Facts on Rev 20:4 before placing it into a system

[Arthur81]

When I seek to find how a verse fits into some associated teaching of the Scriptures, I wish to know facts in the verse, and only then can I attempt to put it into a fitting 'proof text' series or system of understanding. Some points I see on Rev. 20:4 -

Examining the phrase "souls of them/those" in Rev. 20:4, and where is that phrase found?

"souls of those" in the Bible is only found Rev. 6:9 & 20:4 in YLT, RSV, REB, ESV, NRSV

"souls of them" in the Bible is only found Rev. 6:9 & 20:4 in KJV, RV, ASV, Douay

g5590 psuche g4969 sphazo Rev. 6:9

g5590 psuche g3990 pelekizo in Rev. 20:4

"psuche" is "From G5594; breath, that is, (by implication) spirit, abstractly or concretely ..." 1890 Strong's

"pelekizo" is "From a derivative of G4141 (meaning an axe); to chop off (the head), that is, truncate: - behead." 1890 Strong's

"sphazo" is "A primary verb; to butcher (especially an animal for food or in sacrifice) or (generally) to slaughter, or (specifically) to maim (violently): - kill, slay, wound." 1890 Strong's

The phrase "thousand years" is found in the following places, apart from Revelation 20.

"For a thousand years in your sight are like yesterday when it is past, or like a watch in the night." Ps 90:4 NRSV

"Even though he should live a thousand years twice over, yet enjoy no good—do not all go to one place?" Eccl 6:6 NRSV

"But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day." 2Pet 3:8 NRSV

Then I look at the word "throne(s)" -

The word "throne(s)" is found 37 times in Revelation, 73% of the occurrences in the NT. They all seem to refer to the throne(s) of God or his own in heaven which is stated explicitly in -

"At once I was in the spirit, and there in heaven stood a throne, with one seated on the throne!" Rev 4:2 NRSV

I find no reference where God or his people in bodily form are sitting on a throne on the earth.

This reign with Christ in v5 is referred to as the "first resurrection", but a "second resurrection" is not in this chapter, but "second death" is, in v14.

In spite of all the difficulties in this passage, I can't ignore the preceding facts in attempting to understand John's words. It seems closer to the facts revealed, that Rev 20:4 is referring to those back in Rev. 6:9 -

"When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?” They were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number would be complete both of their fellow servants and of their brothers and sisters, who were soon to be killed as they themselves had been killed." Rev 6:9-11 NRSV

 

[Arthur81]

To continue, vs 3-5 must be seen together and compare, and if you are TR/KJV only, you will reject this at the start, but for those accepting modern textual scholarship, there are key differences.

"And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till(G891/achri) the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. 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. But the rest of the dead lived not again until(G2193/heos) the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection." Rev 20:3-5 KJV

"and cast him into the abyss, and shut it, and sealed it over him, that he should deceive the nations no more, until(G891/achri) the thousand years should be finished: after this he must be loosed for a little time. And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and such as worshipped not the beast, neither his image, and received not the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they lived, and reigned with Christ a thousand years. The rest of the dead lived not until(G891/achri) the thousand years should be finished. This is the first resurrection." Rev 20:3-5 ASV

In the TR/KJV "till" in v3 is different than the "until" in v5, but in the ASV they are both (G891/achri). This is important because of how (G891/achri) is used. It does not have to mean "until and then", but as it is used in the following -

"For as in those days which were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until(G891/achri) the day that Noah entered into the ark," Matt 24:38 ASV

It does not mean the eating, drinking, marrying, etc. happened after Noah entered the ark, but the time before when Noah was preaching. In like manner, as in Rev. 20:3, Satan is bound during the 1000 years, not upon the completion of the 1000 years. The same word in v5 shows "the rest of the dead lived not" during the 1000 years, not once the 1000 years were completed.

There is another difference in the current Greek text, there is no Greek to support "again" in v5 as the KJV reads, "the rest of the dead lived not again", it is merely as in the ASV "The rest of the dead lived not".

A third difference is not caused by the Greek, but in the translation of the Greek. The literal rendering as followed by the RV and ASV read "they lived, and reigned" but starting with the RSV, it was changed to "They came to life, and reigned".

