A Brief Commentary on Revelation Twenty

by Merle R. Ruth

The visions related in the book of Revelation frequently seem to lead right up to the second coming, only to retrace themselves a number of times. Stated other­wise, the book, does not follow a continuous chronological sequence; there is pro­gressive parallelism; there is repeated coverage of the same time span from different perspectives. For example, in chapters 10 and 11 it seems clear that with the soun­ding of the seventh trumpet the whole purpose of God in human history is complete and the time is come for the dead to be judged (11:18). Yet after this announcing of the end, chapter 12 brings us back to the beginning of the Christian era, for there we have pictured the dragon waiting to devour the manchild (the newborn Christ). Another of these "breaks" in continuity occurs between chapter 19 and 20. Revela­tion 20 marks a return to the beginning of the New Testament era and constitutes within itself a comprehensive unit. It is, therefore, a panoramic view of the entire New Testament era including the final consummation. It's successive paragraphs repre­sent a shifting of scenes with the context indicating the location in view.

In support of this view is the following observation: Chapter 19 depicts surely the return of Christ and His crushing of all opposition. It is the climax in a series of visions, each of which lead up to the end of time. At the conclusion of chapter 19, Satan's victims and agents have finally and decisively been dealt with. The fowls have devoured "the flesh of all men" (verse 18). If there is unbroken historical con­tinuity, if chapter 20 is the natuural sequence of chapter 19, as the premillenarians claim, how then is one to account for the sudden presence of "nations" (verse 3) and wicked people as numerous "as the sand of the sea" (verse 8)? Where did they all come from? And so quickly? Weree the exterminated ones quickly resurrected? If, however, there is a break in continuity and chapter 20 represents a return to former ground that has already been traversed and is a unit within itself — then that ob­vious problem is eliminated.

Let's move now to Revelation 20. Hopefully you would agree that Revelation 20:1-3 speaks of the restraint put upon Satan as a consequence of the victory of Christ. Since that victory is a past accomplishment, this binding is an already accomplished fact. Since we ought to let scripture interpret scripture, I believe this binding of Satan is the same as that referred to by our Lord in Matthew 12:29 where Christ speaks of His binding of "the strong man" (Satan) as a prerequisite for "spoiling his house" (snatching lost ones from his domaiin). Significantly, the same Greek work is employed in both passages. The use of the keey and the chain symbolize restraint, and this ter­minology finds a remarkable parallel in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6, both of which speak of past action imposed on demonic forces. Persons who find it difficult to accept the fact that Satan is now "bound" need to reckon with equally strong language used to describe Satan's present condition in the nonapocalyptic books of the New Testament (Colossians 2:15, Hebrews 2:14 and John 12:31, 16:11).

The Greek word translated "bound" in Revelation 20:2 is one that does not repre­sent the person in this state as immobile. Other uses of this word clearly indicate that fact. Note the following: "I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem" (Acts 20:22). "The woman ... is bound by the law to her husband" (Romans 7:2). Satan is indeed bound, but he has been given, we might say, a long chain. A certain gangster was said to have ruled Chicago from a Chicago jail. Something similar could be said of Satan.

Since the key and the chain obviously symbolize restraint, I find it consistent to view the number 1000 as likewise symbolizing a long period of time rather than precisely that many years. This is in keeping with the fact disclosed in Revelation 1:1, namely, that this revelation would be "signified" to John. That anticipates the employment of symbols, numerology, etc. Just as the seven churches are represen­tative of the Church universal, so the 1000 years are representative of the entire "Christian" era, the inter-advent period extending from the first to the second advent of Christ. It would correspond to the present mediatorial reign of Christ. Included in this symbolism may also be the idea of the completeness of Christ's power over the Devil. For the number 1000 is the sacred number three added to the perfect number seven to form ten, the number of completeness, and then raised to the third power. As such, it speaks of the completeness and perfection of Christ's victory over Satan.

