More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
This was the mystery Paul would now reveal, namely, the reversal of fortune for Israel.
When that number of Gentiles has been gathered in, it will be the end of the age.”[55] Based on this interpretation, when the full number of elect believers among the Gentiles has come in, then Israel’s hardness will be removed, and Israel will attain the promised fullness and acceptance shortly before the return of Jesus Christ.
This raises the question of genre, i.e., the style of writing and how we are to interpret the highly symbolic language of apocalyptic and prophetic literature, such as that in the book of Revelation.
In a sense, Revelation is a New Testament commentary on those redemptive-historical themes left open-ended by the Old Testament prophets, viewed in the greater light of postmessianic revelation.
we must be careful not to read apocalyptic literature without due regard for the historical context.
The first-century reader knew that locusts were symbols of judgment, not pictures of an unknown future technology.
Given the fact that Revelation is apocalyptic in character, prophetic in authority, and epistolary in style, it is apparent that its symbols will be intelligible only against the backdrop of the broader biblical revelation of the Old Testament.
But as Vern Poythress points out, “Words, but not sentences, have a literal or normal meaning. Moreover, for both words and sentences context is all-important in determining meaning at any given point in the act of
The context in Revelation 20 is not historical narrative but apocalyptic prophecy.
Some say the problem with dispensationalists is they move directly from the linguistic level to the referential level without acknowledging either a visionary or a symbolic level of communication in Revelation.[18] This is particularly problematic in Revelation 20, where the literary genre as well as the immediate context should tell us that in addition to the linguistic and referential meanings there are also visionary and symbolic meanings.
to other biblical-theological themes elsewhere in Scripture.
However, the great irony is that by denying a symbolic level of communication in Revelation 20, the dispensationalists end up not interpreting the passages as the original author intended. They have forced the literalistic sense, i.e., the linguistic and referential sense, on a passage that is a vision with a highly symbolic meaning. Nevertheless, the warning about the wax nose of interpretation according to the whims of the interpreter should be heeded. Keeping this in mind drives us to the only authoritative source for determining the meaning of these symbols: the rest of Scripture,
...more
Put more simply, the visions were arranged topically, not chronologically. Although the cycles of judgment in Revelation increase in intensity as the return of our Lord draws near, the vision described in Revelation 20 might come to pass at the same point in history as previous visions in the book. Revelation 20 may, in fact, not be describing events that come chronologically after those recorded in Revelation 19 but events that are contemporaneous with
But this sounds so theoretical. Is there concrete evidence for this? As William Hendriksen points out, “A careful study of chapter 20 will reveal that this chapter describes a period which is synchronous with that of chapter 12.”[23] This
If true, this is a serious blow to all forms of premillennialism, which place the events of Revelation 20 chronologically after the return of Jesus Christ described in Revelation 19.
This is such an important point for premillenarians that they dig in their heels in the face of the challenge raised by amillenarians.
But this exposes one of the most serious weaknesses of premillennialism, namely, the presence of evil among the redeemed during the millennial age, provoking the final eschatological battle.
Christ judges the nations at his second advent as depicted in Revelation 19:11–21, how does this relate to John’s subsequent reference to the nations in Revelation 20:1–3?
the problem for the premillenarian is simply that “it makes no sense to speak of protecting the nations from deception by Satan in 20:1–3 after they have just been both deceived by Satan (16:13–16) and destroyed by Christ at his return in 19:11–21.”
This
This points to the fact that the visions in Revelation 19:11–21 and Revelation 20:7–10 are of the same battle, and the burden of a second fall of the human race into sin during the millennial age associated with premillennialism is eliminated.
is clear that only glorified saints can be on the renewed earth after the return of Jesus Christ. It also should be clear that, according to the analogia fidei, we must interpret unclear or difficult passages of Scripture in light of clearer ones.
The millennial age in which Christ rules, however, is a present reality and not a future hope.
If the premillennial position is correct, the golden age of the millennium, in which Christ reigns for one thousand years, ends with glorified men and women revolting against the visible rule of Christ when Satan is released from the abyss at the end of that time. When viewing this conception of the future millennial age through the analogy of faith, the idea of a second fall at the end of the millennium is so highly problematic that most amillennial interpreters rule out any form of premillennialism a priori. A fall of glorified humanity into sin after Christ’s second advent means that
...more
The binding of Satan simply means that Satan cannot deceive the nations until he is released at the end of the millennial age.