From the time Adam sinned, the natural man is "dead" in sins, has no spiritual life. At the new birth, the elect are quickened, born again, given spiritual life. So, they live and reign in this 1000 year period. The reprobate or non-elect are dead and remain dead through the entire 1000 years and then go into the second death, v14 . It is to add to the verse to make it read "The rest of the dead lived not until the thousand years should be finished, and then they came to life or, then they lived."

I've not found any view of vs3-5 that does not have problems or difficulties. The preceding is one way to approach it, but the pre-mil seems to have the more difficult issues: elsewhere in the NT in plain language there is only one resurrection, not two; v4 speaks of "souls of those", not merely "souls" as if used to represent the whole person; then the ones on the thrones are the martyrs, not all the elect.

This last difficulty causes a problem for the view I put forth above as well: if it is only the martyrs on thrones in v4, are "rest of the dead" in v5 including both elect as well as non-elect persons? I have my prophetic view framework from the clear passages elsewhere in the NT. I believe there is just the one resurrection on the last day of both elect and non-elect, sheep and goats. But, any view I find has difficulty with Rev. 20:3-5, so the above is one way to see it. I put this forth to present some issues on this passage for serious discussion.

 

[Arthur81]

I quote some viewpoints on the millennium from the commentary on Revelation by David S. Clark -

1st . The premillennial view assumes that the nineteenth chapter describes the second coming of Christ and that these six verses teach that all the righteous dead will be resurrected and live on the earth during the thousand years, and the wicked dead will not be resurrected till the thousand years are ended. Then at the end of the postmillennial period they will be resurrected and brought to judgment as described in the end of this chapter which is a judgment of the wicked only according to the premillennialist. The difficulties in this view are these:

(a) It contradicts everything taught elsewhere in the Bible about the resurrection and the judgment. It contradicts Christ's repeated declarations that the resurrection is at the last day, and the judgment of the righteous at the last day. It contradicts Christ's teaching in Joh_5:28 that the just and unjust are raised at the same time, one resurrection for all that are in their graves.

It contradicts the teaching of Christ in Mat_25:31 that when Christ comes then will ensue the general judgment and the assignment of destiny to the righteous and wicked.

It contradicts the closing part of this twentieth chapter where we see all the dead, small and great, coming from their graves and from the bottom of the sea and standing before God in one general judgment.

(b) It makes this obscure passage a key to interpret the plain portions elsewhere, whereas the true rule is that the obscure must be interpreted by the obvious.

(c) This view is supposed to be strengthened by the statement: "The rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished." But even the premillennialist would not be ready to admit that the wicked dead were actually resurrected at the end of the thousand years, and actually "lived" during the post-millennial period, which his literal interpretation would seem to require.

(d) Besides, the premillennial view makes the resurrection precede the "Tribulation," and therefore should show us the resurrection at the beginning of the fourth chapter (and not a line of it is there) instead of at the beginning of the twentieth chapter.

If this is a living of resurrected saints on earth, what becomes of them at the end of the thousand years? Do they die again? or ascend again? To this, premillennialism has no answer.

Besides if the end of the chapter describes only the resurrection and judgment of the wicked, what provision is made for the resurrection of all the righteous who were born and lived in the millennial and post-millennial periods? And for this also premillennialism has no answer.

These difficulties seem fatal to the premillennial view.

2nd . Another view held by Saint Augustine, by Dr. David Brown, a great authority on the subject, and by Dr. A. H. Strong, the great theologian of the Baptist church, is to the effect that the reigning saints are the triumphant church on earth in the millennial period.

The Christian cause or body that was smitten with the sword and burned in the persecutor's fire, will rise to triumph and domination in the millennial days. That is the resurrection, it is the resurrection of the cause, or party or church of Christ. It will rise to power and rule the world while the Satan party or serpent party will be overcome. But when the thousand years are finished that Satan-party will rise again to live and fight and persecute the church in the post-millennial period as this chapter depicts.

This view brings out the antithesis expressed in these verses. The saint-party rose and lived, the serpent-party also rose and lived. No bodily resurrection in either case; that occurs at the end when the dead small and great stand before God.