If, as the premillenarian claims, Satan is not to be bound until after Christians have gone to be with the Lord ("raptured") and are thus forever beyond Satan's reach, the fact of his being then finally bound affords little, if any, comfort for the present. But if that binding occurred at the first advent, it then becomes a tre­mendous source of inspiration. It supplies the saint with solid ground on which to meet the Enemy.

In spite of the above given evidence that Satan is now "bound", some point to the fact that presently Satan appears to be exercising great deceptive powers. For them, this is conclusive evidence that Revelation 20:1-6 must speak of a yet — future time. Let it be noted, however, that this passage emphasizes one particular area in which his deceptive powers have been restricted. Verse 3 stated that the Devil will deceive the nations no more until the 1000 years are finished. Verse 7 repeats this thought and verse 8 adds that he shall then go forth to deceive the nations, to gather them together to "the war". In other words, the "deception" from which he is now restrained and which he is at the end permitted to exercise, is distinctly stated. He is restrained from "gathering the nations together to the war." What "the war" is appears from Revelation 16:14-16 annd 19:19, where the same great climactic battle is spoken of. It is the battle of tthe war of the great day of God Almighty. A time is evidently coming, and perhaps haas already arrived, when Satan will be permitted to inspire a mass attack upon the true church. The nations (peoples) whom he will gather are referred to as "Gog and Magog," taken from Ezekiel's description of the enemies of God's ancient people. The three chapters, 16, 19 and 20, all speak of this "gathering together" and of "the war." John, in verses 8 and 9, is depicting this final, worldwide oppression of the Church of Christ preceding the second advent. The Church is described under the figure of a camp and a city. Again there is depicted a sudden divine intervention and a final decisive victory for God on behalf of his saints.

According to the pre-millenarian view, verses 4-6 depict a future reign on earth by Christ and His saints centering in Jerusalem along with numerous other details imported from other supposedly related scriptures. Here again I would raise some questions. The souls whom John saw were seated upon "thrones." Elsewhere in the book of Revelation such thrones are located in heaven. I'm sure the reader would acknowledge that chapter 4 is a heavenly scene. The "seats" occupied by the twenty — four elders (4:4) are "throones" — the same Greek word is in one instance translated "seats" and in the other instance, "thrones". If, in chapter 4, these thrones are located in "heaven," is it not likely that in chapter 20 they are also located in "heaven?"

John saw these thrones (seats) occuupied by "souls." Some find it difficult to view these souls as disembodied saiints. I freely admit that there are instances where the term "soul" stands ffor the whole person. But the reader will acknowledge, I am sure, that the meaning of a word in a given instance is determined to some degree by its context. For that reason, I feel that in this instance John saw disembodied saints as they are "with Christ" during the long intermediate state that precedes the general resurrection which comes into view at the end of the chapter. That he is seeing souls rather than bodies seems to be natural inference for it is "the souls of them that were beheaded." The same thought concerning the reign of the martyrs in Paradise while the powers of evil seemingly triumphed on earth was brought into view on the open­ing of the fifth seal (6:9-11). "And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the Word of God," etc. The context in this instance makes it apparent that this, too, is a pre-resurrection scene. The similarity in phraseology, "the souls of ...," argues for the same time period. These "dead" saints "lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." Do we not believe that those who were persecuted unto death during the Roman persecution have been, like the repentant thief, "with Christ in Paradise," and will continue to be there throughout His mediatorial reign (which corresponds to the period of the intermediate period for the dead)? Did not Jesus make the promise: "Him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne." These "souls" are "with Christ" not because He came down to earth to live with them but because they, upon their release from the body, soared up to live and reign with Him.

Sparse comfort would come to those first recipients of this letter through the knowledge that at some point in the way distant future there would be a golden age, a restoration of the Jewish theocracy, a taming of wild animals, a bloody Armaged­don followed finally by victory for God and His people. What those saints needed as they suffered under Satan's persecuting agent (the Beast-at that time in the form of Imperial Rome) was the knowledge that just on the other side of the door of death was something "far better" (Philippians 1:23), the heaven of the intermediate state, a sharing of the mediatorial throne of Christ! This is precisely the knowledge that numerous passages in "The Revelation," including chapter 20:4-6, were meant to convey.

