Revelation 20 & The Church Age

     A major eschatological question has to do with the age described in Revelation 20:1-6 and whether Christ’s returns “after” the 1,000 years (Post- & A-millennial) or before the 1,000 years (Pre-millennial).  Two lines of evidence suggest that Revelation 20 refers to the current Church Age and NOT an earthly, Jewish kingdom age to follow Christ’s return, as Premillennialism asserts.  The first of these are points in the text that suggest a Church Age interpretation and these we shall consider first.  The second are some statements in the New Testament that describe the current Church Age as the final age for this earth and rule out the possibility of another earthly age between this one and eternity.

     20:1/ "An angel coming down from heaven . . ." A similar description is found in 18:1.  The Greek word "angelos" occurs in both Revelation 18:1 and 20:1, but the theology and eschatology of the translator can affect the rendering.  "Angelos" occurs elsewhere in the Greek text and can designate either a special type of being or, simply, a "messenger" (Matthew 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 7:24,27; 9:52; James 2:25).  Perhaps the English should read "A messenger came down from heaven."  This was exactly what the Great Prophet was to be (Deuteronomy 18:15-19 & Malachi 3:1 with Acts 3:19-26).  This point is emphasized in John’s Gospel - Jesus repeatedly claimed to be a messenger who had come down from heaven and was bringing the words of the Father.^[1]

     Jesus possesses the key to the abyss; He controls death, Hades, and passage.  Demons recognized Him as the One who controlled their destiny (Luke 8:26-31).

     20:2-3/ This "messenger from Heaven" comes down and "binds" Satan, incarcerating him in such a way that "he should not" deceive the nations during this era.  We have already considered why Jesus could be the "messenger from heaven" in comments about the previous verse.

     I associate the "binding of Satan" with Jesus' first coming for several reasons.  First of all, Jesus plainly claimed to have bound Satan in His first coming.  He made this claim when challenged about His casting out of demons and claimed that His doing so was proof that He was not in league with Satan (Matthew 12:22-29).  After reasoning that His actions would be counter-productive if He was, in fact, in league with "the ruler of the demons" (vv. 25-26), Jesus added that the same charge could just as well be leveled against Jewish exorcists (v. 27).  Then, He made two powerful statements.  The first argued that the alternative explanation to casting out demons by Satanic power was that He was doing it by God's power and, if this was the case, then it indicated that God's promised kingdom/rulership had already come.  His second comment was that it is impossible to plunder a strong man's house (in this case, Satan's demonic household) unless you first "bind" or have restraining power over the strong man himself - implying that He had already deployed such power over Satan.  The term used for "bind" here (deo) is the same term used in Revelation 20:2.  Along these same lines, be sure to note John 12:31; Hebrews 2:14-15; 1John 3:8.

     But "how could this be referring to the Church Age" when Satan has been so obviously continuing to deceive humanity?  Good question, but one that is answered by noting a crucial grammatical point - the "mood" of the statement (its "reality" of action).  An indicative statement speaks of 100% reality; it describes something that is actually happening.  An optative statement expresses a wish, something that is 0% real - not happening, but someone wishes it would.  Between these, there is the subjunctive mood, expressing a 50% reality factor for the action - conditions are right and it can happen, but some variable stands in the balance as to whether or not it occurs.  Greek identified moods clearly by the spelling of the word, but English requires particular phrases and wording to indicate subjunctives.  The NAS identifies subjunctives by including the words "should/might" - thus, when the passage says "that he should not deceive the nations any longer" (ma planasa), it is portraying the subjunctive mood that John used, which means that Satan’s ability to deceive mankind has been effectively dealt with, but its reality is conditioned on some variable.  The Greek text does not say, "that he cannot deceive," (the NIV is murky here) but rather that he "might not/should not."  In Greek, John was saying that the binding of Satan is a 50/50 proposition as to the reality of the action – something has been done that is fully capable of limiting Satan’s ability to deceive the nations (Gentiles?), but deception is a continuing possibility.  The "binding" makes it no longer necessary for Satan to deceive and this we should see in Jesus' assertion of His authority over Satan in connection with the first coming (see also John 12:31-33; 14:30; 1John 3:8).  I believe the variable that determines whether or not Satan is bound or not is the Gospel and whether it is preached and believed or not.  This is discussed in Hebrews 2:14-15, also in the subjunctive mood, in which it is stated that the death (and resurrection?) of Jesus are sufficient (if embraced) to destroy Satan's "fear of death" power over people.  With Christ's first coming, Satan's power to deceive was severely curtailed with the gospel and Satan's current ability to deceive depends on a person's faith in or rejection/ignorance of Christ.

