Evening of Eschatology part 4, Covenant Reformed Baptist Church, Sunday School

Let's back up to verse 4, if I could come galloping in with some literalism here.

That's my job as a post -millennialist. The beast, these people who are beheaded in verse 4 are beheaded by the beast.

The beast is a seven -headed beast. The seven heads are seven hills.

The seven heads are also seven kings. Five were. The head of the beast that's reigning, that this is talking about, is

Nero. You start with Julius, Augustus. I would argue that this is a typological use of the world power at the time, and that it's going to be that way.

That pattern is going to follow all through church history. I agree that the pattern follows all through church history. But it happens that Nero persecuted the church from AD 64 to AD 68.

But your view demands that this book be written before AD 70, which is a very difficult case to make in view of the external evidence.

It's easier than you think. If you want to believe that, it's easy. But we don't have time for it.

The point is that Nero, who occupied the right place on the number of heads of the beast, persecuted the saints of God for 42 months.

From AD 64 to AD 68 was 42 months. He persecuted the church for 42 months. The beheaded, on your system, you're having to press the literal 1 ,000 years, but you're not pressing the beast or the ones beheaded by the beast.

I'm not pressing anything. I'm saying that the beast's opposition to believers and his beheading of them is typical of the way the wicked world powers persecute the church, whether they behead us or not.

Let's continue. Let me finish, and then you can respond to all the arguments.

Just get the whole paragraph in front of you. Okay, so you've got these people who are physically killed, and then when

Christ comes, they're brought to physical life. That's what the first resurrection refers to, physical life after life, after death, after the intermediate state.

They reign with Christ for 1 ,000 years. That's the first resurrection. Verse 6, blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection.

Over such, the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for 1 ,000 years.

And then verse 7, when the 1 ,000 years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison, and then he comes out.

He deceives the nations. They make war on Christ. Christ puts down the rebellion. Then the great white throne is set up.

So I think you have a sequence here of a resurrection, 1 ,000 years of bliss, reigning with Christ on earth, and then at the end of the 1 ,000 years,

Satan is let out of that pit, and he's loosed from those chains. And so like what we saw in Revelation 9 -1 happens again.

Somebody opens the shaft of the bottomless pit, lets him go, and then he does this work.

There's a final rebellion. It's ended, and then the great white throne is set up, and then after the judgment, we enter into the new heavens and the new earth in Revelation 21 and 22.

And now let me explain why I think that's wrong. My understanding, you used the word with respect to Satan's incarceration in the abyss.

Totally. You're universalizing what John explicitly restricts.

He says that with regard to Satan's capacity during the 1 ,000 years to deceive the nations, he is totally restrained, and I agree with that.

But with regard to all of his other activities. Revelation 13 -7, it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them, and authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation.

But you don't believe that. In the 42 months, Satan has authority over the nations. Let me finish. You don't believe that means that Satan can prevent the gospel from going to the nations and bringing conversions.

Right, but I believe that Revelation 21 -3 is describing something different than the gospel going to the nations.

Well, then we'd have to go back into Acts 26. We'd go back into Colossians 2. We could go back into other texts.

But in the terms of this book. Let me finish, please. Let him finish. Thank you.

Order, order. In the courtroom. That's precisely what Paul testified when he said that Christ has commissioned me to turn the nations from the darkness of Satan to the light of God's kingdom.

During the time of this present inter -advent age, Satan cannot prevent the gospel from succeeding in bringing souls globally to faith in Christ.

He can persecute the church. He can blind the minds of unbelievers who are recalcitrant in their rejection of Christ in the non -elect.

He can tempt. He can swallow up if we give him ground.

But when it comes to deceiving the nations with regard to the gospel and to orchestrating this global cosmic resistance to the church of Christ, he is prevented thoroughly and totally.

Now, let me finish. Because you had all the other statements you made. Let me finish. I agree with that. Okay. Secondly, it says, he said,

I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus in the word of God. As I said in Revelation 6, those are identified as those in the intermediate state.

It's also interesting that in Revelation 2 .11, Jesus says to the church at Smyrna, Be faithful unto death.

He's talking about their martyrdom. Under the authority of the beast. And I will give you the crown of life.

You're going to die physically. You're going to come to life. And the second death will have no power over you.

Precisely what we are told here. They are martyred physically. They come to life in the intermediate state.

And the second death has no authority over them. Now, one more thing real quickly. You said you appealed to Anastasis and the concept of resurrection.

You said everywhere it refers to physical bodily resurrection. I agree with you. I'll go on record saying that's the single strongest argument for premillennialism.