Perhaps this would be an appropriate point at which to direct the following ques­tion to my premillenarian friends: With your insistence on taking the scriptures just as they stand and with your view of a post-rapture appearance of the Beast, how can you contend that this passage teaches that all Christians will participate in the supposed millenial reign of Christ on earth? Specifically, how can you get all Chris­tians into verse 4? Those whom John saw are supposedly resurrected saints. With that assumption, would not the terminology of verse 4 limit that group to resurrected "tribulation saints"? For many are the saints whose death was not a martyr's death, and many are the saints who supposedly will not have the qualification of refusing to submit to the Beast by virtue of the fact that they have or will have died before the supposed time of his reign. Do not the premillenarian assumptions, if con­sistently observed, lead to the conclusion that those whom John saw were resurrected "tribulation saints" exclusively?

This living and reigning with Christ in the spirit realm is identified in verse 5 as "the first resurrection." Later in this chapter, in verses 6 and 14, mention is made of "the second death." Accordingly, the antithesis in this passage is between "the first resurrection" and "the second death." I'm sure the reader would admit that "the second death" is not a bodily death. That fact directs us to the meaning of the antithetical statement, "this is the first resurrection." For if the second death is not the death of the body, neither is the first resurrection a resurrection of the body.

This agrees, too, with the tenor of the New Testament. The teaching of the Bible throughout is that death is not the extinction of a man's being, but is a state of being. The unconverted are regarded as existing in a state of death. At conver­sion, man's natural condition is reversed; he henceforth lives and reigns. But this living and reigning with Christ is in another sphere. Our life is not here; it is hid with Christ in God. (Colossians 3:3). And just as we live with and in our risen Lord in "the heavenlies," so likewise do we reign with him there and now. Romans 5:17 speaks expressly of our reigning in life by one, Jesus Christ. The moment one becomes a sharer of His life, that moment he becomes a sharer of his throne. For we have been "raised up together, and made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:6).

It is confirmatory of the view I am advocating that the writer of the Apocalypse shows, by what he had written in his gospel account, that he had learned from his Master of a "resurrection" which precedes the resurrection of the body, and which could therefore rightly be viewed as "the first resurrection." In this connection, two sayings of Jesus are especially pertinent. "He that heareth My words, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death unto life" (John 5:24). When one passes from death unto life, he experiences a resurrection even though that particular term may not be employed to represent the experience. The transition here in view is from a state of spiritual death to spiritual life, but that makes it no less a resurrection. A second relevant saying of Jesus is recorded in John 11:25, 26: "I am the Resurrection and the Life; he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live, and whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die." Here is a "resurrection" which is wholly apart from that of the body, and one that comes before that of the body.

The Apostle Paul likewise refers time and again to a resurrection which is the experience of those who have not yet experienced bodily death and resurrection, and which therefore is, on that basis, the first resurrection. We read that God "hath quickened (made alive) us together with Christ ... and hath raised us up together" (Ephesians 2:5,6); and again, "Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through faith" (Colossians 2:12); and again, "If ye then be risen with Christ ..." (Colossians 3:1); and again, "that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4); and again, "Awake thou that sleepest and arise from the dead" (Ephesians 5:14); and finally, Paul speaks, in Romanss 6:13, of believers as those who are "alive from the dead."

