Revelation 20, the Binding of Satan, the Resurrections, and the 1000 Year Reign of Christ
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ธ.ค. 2023
- Matt Waymeyer joins us again to talk about the disputed text of Revelation 20. We talk about whether Satan is currently bound, or if Revelation 20 is speaking of a future event. We also talk about the resurrections and whether those should be viewed as physical resurrections or if one can be spiritual. Finally we talk about whether we should expect the multiple mentions of 1000 years in Revelation 20 to be symbolic or whether we should expect Jesus to come back and reign for a 1000 years. A great discussion on eschatology and how we should understand Revelation 20.
Part 1 of the interview: • Revelation 20 and the ...
Matt's article on the binding of Satan: tms.edu/wp-content/uploads/20...
Our previous interview with Matt Waymeyer on the Two Age Model: • This Age and the Age t... (or look up Episode 129 on the podcast).
Matt Waymeyer's Books:
Revelation 20 and the Millennial Debate: www.amazon.com/Revelation-Mil...
Amillennialism and the Age to Come: A Premillennial Critique of the Two-Age Model: www.amazon.com/Amillennialism...
The Expositors Seminary, where Matt Waymeyer teaches: expositors.org/
#eschatology #revelation #revelations #dispensationalism #covenanttheology #satan #bible
Shepherds Theological Seminary (where The Bible Sojourner teaches): shepherds.edu/
The Bible Sojourner Audio podcast: anchor.fm/the-bible-sojourner
More About the Host, Peter Goeman: petergoeman.com
![The Millennium: The Binding of Satan. Revelation 20:1-3. [Sermon]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5qKAvogqMnU/mqdefault.jpg)
This is so helpful. Thank you so much. Our pastor preached for 18 weeks this past year on Covenant Theology and it sent me deep into studying what the Scriptures have to say. All your videos have been immensely helpful.
Really appreciate your encouragement! So glad to hear you've found them helpful!
Yes make His face shine upon you, me and all who listen. Edifying words bring light and clarity to the Word of God!
Blessings to you.
The 3 criteria for determining what is/ is not symbolic language, was very helpful!
Couldn’t agree more!
An illuminating conversation.
Thank you my friend.
Looking forward to listening, thanks to you both.
Appreciate the encouragement. We hope it is a blessing to you.
@Peter, props for knowing about Phillip Kayser's view of the martyr's physical resurrection. Very impressed.
I would also recommend looking at the martyr's millennium in Kenneth Gentry's Navigating the Book of Revelation. As he adjusts his previously held view that this represents the reign of the Church in history. I arrived at Dr. Kayser's view of a martyr's resurrection independently. Generally, I would say he presses the specificity of fulfillment in some of the visions too far, but his reading of the 70th week is interesting and you might like it.
One could hold to only a spiritual resurrection of the Martyrs, except in light of Mat. 24, that is hard to maintain. Jesus quotes from Dan. 12:1 in Mat 24, and pulls in the great tribulation which contextually drags in the dual resurrection in Dan 12:2. (side note: Part of the reason that this tribulation is the "greatest" is because it's not just the 3 1/2 years and the 600,000 people that probably died (Josephus says it was as high as 1.2M), but because of the length of the exile. No other nation has be exiled for such a period and then returned).
I really like Dr. Waymeyer's thought that the resurrection in Daniel 12 could be subject to prophetic forshortening, but there are other possibilities. If one looks at Rev. 19:20 together with the Martyr's resurrection, it appears that both Nero and the false prophet/messiah are thrown alive into the lake of fire, and this implies resurrection. So there may in fact be a double resurrection of the wicked and the righteous in the first resurrection that is consistent with Daniel 12.
But I also read Daniel 11:36-12:13 to be structurally linked to the 4th kingdom, Roman era (as it comes after the Greek era). And because Jesus unveils the mystery of Daniel's prophesy by locating its fulfillment in his generation. All of these things would need to be brought together to have a complete view of Rev 20 from a partial preterist perspective.