But it's not persuasive for this reason. You're making a case that we have to take the word

Anastasis in the way it is used consistently outside the book of Revelation. By the way, this is the only place it's used in Revelation.

Only here. Nowhere else. Why do premillennialists conveniently ignore the word thrones?

Which is used 47 times in Revelation. 40 of which are relevant. Sometimes it refers to the throne of Satan or the throne of the beast.

Every single time without exception, thrones are heavenly. They are never on the earth.

That's also the case with every single use of thrones outside the book of Revelation. Then, finally, on the issue of the first resurrection.

I admit, I concede to you Jim, obviously. I mean, it's easy to prove. N .T. Wright was correct.

Anastasis refers to physical resurrection outside the book of Revelation. This is its only occurrence inside the book of Revelation.

But notice, if you would, this is the only place in the entire New Testament where it's called the first resurrection.

And we have here, in Revelation 20 and 21, we have descriptions of what is first and old.

Pertaining to the present transient order of things. And then we also have reference, especially when we come to chapter 21, to that which is second and new.

Which is a reference to the eternal permanent consummate state of things. So, I think it's clear as you read sequentially through this passage.

He's not describing a resurrection that is then followed by the same kind of resurrection.

A first and a second. He's contrasting the resurrections. In the same way that he contrasts the first with the new and the old with that which is second.

And so the point is, there is a first resurrection that is a coming to life in the intermediate state.

It's called first, the only place where it is. Indicating we're dealing with something very unique here. The millennial reign transpires throughout the whole course of this present age.

Saints are reigning with Christ in the intermediate state. He identifies them who they are. At the second coming of Christ, the rest of the dead are raised.

That's a physical resurrection of unbelievers. At which time they are judged and cast into the lake of fire, as Matthew indicates, as Revelation indicates as well.

Can I reply? Sure. Okay. Your view demands, what's happening in Revelation 13, 5 through 8, is precisely that the beast is deceiving the nations.

And verse 7 of Revelation 13 says that authority was given to the beast over every tribe and people and language and nation.

So your view demands... Deceiving them with regard to what? Define that. They're worshipping the beast.

They're worshipping because of this fake crucifixion... So nobody's coming to faith in Christ in the present age? No, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that... Well then... No... Okay. I'm saying that what Revelation 21 through 3 says isn't happening, is happening in Revelation 13, 5 through 7.

He is deceiving the nations. That's one thing I want to say. And then I want to respond to something that Doug said earlier and that you kind of hinted at or are hinting at when you talk about this one passage and this one reference to the thousand years.

And I just want to ask some questions. So, how many texts in the Old Testament explicitly name the new covenant?

There's one. Jeremiah 31. It's the only place where that phrase is used, I think. How many texts in the Old Testament explicitly refer to the future royal ruler as a

Messiah? There's one. There's one that's undisputed. Daniel 9, 25. How many texts in the Old Testament say that the seed of the woman is going to crush the head of the serpent?

There's one. Genesis 3, 15. And I think I would want to ask Doug, how many texts in the whole Bible say we should baptize babies?

And... Or give them communion? Don't respond to that. Yeah. So... Does everyone see my restraint?

So I don't think that the fact that this one passage is problematic for us.

Oh, I don't have a... I have... I agree totally with everything you just said. The fact that this is one passage that talks about...

I'm happy with it. I think it's talking about the intermediate states. So I have no problem in saying there's one passage that's describing a thousand years.

I believe that. But real quickly here, one more thing. I do have a question as well. You say that here in beginning in Revelation 20, verses 1 through 3, at the second coming of Christ, after Christ's return, the devil can no longer deceive the nations.

And he's in the abyss, so that won't happen. I just want to know where the heck these nations came from. Because according to your reading of Revelation 19, the flesh of kings, captains, mighty men, horses, riders, flesh of all men, both free and slaves, small and great, are consumed.

And they are thrown... The beast of false prophet is thrown into the lake of fire. And the rest... The rest of who?

The rest of the nations who were gathered in this battle were slain by the sword. The nations that you say

Satan is now having to be incarcerated so that he can't deceive, have all been killed at the time of the second coming of Christ.

There are no nations left that he can deceive. And I would say evidently it's not comprehensive. And I would also observe...

Why not just take the plain literal meaning and say... I would also observe that at the end of Revelation 19, the beast and the false prophet, thanks for reminding me of this, are thrown into the lake of fire.

That's in verse 20 of Revelation 19. And then down in Revelation chapter 20, verse 10, the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were already.

And so it seems like there's one defeat, and then there's this intervening period, and then there's a defeat of the dragon, and he's thrown in where the beast and false prophet already are.