3rd . The view honored by the names of Prof. C. A. Briggs and Prof. B. B, Warfield is that this vision shows the saints and martyrs in heaven. It was meant to show that the redeemed are in heaven safe from all the persecutions that raged below, and that John wrote this to encourage the church facing the persecution of that and subsequent times. It would nerve them to faithfulness to see the glory of the martyr when the persecutor's sword had done its worst. It was not meant to show the raising of bodies, but the raising of souls to their heavenly home. This is the first resurrection, the entrance upon heavenly joys, and the second resurrection is the bodily resurrection of all the dead at the end of the world.

Revelation 20 - D.S. Clark's Commentary on Revelation - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Revelation 20, D.S. Clark's Commentary on Revelation, One of over 125 Bible commentaries freely available, this work deals with the final book of the New Testament and Bible: Revelation.

www.studylight.org

 

[GISMYS_7]

Yes!! Little men often have or invent problems reading and understanding .

 

[Arthur81]

Yes!! Little men often have or invent problems reading and understanding .

Thank you for your scholarly exposition of the texts under consideration. It certainly adds depth to a serious discussion among believers, and prompts one to continue with replies!

 

[GISMYS_7]

Have you ever found God's word difficult to understand? If you have, then you're not alone. Many Christians find it difficult to comprehend. But the truth is, we sometimes make it harder for ourselves than it needs to be. Why? Because we cannot accept it means what it says.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Have you ever found God's word difficult to understand? If you have, then you're not alone. Many Christians find it difficult to comprehend. But the truth is, we sometimes make it harder for ourselves than it needs to be. Why? Because we cannot accept it means what it says.

What does that mean for it to mean what it says? That can't mean that all scripture is literal and straightforward since that is clearly not the case. So, what are you talking about exactly?

Do you take a verse like Acts 17:31 to mean what it says?

Acts 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

This teaches that there is just one judgment day that God has appointed to judge everyone. You believe in more than one judgment day, though, don't you? So much for you accepting scripture to mean what it says.

 

[quietthinker]

I quote some viewpoints on the millennium from the commentary on Revelation by David S. Clark -

1st . The premillennial view assumes that the nineteenth chapter describes the second coming of Christ and that these six verses teach that all the righteous dead will be resurrected and live on the earth during the thousand years, and the wicked dead will not be resurrected till the thousand years are ended. Then at the end of the postmillennial period they will be resurrected and brought to judgment as described in the end of this chapter which is a judgment of the wicked only according to the premillennialist. The difficulties in this view are these:

(a) It contradicts everything taught elsewhere in the Bible about the resurrection and the judgment. It contradicts Christ's repeated declarations that the resurrection is at the last day, and the judgment of the righteous at the last day. It contradicts Christ's teaching in Joh_5:28 that the just and unjust are raised at the same time, one resurrection for all that are in their graves.

It contradicts the teaching of Christ in Mat_25:31 that when Christ comes then will ensue the general judgment and the assignment of destiny to the righteous and wicked.

It contradicts the closing part of this twentieth chapter where we see all the dead, small and great, coming from their graves and from the bottom of the sea and standing before God in one general judgment.

(b) It makes this obscure passage a key to interpret the plain portions elsewhere, whereas the true rule is that the obscure must be interpreted by the obvious.

(c) This view is supposed to be strengthened by the statement: "The rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished." But even the premillennialist would not be ready to admit that the wicked dead were actually resurrected at the end of the thousand years, and actually "lived" during the post-millennial period, which his literal interpretation would seem to require.

(d) Besides, the premillennial view makes the resurrection precede the "Tribulation," and therefore should show us the resurrection at the beginning of the fourth chapter (and not a line of it is there) instead of at the beginning of the twentieth chapter.

If this is a living of resurrected saints on earth, what becomes of them at the end of the thousand years? Do they die again? or ascend again? To this, premillennialism has no answer.

Besides if the end of the chapter describes only the resurrection and judgment of the wicked, what provision is made for the resurrection of all the righteous who were born and lived in the millennial and post-millennial periods? And for this also premillennialism has no answer.

These difficulties seem fatal to the premillennial view.

2nd . Another view held by Saint Augustine, by Dr. David Brown, a great authority on the subject, and by Dr. A. H. Strong, the great theologian of the Baptist church, is to the effect that the reigning saints are the triumphant church on earth in the millennial period.