The second resurrection is the rest of the dead (20:5). But there is little support for saying that this is only of the wicked. This resurrection includes identifying those named in the "book of life" (Rev 20:12).
I just wanted to say that I totally agree with Dr. Waymeyer's hesitancy towards a first century resurrection. But none of the living are raised so there is no "historical verification problem," and no reason that Josephus should report on such an event. And when one realizes that the text specifies that its only the martyrs that are raised (those that were waiting under the alter for vindication). It's really more about what the text demands. One can then also take Jn 14:1-3 as a first century event, for those that took up their cross and drank from his cup and so died--as he said his Apostles would.
In lots of ways partial-preterism on this view is pre-mill exegesis on amil kingdom timing, especially if one holds to a strong (dare I say biblical) view of Israel's restoration in the present age.
Appreciate that, John. Trying to be as helpful as possible in thinking through many different perspectives for people.
I recently left Amil. I held to Phil Kaysers view that the 1st resurrection occurred in 70 AD even though it was mostly a Postmil view. What I realize was that it was patch work to fix a broken system when instead you could just throw away the whole system and come to Premil. It was just a way to hold on to the view that we are in the Millennium now. Sometimes we don't even realize that we are just patching a broken system. Amil and postmil is just patchwork.
I went from Pre-trib, post-trib, pre-wrath, postmil, amil and back to premil. I am a combo of Historical Premil and Prewrath.
Thanks for sharing your rollercoaster of a journey! Completely agree with you on the postmill/amill assessment. Nice to hear of someone who has gone through the gauntlet and come out again.
At 14:30 Dr. Waymeyer asked for exegeses to consider in support of a partial-preterist binding in AD 70 (amil or postmil):
The reason that futurist amils (eg. GK Beal) place the binding at the cross is connected to a fourfold view of recapitulation of the structure of revelation.
Rev chaps. 16, 19 and 20’s great battle is read as the same event of Christ’s return on a futurist amil view (some postmil preterists agree but usually they are holding on to their amil past as this doesn’t work if Chap 19 is past). This allows futurist amils to hold that the binding reaches back to the cross because it is at the beginning of the prophesy section of Rev 20.
A preterist amil or postmil view should pay closer attention to the timing of the sequence and would agree with the sequence view of premils about Rev 19 and 20. The battle in 19 is the destruction of Jerusalem and the Roman civil war, which is followed by Satan’s binding in AD 70, then the millennium, then the Gog battle at the end of the kingdom age (1 Cor 15:24, 51-58; Rev 20:9).
The exegesis supporting the AD 70 binding is:
First, Revelation is given about AD 65 during the reign of Nero because he is the sixth king in the Julian dynasty and five have already fallen at the time John is given the Revelation (Rev 17:10). So the things regarding the destruction of the great city were soon and at hand.
Second, the binding follows the death of the beast (Nero) and the resurrection of the dead martyrs who are killed by the beast (Rev. 19:20). The first resurrection should not be spiritualized in a class of believers. It is limited to martyrs of the beast. Nero’s persecutions lasts 42 months (Rev. 13:5), from about mid AD 64 after the fire of Rome until his death in June of 68.
Third, in Rev. 12:7 Satan is not thrown down from heaven until after the ascension and the martyrdom of some of the saints. Then Satan is thrown down to the land (Israel) and the sea (Rome) for a short time or 3 1/2 years (12:12, 14) during the 3 1/2 year war that ends in AD 70 with the destruction of the temple (Rev 11:2).
Finally, the pit/abyss is opened in 9:2 with the fifth trumpet and seems to be associated with the beginning of the Roman entry into the land and release of strong demonic influence. After the summary (Chap 19) of the great battle between Christ and the Romans, which results in the death of Nero in AD 68 and then a great civil war and the uprooting of three Roman emperors (cf. Dan 7:8), and also the destruction of Jerusalem, to save the saints from a persecution that could have destroyed them, then the pit of war and its smoke is closed and Satan is bound in AD 70.