Let me explain why that can't be the case. Because what we have in the relationship between Revelation 19 and 20 are parallel accounts of the same span of time, namely the church age or the millennial kingdom.

And the fact of the matter is, you'll notice there in Revelation 20, 10, the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where, literally, this is what it says, and literally, where also the beast and the false prophet, nothing.

And it makes far better sense to supply not where the beast and the false prophet are, but where the beast and the false prophet were thrown, directly taken from Revelation chapter 19, verse 20.

You're making my case. No, the point is, Revelation 19 describes the end of human history, what's called the battle of Armageddon, the beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire.

Revelation 20 recapitulates to describe the whole present age again, the consummation of which is

Satan is now thrown into the lake of fire, where the beast and the false prophet also were thrown.

And I think that takes different symbols and flattens them out so that they all have the same meaning. It doesn't flatten them out, it's parallelism, and the ellipsis here that does not supply a verb is far better supplied from 19, 20 than it is just saying where they are.

I want to tag one other thing on this, and this is from within the text that you went through. When you're done,

I'm going to do some summing. In Revelation 20, I believe

Jim, the difficulty that I have with what you're saying is that you have a very specific binding of Satan, a very specific thousand years.

John has that. John's got some other stuff coming up too.

A very specific Satan, a very specific thousand years, it's a historical period, the historicity of it is being affirmed at a very specific point in time.

But then, in order to populate this very specific millennium, you appeal to generic martyrs, martyred by a generic beast throughout all history.

Well, we read about it in Revelation 13. Well, the beast that we have in Revelation, this goes back to what

I said at the beginning of the book. These things are soon to happen, it's right on top of you, it's at the door.

Daniel is told, for example, to seal up the words of the prophecy, because the time is not yet.

And the events were 400 years out.

Okay, so if these are the people martyred under Nero, have they come to mind? The point is, in Revelation, he's told, don't seal the words, because it's right on top of us.

Don't seal the words, because it's right on top of us. And yet, here we are, 2 ,000 years out. Daniel is told to seal the words of the prophecy, because it's a while yet.

And the fulfillment of that was 400 years later. I take the book of Revelation as right on top of the first century church.

It's at hand, it's near, it's now, and it was immediate. Nero, the beast, the persecuting beast, all of this was alive for the recipients of the letter.

So when John says, here, the number of the beast is this. And he says, this is for the guy who has wisdom.

John knows who it is, right? John knows who it is, and he expects some sharp sophomore in college to be up late that night figuring it out.

Okay, let him who has wisdom figure this out. John knows who it is, he expects some of his first century readers to figure it out.

And I can't imagine Demetrius in Ephesus figuring it out, saying, who the heck is

Henry Kissinger? Right? Nobody's arguing that.

I can see someone in the first century saying, Nero, the number of the beast is 666,

Nero, beast, persecuting. I believe that the beast and the martyrs are very specific in history.

And you've got a very specific millennium at the end of history, but you have to make the martyrs and the beheading and the process that populates the saints for that generic.

And I think that you should do one thing or the other through the text.

And I would disagree with what you're saying I'm doing. I'm going to make one more comment, and I'm going to leave it there, and I love

Jim too. But when I read Revelation 19, and the birds of the heavens said, come gather for the great supper of God.

This is 19, verse 18. To eat the flesh of kings, flesh of captains, flesh of mighty men, flesh of horses, and their riders, and the flesh of all men, both free and slave, both small and great.

And then it says the beast and the false prophet are killed, who had done the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast, and those who worshipped its image.

You'd think, wow, that's just about everybody, isn't it? And if that's not enough, verse 21. And the rest were slain by the sword that came from the mouth of him who was sitting on the horse,

Jesus, at his second coming. So I'm saying if you can extract out of that kind of rather extensive, exhaustive slaughter of all unbelievers at the second coming of Christ, this remnant who survived to enter into the millennium, because you've got to have them to propagate, to constitute the nations, and so on.

I don't have any, I have nothing more to say. I don't know what I could say to that. I don't know how you have

Satan deceiving nations that all just got slaughtered. They don't exist. They're killed by the second coming of Christ.

And you can't conceive of any way unbelievers could. You read Revelation 19. If you can conceive of it, you convince me, and then

I'll repent. What about babies? We baptized them. I think,

Sam, we could just say the rest of those who were present at that moment, the rest who were there when this happened.

There, on the globe, on the earth. That's the way you're reading it. That's the way I'm reading it.

