XIII THE BINDING OF SATAN AND THE REIGN OF THE SAINTS WITH CHRIST (Chapter 20) The last three chapters of Revelation were sequel to the visions of conflict in the preceding nineteen chapters, and presented in contrast a pageant of victory. Beginning with the twentieth chapter a new picture was presented, an imagery of changed conditions. With the close of the nineteenth chapter, Jerusalem had fallen, and the great symbolic enemies of the Cause of Christ--the beast and the false prophet--had been consigned to visional banishment. The dragon who instigated both the activities of the imperial beast and the deceptions of the false prophet (the landbeast) was about to be cast into the abyss, the bottomless pit, and thus be returned to his diabolical region in complete defeat. The twentieth chapter opened with the scenes of the culmination and climax of the great conflict. This chapter has been full of confusion and the source of insurmountable difficulties, all of which have been due to the anachronism of wresting its contents from the period of the imperial persecutors and projecting its visions into centuries yet future for fulfillment. This has been the great mistake of attempting to make the book of Revelation a compendium of history--a thing that it is not. In the structural unity and orderly development of the Revelation, chapter twenty was the beginning of the scenes that made the victory of the church over hostile nations final and complete. Although the picture had changed, the continuity of the apocalyptic imagery in chapter twenty remained unbroken. The apostate harlot Jerusalem had fallen; the great red dragon deceiver had been cast down from the position of assumed exaltation to his place in the abyss; the souls of the martyrs were no longer under the altar of a persecuted cause, but in the figurative first resurrection they have been elevated to thrones, reigning with Christ in the state of complete victory symbolized by thousand years; the surcease of persecution had come, symbolized by the binding of Satan, and his imprisonment to estop the source of deceiving the nations of the empire into the idolatry of emperor- worship; the persecutors represented as dead, lived not again; and the wicked nations stood in judgment before the great white throne of an avenging God. But the spiritual conflict between heathenism and Christianity was not abated by the cessation of the activities of the persecuting powers; and through this idolatry of paganism the influence of Satan was represented as loosed out of his prison to destroy the church, not by the weapon of persecution but by concentrating all the heathen forces of Gog and Magog, the symbolic head of heathendom, into spiritual battle against the beloved city--the New Jerusalem which symbolized the church. Again, in the final scene, the cause of the Christ triumphed over all the influences of the heathen world, and all the enemies of the church were made to stand before God to be judged according to their works. (1) The twentieth chapter of Revelation. It is a common expression, we hear it on every hand; that the Bible plainly says that Christ will reign on the earth a thousand years. That is something that the Bible nowhere says, plainly or vaguely. Like the battle of Armageddon notion, the millennium imagination is not in the Bible. Armageddon is mentioned in the Bible but the “ battle of Armageddon” theory is nowhere found in the scriptures. The Bible has something to say about “ a thousand years” but nothing about a thousand years reign on the earth. Christ reigns, but the reign of Rev 20:1-15 was not the reign of Christ. It was rather a peculiar and special reign of certain souls with Christ. It does not mention or refer to the reign of Christ. The ones mentioned were reigning; it was a special use of the word, applied to a special incident of the Revelation vision. The text says they lived and reigned. Where did they live and reign? They lived and reigned with Christ. John saw souls out of the body, not in the body. It was a vision of the souls of t h e martyrs living and reigning with Christ in a particular and peculiar sense. In a conversation with any group of denominational preachers one will invariably be heard to say that the Bible plainly says that we shall reign with Christ on earth a thousand years. When the asserter is asked for the passage that so plainly says it, he will just as invariably and confidently refer his listeners to Revelation 20:1-15, verse 4. It is in order, in time and in place now to dissect this misunderstood and misapplied passage of scripture. This is the way its reads: And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. The passage is almost universally believed to actually say that we shall reign with Christ on earth a thousand years. The text says, they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. The pronoun we is a personal pronoun of first person, but they is a personal pronoun of the third person; the verbs lived and reigned are verbs of past tense; but shall live and reign are verbs of future tense. No man can claim the right to change the sentence of this text from the third personal pronoun they to the first personal pronoun we, nor to change the verbs lived and reigned of the past tense to shall live and reign of future tense. That is too much change for any man to make who has an ounce of respect for the word of God. John said, “ they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.” The passage says nothing about “ the thousand years reign of Christ.” There is a great difference in the two expressions. Revelation 20:1-15 says, “ they lived and reigned with Christ.” They who? Lived--lived where? Reigned --how, with whom and where? “ Lived and reigned” --with