The binding is complete but it is only of Satan. Whether this includes all demonic activity by proxy is not stated in the text. The purpose is to weaken the demonic powers so that the gospel can go forth. And in fact within 300 years Rome is coming to Christ. Something never seen prior to the age of the Spirit.
This is not to undervalue the cross. The cross is the power behind this binding which results from the faithfulness of the Apostle’s ministry. The casting down of Satan like lightning from heaven is something that Jesus sees will be the result of their ministry (Lk 10:18). And it is the work that he began.
Anyway, that’s how I think an amil/postmil preterist would exegete an AD 70 binding.
That’s a very helpful explanation of how one could argue for a 70 AD binding. Thank you. Most of the 70 AD binding arguments seem more historically contested (dating book of revelation, Nero as beast, etc.). I need to go back and read Chilton again and see how he talks about that. Thanks again for the insightful explanation!
@@thebiblesojourner, I would look at Kenneth Gentry's before Jerusalem Fell for detailed arguments on the dating of Revelation as well as the letters/numbers behind Nero's name. As I already hold a high view of scripture, I'm more impressed by internal dating evidence than external. And the internal evidence is pretty definitive for me. This does not require preterism, but yeah, it sure does make it an interesting option.
It is true that the most difficult part of preterism is that there are prophetic events that already have history, so one bears the burden of establishing a connection. One is right not to jump to conclusions.
But its also not necessary to say that Josephus needs to be "inspired" for this to work. Josephus is just a historical source. It's no different than any other biblical event that has third party historical evidence. Or looking at history today for signs of the times. This is just the way that prophesy works, it needs history for fulfillment. Eusebius also notices Josephus, check out his comment in Eccl. History Book 3, Chap 5 & 7.
It is quite providential that Josephus has been preserved. But we would say that even if preterism is not the correct view, because the NT background there is just that amazing!
@@jrhemmerichThat's very helpful. I do plan on doing some videos on the numbering for Nero and the date of Revelation, so I'll be eagerly looking forward to your thoughts on that as well! Appreciate your challenges, feedback, and help.
Preterist, full or partial relies on Revelation being written at the time of Nero's reign. However, Irenaeus wrote that Revelation was written during the reign of Domitian. Not that Domitian is the 666 Beast, either. In any case neither Nero, Domitian or any other Roman Emporer tick all the boxes fulfilling the criteria as The Beast, Anti-Chirst, 666. It also should be noted that while Nero's name could be transcribed to 666, this has been done with Moshe Dayan. In short the Anti-Christ/666 is still to come. @@jrhemmerich
@@1969cmp, you raise good points.
I don’t see the early date requirement as a weakness for a preterist interpretation. Either there is good evidence for it or there is not. And the prophetic status of many prophetic writings in scripture is “questionable” based on how we are inclined to date them-Isaiah, Daniel, the synoptic Gospels.
Full/hyper-preterism is unorthodox on account of its rejection of Christ’s future return, a gnostic view of the resurrection, and a denial of the full redemption of this present world. Ironically, one can only adopt this view if one contradicts a literal reading of scripture’s time texts (e.g. 1 Cor. 15:24, 51-58, Rev. 19-21), which is the basis for the preterist interpretation. Hyper-preterism should be firmly rejected, but it doesn’t require rejecting the early dating of revelation. And one should not take a late view just as a defense against a rival interpretation.
Irenaeus did not actually ask about when revelation was written, he was asking after the meaning of 666. It’s quite plausible that he was saying that John himself, rather than the revelation was seen in the time of Domitian and so would have told us the name if it had been important to know.
It’s pretty clear that Irenaeus, as super valuable as his information and insights are, does not have any direct information from the Apostle about how to interpret the book. So he does his best, as we all do, to understand it, speculating that the number has to do with the latins (influenced by his reading of Rome as the era of the little horn, from Daniel, no doubt).
I would disagree that any other name fits as well as Nero Caesar. The common spelling on their coin fits the number when translated to Hebrew. No other emperor fits the sixth one who “is” when the revelation was given. Other names only “fit,” when this criteria is ignored or generalized-and usually not on a natural numerical representation of letters, which is built into ancient languages.