You want to read it as though we couldn't put Paul and John together. And I would say, Jim, I agree. If you can read it differently and in good conscience say that there are, therefore, nations left over of unbelievers and natural, unglorified bodies that enter this purported millennial kingdom, then

I just say, God bless you, and we'll disagree. So you said that the biggest problem for amillennialism is the meaning of anastasis in verse 6, is it?

Yeah, it's consistent. And would you say that getting natural bodies and unbelievers into the millennium is the biggest problem for premillennialism?

Probably so, yes. What's the biggest problem for postmillennialism? Baptizing babies. No, I'm sorry.

I would say, I alluded to the biggest, I think the biggest problem for postmillennialists is grabbing too soon.

No, I don't mean the problem if you believe it, what to do with it. I mean whether it's true or not. Textual.

Actually, the biggest problem I have is in harmonizing 1st and 2nd

Thessalonians. We need to go there. So 1st Thessalonians 4, 13, you take to be the second coming of...

Yes, correct. But I also take the man of sin, the man of lawlessness as the

Roman emperor. And I don't have a way of... And he's already arisen and the rebellion has already happened?

Like I said, there's a problem. That's your problem. No. Actually, it's not.

That's for another night. I think it would be helpful to take a few minutes, even though our time is up, and go back where we started and ask about the practical implications of these three views.

You were all very animated, more than I expected you to be. I thought this was... I didn't think you expect to feel as strongly as you do.

So that's energizing to me. I love it. That's why I like you guys a lot because you care about the

Bible and care about truth, even this one. So now, here's the issue. You said... Let's start here and then take maybe five minutes on this.

Our marching orders from Matthew 28, 19 and 20. He has all authority in heaven and on earth right now.

Whatever Satan, whatever freedom he has, he has... Jesus has all authority. He says, go make disciples of all the nations.

How do your views... Just say something positive about why we can work together with these views and why the other view, if you think this, doesn't undermine doing what we're called to do.

First, when I read post -millennialism, I fret over the first problem you said, namely that it will become dominion, theonomy, takeover with carnal means.

You refresh me by insisting it will be spiritual means.

It will be worship and the right worshiping of God. And when I read your strategies for conquering the world, they feel just like mine.

Even though I don't expect the world to be conquered in the same way you do. So that my pattern of life and ministry doesn't pick up the sword.

And you're not picking up the sword. It's unclear to me, like we talked in the panel, about when the

Christian Congress might pick up the sword. But that's not where you are. And you don't want to think that way, it sounds to me.

So that would be one example of what I'm fishing for, is that I hear his strategies in the triumphant spread of the gospel being exercised in ways very much like the way

I live my life. What more like that can we say? I want to make what you said more explicit, that it's very comforting that you say we conquer the same way

Jesus did in a death and resurrection kind of conquering. So I appreciate that very much. And you and I have agreed a lot tonight.

And I think we've agreed on a lot of interpretive matters. And I think that we would both say that the gospel is going to advance and God is going to prosper the preaching of the gospel.

I think we would all say that. And so I think we can all affirm those things. Yeah, I think in terms of,

I'm not trying to align up against Doug here, but it's just in terms of how it affects our expectations for the future and how the church lives out its life, that Jim and I would probably be in more agreement.

We're going to suffer until the end. Yeah, that suffering, I think suffering is actually going to increase, intensify, and spread.

And I think the way the church conquers is Revelation 12. Yeah, 1211.

They conquered Satan, the enemy, the beast, by the word of their testimony, the blood of the lamb, the word of their testimony, by not loving their lives to death.

They died physically, and by dying physically under the oppressive power of Satan, the beast, they win.

That's the victory that is secured by the church in this age. And I think Jim and I would agree that there is going to be this increase of oppression and persecution of the church that is not going to abate until the second coming of Jesus.

And I think Doug would say he believes he has confidence that through the power of the Holy Spirit, the spread of the gospel, there will be a slow and progressive but yet decisive and at some point visible manifestation of a more widespread victory that can be more cultural, governmental, political, economic in nature.

I would say I don't see that in Scripture. He does, and I know the verses he uses in the Old Testament, primarily in the

Psalms. They're tough to answer. He's got a good point. Not if you've got a millennium. Yeah, but I wish that he had had time to defend those texts.

Tomorrow and in the coming year, we four will all be preaching the gospel in public, sending missionaries to the nations, saying,

Hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, and meaning a little bit different.

Same thing at the center, and then broaden it out differently. And we will be willing to lay down our lives that people might see the supreme glory of Jesus Christ.

The only way they can come to know him is, I mean, come to be saved is by believing in him. The nations need to hear the gospel.