whom, in what place? It is not the reign of Christ, but the reign of souls “ with Christ,” that is mentioned in Revelation 20:1-15. There is a vast difference between living and reigning “ with Christ” and a millennial reign “ of Christ.” So let us be true to the facts in the case. It does not mention the reign of Christ, but the reign of souls “ with” him. They not only “ reigned” with him, they “ lived” with him. They “ lived and reigned” with Christ a thousand years. The two verbs “ lived” and “ reigned” are both limited by the thousand years. If the expression denotes time, then when the reign is over, and they ceased to reign; the living would be over and they would cease to live. Revelation 20:1-15 : l-6 does not mention the second coming of Christ. That is not the subject of it. It does not mention a bodily resurrection, and that is not the subject of it. It does not mention a reign on the earth, nor does it mention the “ reign of Christ” --and neither is the subject. Is it not possible for souls to live and reign “ with Christ” without Christ being on earth? Furthermore, it does not mention the throne of David or any other throne on earth. And it does not mention either Jerusalem or Palestine, nor does it mention Christ on earth. Jesus said that Jerusalem is not the place where men should worship (John 4:21), but they want to put it there. He said that his kingdom is not of the world (John 18:36), but they want to put it here, and make it of the world. Can millennialists consistently say that though it mentions none of these things, it teaches all of them? It is altogether possible and consistent for all the things mentioned to exist without being on the earth. (2) The thousand years reign with Christ. There are twenty figures of speech in the nineteenth and twentieth chapters alone. In a series of symbols such as these, it is not reasonable to make a literal application of the thousand years and a figurative application of all the rest of the symbols, without a contexual or historical reason for doing so. The thousand years, like the other parts of the vision, is a figure of speech--a symbol of something else. It is said in Deuteronomy 7:9 that God keeps his covenant and his mercy unto a thousand generations. God does not count a literal thousand generations, then quits remembering his covenant. It means God’ s memory of and faithfulness to his covenant are perfect and complete. The term thousand was a figure of completeness. It does not denote a cycle of time. Then what about the millennium? Nothing was said of a millennium. The thousand years did not mean a millennium. There is no millennium. There never was a millennium. There never will be a millennium. The twentieth of Revelation did not refer to a millennium. The thousand years was not literal, therefore was not a millennium and has no reference to a millennium. There is no connotation for the notion. The magic word millennium is not in the text. In this vision John “ saw thrones” and the ones that “ sat on them.” And those whom he saw were the souls of the beheaded. They had not “ worshipped” the beast. They had not “ received” his mark, and they “ lived” and “ reigned” with Christ. First: They lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. It does not mention the second coming of Christ, a bodily resurrection, a reign on the earth, or a literal throne in Jerusalem or elsewhere. It does not mention us, and it does not mention Christ on earth. Revelation 20:1-15 mentions none of those things, and a curse was pronounced on the one who adds to the words of the book. Second: They lived and reigned with Christ. It says “ they” --the souls of the martyrs, those who were beheaded. The beheaded souls lived and reigned with Christ. Only those who were beheaded entered into that thousand years. If that thousand years is literal, then the beheading is literal, and only those literally beheaded get into the millennium. If the beheading is figurative, the thousand years is figurative, and that cuts us out; for there could be no literal millennium. If it is a literal thousand years, it is a literal beheading. If it is a figurative beheading, it is a figurative thousand years, and either way there is no millennium for us. Third: They lived and reigned. If the term “ reigned” is limited by a thousand years, the verb “ lived” is also limited by a thousand years. If the reigning ends with the thousand years, the living ends with a thousand years, and the millennium will end with everybody in it ceasing to live. That would be quite a hopeless millennium. (3) The meaning of the first resurrection, The expression this is the first resurrection is itself the proof that reference was made to a figurative resurrection. The word was being used in an unusual sense, so unusual that it was necessary for John to explain its use by saying, “ this” is the first resurrection--that is why John explained that this is what was meant by the symbol. The resurrection of the twentieth chapter of Revelation was a figurative or spiritual resurrection, and of the same character described by Ezekiel concerning Israel in captivity. The prophet Ezekiel was in Babylon with exiled Israel, and prophesied their return from Babylon in the vision of Eze 37:1-14 : “ The hand of the Lord was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the Lord, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones, and caused me to pass by them round about: and behold, there were very many in the open valley; and lo, they were very dry. And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, 0 Lord God, thou knowest. Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, 0 ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord, thus saith the Lord God unto these bones, behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live. And I will lay sinews upon you, and I will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the Lord. So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to bone, and when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came upon them, and the skin covered them above; but there was no breath in them. Then said he unto me, prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God; Come from the four winds, 0 breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as I was commanded, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army. Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold they say, Our bones are dried and our hope is lost; we are cut off for our parts. Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; behold, 0 my people, I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, 0 my people, and brought you up out of your graves. And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it. said the Lord.” Here was the description of a resurrection extraordinary, indeed. Taking Israel out of the land of their captivity and bringing them back to their own land was called a resurrection. They were in the grave of captivity in Babylon, yet they were a living people. God said that he opened their graves and brought them out and caused them to live--in their return to Judea and restoration to their land and their religion. Now hear Isaiah, who prophesied the Babylonian exile one hundred years in advance: “ 0 Lord our God, other lords beside thee have had dominion over us: but by thee only will we make mention of thy name. They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise; therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish” -- Isaiah 26:13-19. The reference here was to the wicked lords of the Old Testament. They were exercising dominion over God’ s oppressed people. They were “ lords” over God’ s people. Isaiah said, other lords once had “ dominion” over them, but they were “ dead,” and should not “ live” ; they were “ deceased,” and should “ not rise.” This could not mean that the wicked will not be raised from the dead. It could not mean that the wicked dead will not live again. If that is what it means, there will be no resurrection of the wicked, and a fundamental truth is thereby denied. But that is not the meaning. Here is the meaning: The dominion of the wicked lords over God’ s people would be put down. While these lords had dominion over God’ s people they were said to “ live’‘ --live in their dominion. When their dominion should be destroyed and the oppression of God’ s people brought to an end, these lords would be “ dead’‘ --they were dead as lords. They shall not live--that is, their dominion would not exist again. But speaking of the persecuted people of God, the prophet said: “ thy dead men shall live.” When Israel was in the bondage of the captivity of these lords, they were said to be dead--they were dead as a people in captivity; and the wicked lords were said to live--that is, in power and dominion. But when the dominion of the lords ended, they were demised, their power was deceased--they were dead; they should not “ live” in wicked dominion; they should not “ rise” as lords. In the opposite imagery of the prophecy Israel in captivity was in a state called “ dead,” though living. Isaiah said “ They shall live” and “ they shall rise.” Thus coming out of the grave of their captivity represented a resurrection, but not a literal resurrection-- it was a figurative resurrection. Now that was exactly the kind of resurrection pictured in Revelation 20:1-15. One was the description of the persecuted Israel in the Old Testament; the other was the description of the persecuted church in the New Testament. The principle is the same. Another example is in Paul’ s reference to the spiritual resurrection of Israel: “ For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?“ -- Romans 11:15. When the Jews were converted to Christ under the gospel, it was the receiving of them “ as life from the dead.” That is another figurative resurrection--a spiritual resurrection. When John saw the souls of the martyrs, slain for the testimony of Jesus and the word of God “ under the altar” (chapter 6); then saw the same souls “ on thrones” (chapter 20); it was a vision of victory. Taking the souls from beneath the altar and elevating them to the thrones was called a resurrection in exactly the same sense that bringing the people of Israel out of bondage in Babylon was opening their graves and causing them to “ live’‘ --a figurative death and a figurative resurrection. A comparison here of two passages in the apocalypse will further reveal the nature of the resurrection of the twentieth chapter of Revelation. First: “ He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death"--2:11. Second: “ He that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power"--20:6. Picturing in advance the persecutions of the early Christians, John declared in Revelation 2:11 that he that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death. But in Revelation 20:6, the same apostle speaking to the same persons, said, he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power.” Thus to have part in the first resurrection equaled exemption from the second death. But to overcome these persecutions equaled exemption from the second death. 1. Overcoming the persecutions equaled exemption from the second death. 2. Part in the first resurrection equaled exemption from the second death. 3. Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. 