I have been perplexed and in fact astounded at the refusal of so many to admit this well substantiated fact, namely, that the New Testament likens conversion to a resurrection. As to the word "anastasis" never being used in the sense of a spiritual resurrection — what about Luke 2:34? "This child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel." Marvin Vincent, in his Word Studies, makes this comment re­garding the expression, "rising again." (Christ is set for ... the rising again of many) "because many will be raised through Him to life and glory" (Romans 6:4-9 and Ephesians 2:6). These cited scriptures definitely have in view the conversion experience (as does also Luke 2:34) so that here is an instance where "anastasis" is. associated with conversion. (Incidentally, Menno Simons wrote a tract on the "Spiritual Resurrection." And the well-known Anabaptist, Peter J. Twisk, wrote an exposition of Revelation 20 entitled, "The Peaceful Kingdom of Christ." The latter was translated by John F. Funk back in 1913, but for some strange reason is almost unknown in our circles. All of this proves nothing, but it says a great deal about the eschatology of the Anabaptists). Even if no exception in the use of the word "anastasis" could be cited, the comparison of conversion to a resurrection is so obvious on the pages of the New Testament that the supposed restriction in the use of the word "anastasis" loses the supposedly great significance that has been attached to it.

Now you may feel that this excursion and this emphasis on conversion and the subsequent life of the believer iss a departure from my contention that Revelation 20:4-6 depicts the experience of thhe faithful during the interim between their physical death and their bodily resurrectioon. Instead of being a departure, it is the necessary ground-work for what follows. Physiical death does not greatly alter the believer's status; it involves no separation from Christ. "Whether we live ... or die, we are the Lord's" (Romans 14:8). "The first resurrection" begins with conversion and culminates in the still-better life of the intermediate state. "The first resurrection" is the resurrection of the soul from death, to a life of grace on earth, and of bliss in glory. The reign of the saints begins with their new birth on earth (Romans 5:17, 20, 21), and continues with Christ in His present glory (Revelation 20:4-6). The Revela­tion 20 passage has primary reference to the second of these two stages. In this nar­row sense, "the first resurrection" could therefore be defined as the rising of the saint at death to a higher life in Christ, which will be consummated at the "general" resurrection when "the thousand years" have expired.

The saints of "the first resurrection" are set in contrast with "the rest of the dead" who live not till the thousand years are finished. The saints who have gone to heaven are dead as far as the body is concerned, but they live and reign with Christ in the heaven of the intermediate state. "The rest of the dead" are dead in every sense, bodily and spiritually dead, and they will come to life again (in the body) only to die the dreadful second death. This is the only resurrection they will have. It may be objected, that this involves taking the word "live" in these verses in two different senses — in verse 4 of a spiritual resurrection and in verse 5 of a bodily resurrection. But John elsewhere refers to the ssame two different kinds of "life" within a few verses (John 5:25, 28, 29). And in this very passage, in verses 5 and 6, he uses the word ' 'death" in two different senses - of bodily death (rest of the dead) and spiritual death (the second death). So it is not only permissible to take "life" here in two dif­ferent senses, it is almost demanded of us that we so take it.

Please note, too, that this allusion to "the rest of the dead" implies that the Christians, whose souls reigned with Christ, were not living upon earth at the time. These Christians were regarded as some of the dead and existed in a state different from "the rest of the dead&quoot; who, while having a conscience existence, did not live in the same way, but will continue in misery and torment until the end of the cycle of time, represented by the one thousand years, when they will be raised to shame and everlasting contempt. They were neither blessed, nor holy, for they had no part in the first resurrection; not having known its beginning in the experience of regenera­tion, they could not know its end in reigning with Christ.

Now let's attend to some loose ends. Assuming momentarily that the pre-millenarian interpretation is correct, the company depicted in Revelation 20:4-6 would of necessity need to consist largeely, if not wholly, of those who refused to submit

to the Beast during the supposed ttribulation period, that is, after the rapture of the saints, for that is when the Beast supposedly makes his appearance. These martyred tribulation saints would have needded to experience a resurrection on the eve of Christ's millennial reign on earth, that is, at the close of the tribulation period — being seven years after the resurrection of the other saints. How then could this be termed "the first resurrection," for the first would have taken place seven years before at the time of the rapture?

Actually the pre-millenarian system demands not just two resurrections but a series of at least four resurrections as any thoughtful person will soon perceive. And that becomes extremely difficult to reconcile with the plain declarations of Jesus that "the hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth, they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation" (John 5:28, 29). Any un­prejudiced person reading that declaration will naturally infer that it depicts one general resurrection. It is strange that people who pose as literalists arrive at another conclusion!