Nero was followed, by Galba, who remained only a little while and was assassinated after 3 months. Then came an eighth, who was to be included in the seven, this was Otho, and he too remains a short while and goes to destruction. Vitellius also dies in the great Roman civil war of 68-69, when the “sea” of Rome and the nations was “filled” with blood. Then Vespasian came, and the beast was given a new lease on life, and “came again” into the land (of Israel) to finish the destruction of that great city where their Lord was crucified. This is a witness of his truth, to bring Israel to repentance before he comes again, so that they will say, “blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” (Mat. 23:39).
As a student of classical literature, there is nothing like this for historical fulfillment to be found. And it won’t ever be found in the future because it’s too specific to the time it was given. But this is a strength not a weakness.
In short, the beast of the sea represented both Rome and her then living and soon to come emperors. The beast of the land is Israel’s revolutionary government who was making herself after the image and likeness of Rome and this world rather than after the image of Christ. This duality reflects the beast (Rome/Nero) and the little horn (Israel/Simon) in Daniel 7:11-12.
But one would need more time to establish these things in a convincing way. Certainly, it took more time for me.
Another excellent program. Especially the commentary on Satan's activity. I have consistently used this counter-example when discussing the thousand-year binding of the enemy. Few of their rejoinders are compelling.
It is an interesting discussion to work eschatological viewpoints through.
I was listening to Dr Andy Wood last year, I don't know who he quoted and he made the point that none of the numbers are allegorical.
Dispensationalists have to understand that progressive parallelism/recapitulation of the 7 parts in revelation is NOT a presupposition but a conclusion after a contextually consistent exegesis of Revelation.
All seven parts describe what happens during the interadvent period like persecution and deception (as introduced in chapter 2-3 and explained in chapter 12-13 and 17-18) and end-time-events (seals, trumpets etc.).
All seven parts have a description or contextual indication of the 2nd Coming and/or Final Judgement (rapture to the throne for the just / wrath and judgement for the unjust).
1. Rev 1-3: Seven churches
Jesus Return/Rapture in 1:7-8 + 3:3-5
2. Rev 4-8:1: Seven Seals
Jesus Return/Rapture in 6:12-17 + 7:9-8:1
3. Rev 8:2-11: Seven trumpets
Jesus Return/Rapture in 10:5-7 + 11:15-19
4. Rev 12-14:5: Persecution and Deception
Jesus Return/Rapture in 14:1-5
(Verse 3 makes it a rapture to the heavenly zion before the throne of God - if 144.000 are a literal group of first or last saints or a representative number for the great multitude doesn't really matter here)
5. Rev 14:6-16: Seven bowls
Jesus Return/Rapture in 14:14-15:8 + 16:15
6. Rev 17-19: Babylon, the whore
Jesus Return/Rapture in 19:1-21
7. Rev 20-22: Jerusalem, the bride
Jesus Return/Rapture in 20:11-15 + 22:12-21
As we know from chapter 12, 13, 16, 19 and 20, there are only 3 beasts. So we have the dragon (satan), the beast out of the sea and the beast out of the earth. Who is the beast in the bottomless pit from chapter 11 and 17, that looks like the dragon in chapter 12 and will ascend to make war and receive power with the ten kings for the final battle and then go into perdition? I'm almost 100% sure, that Satan is the first beast with the deadly wound (Gen 3:15) currently locked in the earth/bottomless pit. What we read in chapter 20:1-3 and 7-10 is nothing new. It's a recapitulaion/summary of what we already have in chapter 9, 11, 12-13, 16, 17 and 19.
The chronological presupposition really does the literal interpretation of Revelation no justice. You can't even be consistent and you are forced to introduce timetravel-passages like the tribulation-multitude in chapter 7 and the birth of Jesus in chapter 12. If you understand parallelism and scriptural context it makes total sense that for example the great multitude appears in chapter 7 in light of the olivet discourse or that the central part Starts with the birth of Jesus in chapter 12.