The imagery that Satan is presently bound means that he cannot deceive God’s people en masse, nor can he attack the covenant community with relative impunity, as he did before the coming of the Messiah.
Although Satan remains a fierce foe, persecuting God’s people as he is allowed, he cannot triumph because he is bound until released at the end of the millennial age.
The Gospels clearly teach that the devil’s control and power over the peoples of the world has been weakened since the first advent of Christ (cf. Heb. 2:14).
Satan continues to do all of these things. The amillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 does not deny this.
restrains Satan’s evil activities. His binding does not eliminate them.
Once the divine restraint is lifted, the lawless one suddenly appears, accompanied by lying signs and wonders (2 Thess. 2:1–12). The release of Satan at the end of the millennial age is itself a strong argument in favor of the amillennial interpretation of Revelation 20:1–3. The binding of Satan for a thousand years and his subsequent release surely belong to the present age and not to that period after Christ returns to judge all people, raise the dead, and make all things new.
but where does the scene in verses 4–6 take place? It is clear from the text that the thousand-year reign occurs where the thrones are, for we read, “I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge” (v. 4). The answer is simple: the thrones are in heaven.
Throughout the book of Revelation, the thrones of Christ and his people are invariably said to be in heaven (Rev. 1:4; 3:21; 4:2ff.; etc.).
After Christ returns, disembodied souls no longer reign, because after the resurrection, body and soul are reunited when the perishable becomes imperishable. Once this occurs, the saints will reign not for one thousand years but “for ever and ever” (Rev. 22:5).
The first resurrection includes believers at the return of Christ. The second resurrection includes unbelievers at the end of the thousand years. This is the natural result of understanding the events depicted in Revelation 20 as occurring after those in Revelation 19. This is the sine qua non of all forms of premillennialism. Premillennialism stands or falls at this very point.
When John spoke of the “first resurrection,” he did not mean the first in a series of resurrections of the same kind; rather, he indicated a difference of kind with the resurrection that follows.
The term prōtos may, in fact, refer to a difference in kind rather than reflect a purely sequential order.
Prōtos does not merely mark the present world as first in a series of worlds and certainly not as first in a series of worlds all of the same kind. On the contrary, it characterizes this world as different in kind from the “new” world. It signifies that the present world stands in contrast to the new world order of the consummation which will abide
Then in Revelation 21:1, prōtos does not mean the first in a sequence of the same thing. In fact, it refers to a difference in kind, i.e., something that passes away and is replaced, such as the first heaven and earth. The contrast is not between a first earth and a second earth of the same kind. Rather, John contrasted a fallen creation and a redeemed heaven and earth.
although the first death is the loss of physical life, the “second death” is death of a different kind, death in a metaphorical rather than literal physical
Christians are both spiritually raised from death to life at the moment of regeneration and spiritually raised from earth to heaven at the time of death.
The presence of evil in the millennial age is a problem from which all forms of premillennialism cannot escape.
“Revelation 20:7–10 by itself refutes the postmillennial projections, for it is evident there that the nations of the world have not become officially Christianized institutions during the
John was describing the same event from different camera angles, if you will. In Revelation 19:20, the camera is looking at the beast and the false prophet, while in 20:7–10, the camera focuses on God’s judgment on Satan. This is the same event, and both things occur at the same time.
“The Gospel cannot be proclaimed without the world straightway going mad. Hence it will never be possible for godly teachers to avoid the world’s hatred.”
The one sign of the end Jesus gave, however, that falls into the realm of the church’s responsibility is that the gospel will be proclaimed to the nations before the Lord returns.
The conversion of the Jews is therefore a significant sign that our Lord is soon to return to bring about the final consummation of all things. As Paul put it in Romans 11:15, “What will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?”
The satanic activity associated with the appearance of the final Antichrist corresponds to the release of Satan from the abyss, is also tied (as either cause or effect) to a time of great apostasy in the church, and is said by Paul to immediately precede the return of Jesus Christ,
Therefore, before the Lord returns, the gospel must be preached worldwide, there will be a massive conversion of Jews to faith in Jesus Christ, and the church will experience a time of great apostasy and satanic activity tied to the revelation of the final Antichrist, who appears only to be destroyed by Jesus Christ at his second advent.
There can be no doubt that the tension between the signs preceding the end and the suddenness of the Lord’s return is intentional.