The idea of a bodily resurrection of the righteous dead preceding a thousand year earthly reign is also at variance with the words of Jesus in John 6:60: "For this is the will of my Father, that everyone that beholdeth the Son, and believeth on Him, should have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (not a thousand years before).

Another passage bearing on this point is Matthew 13:30: "Let both grow together until the harvest (end of the world) and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles and burn them ..." Does not this depict both classes living on earth to the very end (the harvest)? And will not the harvest involve both those who are alive and those who have died — necessitating a general resurrection at that point? And how, in the light of this passage can one maintain that the righteous will be raised and rewarded with immortality a whole millennium ahead of the wicked when this depicts God dealing "first" with the tares?

Just as the New Testament uniformly speaks of the judgment in the singular, so it does likewise with the resurrection. Note Acts 24:15: "... there shall be a resur­rection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust." Not two resurrections of the dead, but "a resurrection" including both classes. An article in the International Stan­dard Bible Encyclopedia makes this assertion: Acts 24:15 annd Revelation 20:12 "refer to a general resurrection with absolute unambiguity."

Note also Luke 17:29 and 30. "The same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all (there was no one left to ask, "Where is Lot?"). Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed." The day of salvation for Lot was also the day of judgment for all others in Sodom. Even thus shall it be in the end time consummation. In the light of this assertion, how can one maintain either separate resurrections or separate judgments. 2 Thessalonians one likewise depicts the wicked and the righteous receiving their just recompence at the same time.

Philippians 3:11 is often cited as evidence that Paul anticipated sharing in a bodily resurrection that would not be a general resurrection, for it would be "out from among the dead" as the word indicates. The context, however, points to the conclusion that when Paul expresses the desire to "attain unto the resurrection of the dead," he is expressing the modest hope that, as his life is being conformed to the death of Christ, it may also show the power of the resurrection of Christ. Paul was thinking in terms of a present tense spiritual attainment. As this is realized in Christian ex­perience, Christians constitute "the living among the dead."

In similar fashion, the typical pre-millenarian finds multiple judgments. I have personally heard four separate end-time judgments outlined. This necessitates denying that Revelation 20:11-15 depicts the general judgment or includes any but the wicked. It is claimed that only the ungodly are here in view. John sees "the dead, small and great, stand before God." A sweeping generalization such as that, in itself, argues for the universality of the scene. Furthermore, that these were not the un­believing dead only is evident from the fact that, conspicuous among the books out of Which they were judged was "the book of life," and from the statement that "whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." For obviously there would be no usse for "the book of life" at this judgment if all the believing dead had been raised, clothed with resurrection bodies, and made sharers of Christ's throne and glory a thousand years previously. I find in the New Testa­ment an emphasis on the singularity of the judgment. "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the jjudgment" (Hebrews 9:27). Again, "in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ" (Romans 2:16). The following words of Jesus are also highly significant: "The men of Ninevah shall rise in the judgement with this generation, and shall condemn it" (Matthew 12:41). Does not this imply that both those who repented and those who repented not will be present?

IF EASTER BE NOT TRUE

If Easter be not true, Then all the lilies low must lie; The Flanders poppies fade and die; The spring must lose her fairest bloom For Christ were still within the tomb-

If Easter be not true.

If Easter be not true. Then faith must mount on broken wing; Then hope no more immortal spring; Then love must lose her mighty urgge; Life prove a phantom, death a dirge-

If Easter be not true.

If Easter be not true. 'Twere foolishness the cross to bear; He died in vain who suffered there; What matter though we laugh or cry, Be good or evil, live or die,

If Easter be not true?

If Easter be not true-But it is true, and Christ is risen! And mortal spirit from its prison Of sin and death with him may rise! Worthwhile the struggle, sure the prize,

Since Easter, aye, is true!

Henry H. Barstow, 1866-1944

 

Previous Article Winter 2005 Front Page Next Article