     A final point to note in this passage is that interpreters sometimes have to make decisions as to how they will render some terms for which two English words could be used.  The "nations" sounds like the whole world, but the term ethnos is also often rendered "Gentiles" in the New Testament.  How would it affect the meaning of the verse if we read that Satan was bound in such a way that it was no longer necessary for the Gentiles to be deceived?  With Christ's first coming and the Gospel, it is no longer only the Jews who have access to revelation about God’s will and are "instructed" by the Law (Romans 2:17-20), but now the message is to go into all the world (Mark 16:15-16) and the Gentiles become accountable (Acts 17:30-31).

     20:4-6/ John saw "thrones" because Christians reign with Him (Ephesians 1:20-22; 2:6,19; Philippians 3:20; Colossians 2:9-20).  As for those who judge, see: Matthew 19:28; Luke 22:28-30; 1Corinthians 6:2-3.  Do not think of this as a resurrection of bodies, because John clearly identified what he saw - the souls of the faithful “came to life.”  However, only those who are faithful to Christ participate in this first "coming to life," whereas the rest of the dead (the unbelievers) do not "come to life" until the time of final judgment.

     To understand the "two resurrections," be sure you compare this with the first time that this teaching was presented - John 5:21-29.  Hearing Christ's word and believing in Him transfers one into eternal life and exempts them from condemnatory judgment (Romans 8:1) and this is the first of these "come to life" events - the one which was a possibility/reality from Jesus' first coming onward and involved the "dead who hear" (vv. 24-25).  Later on, there would also be a universal "resurrection" for all "in the tombs" to one of two eternal fates (vv. 28-29).  Accordingly, in Revelation 20 we find that the first "coming to life" involves the souls of the believers through the Gospel, as is a common theme in NT writings.^[2]

     Those who participate in the Gospel "coming to life" are called "blessed and holy," as Paul referred to the believers in Colossae (Colossians 1:22).  As victors through Christ over the "second death," Christians share in Christ’s reign now and are priests NOW (Romans 12:1-2; Ephesians 1:18 – 2:10; 1Peter 2:5,9; Hebrews 13:15-16; Revelation 1:5-6; 5:9-10).  As Paul wrote to the Ephesians, these things must be perceived spiritually by “enlightened eyes of the heart” (Ephesians 1:18).

     20:7-9/ At the end of the age there will be a final effort by Satan to gather the world against the Lord and His people, having deceived and gathered them through his demonic helpers (Revelation 16:13-16).  Notice that this final war is described as involving the worldly nations gathered against the Lord and His people, not against each other!!!  In response to the premillennial view of WWIII arising from this “world-wide revolt," how could this occur if Jesus is "ruling the world with a rod of iron" from Jerusalem, as they assert is described in Revelation 20:1-6?

     On the other hand, if Jesus is not "ruling on an earthly throne" during this era, but from heaven’s throne (Revelation 1:5-6; 3:21) then a final earthly rebellion is more believable.  I do not believe that this final war will necessarily involve the military aspect (“Battle of Armegeddon”) claimed by most Premillennialists – notice that the demonically-gathered international enemies (Revelation 16:13-16; 20:7-9) do not gather to fight each other, but are united against God and His people.  Instead, Paul emphasized that we should be aware that a spiritual war is already raging (temptation, wealth and love of comfort, false teachers and doctrines, contrary philosophies and worldview speculations – 2Corinthians 10:3-5; Ephesians 6:10-18; 1Timothy 4:1-3; 2Timothy 4:2-4) and it may be that this is how the world is demonically gathered against God and His people at the end of this age.  The destruction of God’s enemies by "fire from heaven" is probably the return of Christ, as Paul described (2Thessalonians 2:1-10).

     20:10-15/ This is the Great Judgement at the end of the age, followed by the final separation of the righteous and unrighteous and then the “new heaven and earth” (Revelation 21:1 - 22:6).  As “judgment” (determination of guilt/innocence - John 3:17-21) began with Jesus’ first coming (John 12:31) and starts with the house of God first (1Peter 4:17), I think there is only one, great, final day of judgment (sentencing) to come and it is portrayed in a number of places.^[3]

     I believe these comments support my contention that everything in Revelation 20 can be correlated with the first two comings of Christ and what lies in between.  The second line of reasoning which leads me away from Pre-millennialism consists of NT statements that seem to rule out another age (for this earth, prior to the New Heaven and Earth) to follow the present "Church Age."

     A. The Church Age is the "Last Days" spoken of by the OT Prophets.  Peter related Joel's prophecies of "the last days" with the events of Pentecost and said "this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel" (Acts 2:16-17).  The writer of Hebrews spoke of God's communication to the Old Testament fathers as being finished "in these last days" by His communication through His Son, who appeared, offered himself for our purification from sin, and then took his seat on Heaven's throne (Hebrews 1:1-2).  Peter spoke of Christ being foreknown before the creation, but having just appeared "in these last times" (1Peter 1:20).  If this age represents the "last days" and "last times," then how can there be another whole earthly, Jewish kingdom age yet to come?

