Does the Nation of Israel have a Distinct Future apart from the Church in the Kingdom of God?
|
||||||||||||||