For the statements and questions posed after the 30:00 mark, excellent points made and yes, I have done that test driving approach on Scripture with a postmillennial approach. Also, no early church fathers after 70 AD confirms a rapture at that time. That event would be stated by many afterwards but they don't. Not until the Greek Orthodoxy is established do we see any suggestion of the existing millennial reign.
Thanks for watching! I think I'm tracking with what you're saying. But what do you mean, "Not until the Greek Orthodoxy is established do we see any suggestion of the existing millennial reign?"
@@thebiblesojourner
Sorry
The earliest suggested Amillenial perspective occurs in the mid 4th century.
@@graysonbr Gotcha! Yes, history is not *the* determining factor, but it is certainly evidence we need to consider! A lot of people don't realize premill is dominant in early church history!
Hi, this dialogue was very helpful! Thank you. Just have 2 questions.
1. Will you do a more in depth discussion of dispensationalism? What it is? If there are extremes of this system? Why we should or shouldn’t hold to this view? For me personally, it seems like everywhere I look or everyone I ask I get a different definition.
2. My husband and I were just down visiting my mom in Cary North Carolina and are trying to help her find a biblical church. Is there one you recommend in the area? she is not able to travel very far. Thank you!!
Great! So glad to hear it was helpful. Concerning your first question, my good friend and colleague has an excellent short video on that (th-cam.com/video/wqFSB9R0cC8/w-d-xo.html). I also have a short blog article on the subject: petergoeman.com/how-do-you-define-dispensationalism/. Also, my episode with Doug Bookman is a good discussion on what the defining mark of dispensationalism is. But yes, many people have different answers. I suppose that is to be expected from a movement that is quite varied. Plus many opponents of the system mischaracterize it.
Second, I actually go to church in Cary NC at The Shepherd's Church on Tryon Rd and Holly Springs Rd (6051 Tryon Rd). It is a great church and think it would be worth checking out for your mom. Blessings!
Wonderful! My mom lives very close to your church and said she will come to visit. She wasn’t able to attend last week but she did watch it online and is very excited to come in person.
Thanks for the recommendations on the resources and the church!
God bless you.
@@thebiblesojourner Isn't that where Vlach goes?
@@mikeyonce2323 Indeed it is.
I think you hit the nail on the head. You have to define these words. The Bible is consistent if you do your word studies on what the abyss or bottomless pit is. I don't believe there has been a thousand years where all Satan's activities have been absent
Consistency in interpretation is key.
Multiple Second Coming Visions in Revelation: (book not in chronological order )
Christ returns one time in the future. However, there are several different visions of His return shown from different perspectives in the Book of Revelation.
Christ returns at the end of Revelation chapter 6, with signs in the sun, moon, and stars, as are found in the Olivet Discourse.
Those at the end of the chapter are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb.
Why would they be hiding if Christ is not present?
The "kings", "captains", "might men", "free", and "bond" are also found in chapter 19 at the return of Christ.
He returns at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:15-18.
The beginning of chapter 12 is a history lesson containing the fall of Satan, and the birth and death of Christ, who is the seed promised to crush the head of Satan in Genesis 3:15.
The Second Coming is found in the "harvest" of chapter 14, which is related to the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew chapter 13.
He comes as a thief at Armageddon, and we find the greatest earthquake in history in chapter 16. This occurs when the 7th angel pours out his vial. How powerful is an earthquake which moves islands and destroys the mountains? What is happening to the planet?
He comes on a horse in chapter 19, right after the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.
Chapter 20?
Does He come with the fire, and the judgment of the dead at the end of chapter 20, which agrees with what Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and 2 Timothy 4:1?
(The time of the judgment of the dead is also found in Revelation 11:18.)
There are no mortals left alive on the planet at the end of Matthew 25:31-46.
Why does an angel come down from heaven with a key to unlock the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:1-2, if the pit was not already locked before that time? Are there wicked angels in the pit in Rev. 9:11? If the beast "ascends" from the pit in Rev. chapter 11, where was the beast before that time?