     B. Jesus connected the end of heaven and earth with the coming of the Son of man (Matthew 24:35-37ff).  Paul spoke of Christ's resurrection, then the resurrection of believers at Christ's return, followed not by another "millennial kingdom" age but by "the end" and the kingdom being turned back to the Father (1Corinthians 15:20-25).  Christ reigns until the last enemy is defeated – death, when the saints are raised at the 2^nd coming!  Peter also connected Jesus’ apparently delayed return with the end of this heaven and earth and its replacement by new ones (2Peter 3:3-13).

     C. Paul said that the lessons from the Mosaic age were written for us during the Church Age, "upon whom the ends of the ages have come" (1Corinthians 10:11).  The word "ends" here (telos) speaks of that which is the termination, cessation, the last part, close, conclusion, or goal (Bauer, Arndt, & Gingrich) of something.  This seems to leave no room for another whole "millennial kingdom" age to follow this one.

     The book of Hebrews contains a similar statement.  Jesus' sacrificial appearance to put away sins (obviously His first coming) came "at the consummation of the ages" (Hebrews 9:26).  The word here is sunteleia and it refers to the completion, close, or end of something.  Again, there is no room for another whole "millennial" age after the "last" one!

     D. Premillennial attempts to equate "the age to come" (Matthew 12:32; Mark 10:30; Luke 20:34-37; Ephesians 1:21) with the "millennium" rather than the eternal, New Heavens & Earth era are ruled out by the description of those who will inhabit it: resurrected ones, incapable of marriage, beyond the power of death, recipients of eternal life, and beneficiaries of eternal life.  (see the special study in Paul Butler's commentary on Daniel - College Press, pp. 441-448).

     E. Those who assume that the bulk of the book of Revelation refers to the 2^nd Coming of Jesus, with lots of horrible plagues, wars, and turmoil upon the earth just before He comes must struggle with what Jesus and Paul plainly said about conditions at the time of His return.  Read Matthew 24:35-51; Luke 17:20-36; 1Thessalonians 4:13 – 5:3.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Revelation 20:4-6 speaks of the “first resurrection” in which John describes those who, after Satan was bound, “came to life” and reigned with Christ as “blessed and holy” and reign as priests with Christ.  Later in the chapter, John speaks of all humanity standing before the Great White throne for judgment and separation eternal fates (Revelation 20:11-15).  He doesn’t mention “second resurrection,” but such is implied in the judgment account.  Dispensationalists assume that two physical “resurrections” are intended and make the first one the resurrection of bodies at Christ’s return and the second as the resurrection of all humans for final judgment.  However, I have several questions about this explanation.

     First of all, as I think back on the rest of New Testament teaching, I come to what Jesus taught in John 5:24-29 – probably His introduction of exactly what John portrays later in Revelation 20.  Those who hear Jesus and believe Him are said to have “passed out of death into eternal life” (John 5:24).  Jesus then repeated that thought in other words - “An hour is coming and now is” (John 5:25) – thus it is a reality from Jesus’ first coming onward – that “the dead who hear” (dead people who can hear? – maybe spiritually dead instead of physically dead?) Jesus’ words shall live.  I believe this is a reference to the Gospel and how those “dead in sin” can embrace the Gospel and become spiritually alive (cf. Romans 6:3-11; Ephesians 2:1-6; Colossians 2:9-14).  Perhaps this is why John portrayed the “first resurrection” (Revelation 20:5) in terms of seeing the “souls” of the faithful, a select group that “came to life” and are referred to as “blessed and holy” and a royal priesthood with Christ (which he had already identified as true of Christians now - Revelation 1:5,6; 5:9,10).  In First Corinthians 15:20ff, Paul identified two phases of “resurrection” – first, Christ, the first fruits (and when we are baptized into Christ, we spiritually participate in His death and resurrection - Romans 6:3-11; Colossians 2:9-14) and then the physical resurrection of the saints when Christ returns.  So, from the first coming onward, there is a way in which "dead" people can hear (some may chose not to), become alive, and enter into eternal life (John 5:24-25; Revelation 20:4-6).

     Then, Jesus describes a future event ("coming") in which "all who are in the tombs" (these are physically dead people, all of them) will all hear and come forth to eternal fates (John 5:28-29).  This I would equate with Revelation 20:11-15 and the final judgment of all.  Thus, I conclude that there are two types of "dead" and two types of "coming to life/resurrection" – one is associated with finding spiritual life through the Gospel (and these folks, because of Christ's blood, have no need to fear the final judgment and the "second death" – Romans 8:1; Revelation 20:6) and the other is a physical resurrection of all humanity for final judgment.

     I would suggest that John and Peter's "born again" doctrine (John 1:12-13; 3:3-5; 1Peter 1:3,22-23 – 2:3) and "coming to life" concepts (John 5:24-25; Revelation 20:4-6) were their way of expressing what Paul taught in terms of being "dead in sin," buried with Christ in baptism, and rising to walk in new life (Romans 6:3-11; Ephesians 2:1-9; Colossians 2:9-14).

====================================================

Charles E. McCoy

1/9/2005