All that's true. Is that correct? Amen. Yes. Give a closing minute exhortation to the watchers of this about where to go from here.

Because some people are going to say, I just give up. I just give up. These guys are so smart, and they've got doctorates, and they cannot agree on the interpretation of the first six verses of Revelation 20.

So say something by way of guidance to the frustrated layman right now who would like to have some sense of what's coming at him.

And he doesn't feel like he's nearly as competent as you guys are. Just a minute or two each as we close about something encouraging and helpful for the watchers.

You have exalted above all things, O Lord, your name and your word. So I would say just keep reading the

Bible worshipfully. Keep asking the Lord to give you insight into the texts. And if there seems to be a meaning that is natural and it seems to fit the terms of the book, believe it.

So just keep reading the Bible for yourself. And if you've got the Bible, you have an

Archimedean point on which to stand and a lever and a place to lodge that thing. And you can move scholarly opinions in your own ability to arbitrate them if you've got your arms around texts.

I would say keep the gospel central. Always keep the gospel central, the death, burial, resurrection of Christ, our imitation of him, and following that.

As we interpret Scripture, as we lay down our lives for others, as we preach the gospel, keep the gospel always and everywhere central.

And know that all of this, these disagreements, the fact that the church for 2 ,000 years has only come to one central eschatological agreement, and that is

Jesus Christ will come again to judge the quick and the dead. That's as far as the church has gotten, the church broadly has gotten that far.

And when we look at the world and how the gospel is progressing through the world, and I look at South America and Africa being overrun by pre -millennialists,

I think it's the coolest thing in the world. That's just the kind of thing that God would do.

Have people believe the Bible. Hallelujah. So if we say, look, what's happened?

The church, I think, is well established, far more deeply rooted and established in the world today than it was 1 ,500 years ago, 2 ,000 years ago.

And the vast majority of the sacrifices and the missionary efforts and the martyrdoms, the vast majority of people who did that, did it through love of the same

Jesus, but with a different eschatology than mine. And so, you know, good grief.

Keep a sense of proportion, keep the gospel central, and keep a sense of proportion, and let every man be fully convinced in his own mind.

Well, certainly I'd echo both of those. I don't think I can add anything to them. I would simply say to people who are watching this, who probably, some of them are tempted to say, as you said,

John, goodness, I'll never understand that. And if that's what studying the

Bible does, I'm going to avoid it. And I would say, please don't do that. What we did tonight.

You might not turn out like us. What we did tonight was really good. This is healthy.

Really, I'm a sick sort of guy. I love this. Some other people out here were very nervous, and they were sitting on edge, and they think

Jim and I don't love each other. And I love this because he's refining my thinking.

Doug's refining my thinking. I might go back and look again, and I hope I've given them some thoughts as well. And I think

God is honored when we take this book seriously enough to do this.

That we care about truth. We believe that there is objective, real truth here about what

God is doing in history. And he says, wow, they care enough about my word.

They believe it is inerrant and infallible enough that they're willing to go toe -to -toe with each other in the love of Christ to try to arrive at some understanding.

If in the final analysis, Jim's right, that won't affect my relationship with Jesus one bit.

And I won't be disappointed. I'll be saddened that I misled people through my teaching gift.

If Doug turns out to be right and I'm wrong, I won't be disappointed. I kind of hope he's right, by the way.

You know, between us. Me too. If he turns out to be right, again, my regret will be that I would have used the gift

God has given me to mislead people, which is a weighty thing, James 3. We all have to take into consideration.

But in order to become a better teacher, I need these guys. I need all of you. I need the whole body of Christ to call me back to the text, force me to look at things in a new way.

So I think that's what I take away from it. I think that we will not ask you what should people read, but maybe get that information and when this goes onto the web, we'll put it up.

Some readings in pre, post, for people who want to follow on.

Thank you all so much for your willingness to do this.

Thank you for taking the risk of posting this. Let's pray and go. Father in heaven, we are deeply thankful for the

Bible. We're sorry if we're knuckleheaded about its plain meaning.

I'm sure I am in numerous places. And we ask for light. If any sin is an obstacle to any of us seeing what's really there, grant that that sin would be conquered.

Humble us under your mighty word and help us to maintain a sense of proportion.

We are thrilled that you, Lord Jesus, are coming.

That you will conquer one day all evil. That you will set all things right.

That you will banish all ungodliness and unrighteousness out of the universe.

And you will grant that righteousness and peace will reign forever and ever.

And we will shine like the sun in the kingdom of our Father.

We say, hasten the day, O Christ. And to that end, keep us faithful,