Does your view agree with Peter in 2 Pet. 2:4, and Jude in Jude 1:6, when they both said wicked angels are already in chains of darkness?
Revelation 9:14 proves some of the angels were previously bound in some manner.
Because the two witnesses were bodily resurrected from the dead in Revelation 11, the "first resurrection" at the beginning of Revelation 20 is not the first bodily resurrection in the book.
The principle of "Recapitulation" means there are multiple visions of His return.
Good stuff. Can you guys cover Ezekiel 40 to 48 and specifically 45?
Good idea! I can't promise it will be soon, but it is on the list to do! Life gets busy :)
@@thebiblesojourner , thank you. This is the one area that is a stumbling block. How does this reconcile with Hebrews 7-10? What was the intention of the original sacrificial system? How does this relate to Communion?
Thanks for having Matt on for these discussions.
Isn’t the root of all of this disagreement due to hermeneutics?
Could you do a show on the Alexandrian influence and neo platonism on the allegorical hermeneutic?
From what I understand Augustine was semi gnostic in his distaste for what the Bible calls earthly or even carnal enjoyment in aspects like the marriage feast of the lamb and an earthly reign of Christ. The idea from Plato that these were just forms of the greater to be known.
That’s a perceptive comment. It does go down to presuppositions about hermeneutical method. And I think that would be a great episode idea! Hopefully we can implement something like that soon.
@@thebiblesojourner😁
Maybe you should do a video on pre trib, post trib, and mid trib and why you believe pre trib is the most biblical.
By the way, don’t let my username fool you. This was before I wised up ;)
Haha, I try not to judge a person by their username 😂 That's a great idea to do a video on on the tribulation positions. I have some other videos lined up for the near future, but hopefully we can get to that soon!
Are you assuming that there will be a "7 year period of Tribulation"?
1). I would refute the "gap theory" of Dispensational Futurism (claiming that there is a 'time gap' between the 69th and 70th weeks of Dan. 9:24-27).
2). I would assert that the Decree of Artaxerxes that Dispensational Futurists begin the 69 weeks (483 years) with is the WRONG date and decree. That's why the Dispensational Futurist math doesn't add up.
Next, I would say that the 2nd Advent, the Resurrection of the Saints, and Rapture are all the SAME EVENT! Not two, temporally separate ones.
1 Thes. 4:13-18 makes this very clear.
Questions?
Let me know.
*Soli Deo Gloria*
A literally interpreted 1000 years means that the Beast will be easily recognized by his 7 heads. ✔️
But of a logical fallacy there. Daniel sets the paradigm for how to understand symbols and years. We should interpret Revelation like Daniel 👍
Satan is not a god.
the meaning of Satan being bound for 1000 years is quite simple.
in the Old Testament there was one nation of God... outside of that nation were the nations deceived by Satan.. now the kingdom of God is available to whosoever believes in the Lord Jesus Christ.
therefore, Satan is bound.
when Jesus returns... we, that are saved, are lifted up to meet the Lord in the air... all those on earth.. the unsaved... they will be outside of the kingdom of God.. just like in the Old Testament.. and Satan will be able to deceive them... with the purpose to gather them together... at our feet.. and then God will send fire down from heaven.. and devour them.
it shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise his heel.
til I make thine enemies thy footstool.
from Genesis to Revelation this is taught.
Paul did remind his old traditions no Male no Female or jew nor gentiles ect,,,,,,,,,,in Christ in YOU like Paul taught OT written stories allegories. Also after teaching to what was called childrens addiction with old traditions then after that teaching he said I have more excellent WAY were prophecy old knowledge FADES away for Adults.
Where does Paul say old prophecy knowledge fades away for adults?
Romans 2:28 only Spirit not letters.@@thebiblesojourner
Can you please explain how a prophecy like Ezekiel 38 and 39 has 'faded away'. It has yet to happen and while happen. @@berglen100