4. Overcoming the persecutions and part in the first resurrection were equal to the same thing, therefore they were equal to each other. To support the theory of a future millennial reign of Christ, efforts are made to connect Revelation 2:25-28; Revelation 3:21-22 with Revelation 20:1-6, as referring to the second coming of Christ, when he shall then give the saints “ power over the nations,” and he shall then “ rule them with a rod of iron” --in the millennium. Such an interpretation charges that Jesus deceived the church at Thyatira into believing that he would come during their lifetime. It should be observed again, as previously detailed in Section Two, that the “ coming” of Christ is mentioned in several senses, elsewhere in the New Testament, and in Revelation. To Ephesus, Pergamos, Sardis and Laodicea, Christ said he would “ come.” He would come in the events named, in things promised or threatened. To Thyatira he said: 1. To hold fast. 2. To overcome. 3. To keep his works. All of that “ till I come,” which obviously did not refer to his second coming. Furthermore, the expressions in verses 26-28 were indicative of things that would occur in the life period of Thyatira: 1. Power over the nations--the influence of the gospel in breaking the power of pagan persecutions and the heathen nations. 2. Rod of iron--the irresistible influence of Christ in the preaching and lives of early Christians, exemplified even in martyrdom. 3. The morning star--the exalted place of those who overcome, next to Christ, in his glorious empire, the church. On the same erroneous premises it is held that Revelation 3:21-22 makes a distinction between the Father’ s throne, upon which Christ is asserted to occupy now, and Christ’ s own throne which it is claimed he will occupy when he returns. But the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Christ are one kingdom (Ephesians 5:5); and the church of God and the church of Christ are one church (1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1 Thessalonians 2:14); and the throne of God and the throne of Christ are one throne (Hebrews 1:8). Christians share Christ’ s kingdom now (Luke 22:29); and they share his throne now (Revelation 3:21-22). For further textual comparisons, in Matthew 19:28 it is stated that “ in the regeneration” Jesus would sit on the throne of his glory, and in Matthew 19:28 it is stated that the twelve apostles would occupy the thrones of authority in the same dispensation of regeneration. In Titus 3:4-5 Paul identified this gospel dispensation as “ the regeneration.” So in this dispensation Christ is occupying “ the throne of his glory.” A comparison of Mat 20:21 and Mark 10:37 will prove that his kingdom and his glory are identical. A further comparison of Luk 24:26 and Hebrews 1:8 will show that entering into his kingdom and glory was connected with his ascension. In Matthew 19:28, Jesus said that the disciples who had followed him would sit on thrones. But in Luke 22:28 he declared that the disciples who had continued would be appointed the kingdom. Therefore to occupy thrones in this gospel dispensation was the same thing as to be appointed the kingdom--and both relations between Christ and Christians exist now. In this gospel dispensation Christ is on the throne of his glory (Matthew 19:28); and he is on the throne of his kingdom. (Hebrews 1:8) This occupancy of his kingdom--glory throne extends from his ascension (Luke 24:26) to his coming (1 Corinthians 15:23-24). Christians who overcome “ sit with him in his throne” now. They share his throne in the same sense, degree and extent that they share his glory and his kingdom, shown by the comparisons of these passages. These considerations destroy the millennial interpretation of the Father’ s throne and the Son’ s throne, as respects a distinction and a difference between them, and refute their interpretations of all the Revelation passages forced to serve their theory. The closing scene of Revelation was pictured in chapters 20,21 and 22 in a general summary of the elegant truths of the vision in relation to the obligations of the triumphant church, emerging from persecution and oppression into glorious victory. As a sequel to the vision of victory, the last chapters of Revelation present the church garbed in the robes of victory “ as a bride adorned for her husband.” The figure does not indicate that the church is not now the bride of Christ, as some have assumed. Rather, the apostle declares in Romans 7:4 that the church has been married to Christ and has brought forth fruit unto God in that relationship. The expression “ as a bride adorned” was a comparison only--a graphic description of the grandeur of the triumphant church adorned in the glorious habiliments of victory, “ prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” Having thus triumphed over all hostility and opposition and oppression and persecution the glorious church renewed her mission to all men in the second great invitation of chapter 22:17: “ The spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. (4) A textual analysis of chapter twenty. It has been shown that Revelation 20:4 is altogether too inadequate as a text to sustain the millennial theory--and it is the only text that makes mention of the thousand years. Hence, they have no text. No apostle in any epistle has ever mentioned such a period of time, nor such a dispensation, nor such a millennial age or hope. It must not therefore belong to apostolic doctrine, or to the Christian’ s hope and duty. Revelation 20:1-15 was but the climax of an imagery that began with the scene of defeat in chapter 6:9 and ends in a scene of victory in chapter 20:4. The comparison of chapters six and twenty reveals the application of the symbols intervening. A running analysis of the final chapters will display the success of the cause of the martyrs and the glory of the victorious church.