The Christian cause or body that was smitten with the sword and burned in the persecutor's fire, will rise to triumph and domination in the millennial days. That is the resurrection, it is the resurrection of the cause, or party or church of Christ. It will rise to power and rule the world while the Satan party or serpent party will be overcome. But when the thousand years are finished that Satan-party will rise again to live and fight and persecute the church in the post-millennial period as this chapter depicts.

This view brings out the antithesis expressed in these verses. The saint-party rose and lived, the serpent-party also rose and lived. No bodily resurrection in either case; that occurs at the end when the dead small and great stand before God.

3rd . The view honored by the names of Prof. C. A. Briggs and Prof. B. B, Warfield is that this vision shows the saints and martyrs in heaven. It was meant to show that the redeemed are in heaven safe from all the persecutions that raged below, and that John wrote this to encourage the church facing the persecution of that and subsequent times. It would nerve them to faithfulness to see the glory of the martyr when the persecutor's sword had done its worst. It was not meant to show the raising of bodies, but the raising of souls to their heavenly home. This is the first resurrection, the entrance upon heavenly joys, and the second resurrection is the bodily resurrection of all the dead at the end of the world.

Revelation 20 - D.S. Clark's Commentary on Revelation - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Revelation 20, D.S. Clark's Commentary on Revelation, One of over 125 Bible commentaries freely available, this work deals with the final book of the New Testament and Bible: Revelation.

www.studylight.org

You examine the words Arthur a bit like a surgeon examines the anatomy of a hand. However, considering its purpose can be used for kindness or hate, for tenderness or wrath does not enter his dissection. So I would ask, where is the disconnect?

 

[ewq1938]

In spite of all the difficulties in this passage, I can't ignore the preceding facts in attempting to understand John's words. It seems closer to the facts revealed, that Rev 20:4 is referring to those back in Rev. 6:9 -

"When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?” They were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number would be complete both of their fellow servants and of their brothers and sisters, who were soon to be killed as they themselves had been killed." Rev 6:9-11 NRSV

The timeframe in which these people die do not match proving they are different groups. In the 5th seal they are told they have to wait for others to be killed as they were. This is a reference to those who will die in the GT so they souls crying out died before the GT.

The ones in Rev 20 died during the GT because they were killed for refusing the mark and not worshiping the image of the beast etc. These are those who in the 5th seal were referred to as "the number would be complete both of their fellow servants and of their brothers and sisters, who were soon to be killed".

 

[Patrick1966]

Little men often have or invent problems reading and understanding .

Congratulations on your intellectual and spiritual superiority!

 

[Patrick1966]

Have you ever found God's word difficult to understand?

Which version of "God's" word? Never mind. I don't want to hijack the OP's thread.

 

[ewq1938]

There is another difference in the current Greek text, there is no Greek to support "again" in v5 as the KJV reads, "the rest of the dead lived not again", it is merely as in the ASV "The rest of the dead lived not".

It works without it but it is important in the translation because two groups of the dead are being discussed. One group lives again meaning they resurrected back to physical life and the rest of the dead not resurrected with them would not also "live again" until a later time. "again" is important for that reason and is supported by the meaning of anazaō.

Luk 15:24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Same word here. Again, it works without "again" but with it the meaning is enhanced and provides better detail. He is not just alive but alive for a second time, which is alive again.

I believe there is just the one resurrection on the last day of both elect and non-elect, sheep and goats.

All passages that deal with the dead resurrecting show two resurrections. The righteous resurrect first, and the unrighteous resurrect in a second resurrection. Only Rev 20 gives how much time passes inbetween. "the rest of the dead lived not until..." proves this second resurrection as do all the other passages. Here are all the passages:


Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

First group resurrection: "to everlasting life"
Second group resurrection: "to shame and everlasting contempt"


Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

First group resurrection: "resurrection of life"
Second group resurrection: "the resurrection of damnation"


Acts 24:15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

First group resurrection: "the just"
Second group resurrection: the "unjust"

Take note that in every passage where the resurrection of the saved and unsaved are mentioned that the saved or just is always mentioned first. That's important because it is they that resurrect first! Scripture never deviates in this order. Revelation, John, Daniel and Acts all say the saved first, then the unsaved in that exact order.


Luk 14:12 Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbours; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompence be made thee.
Luk 14:13 But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind:
Luk 14:14 And thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

He did not say the resurrection of the just and unjust. He said only the just. Again, this is evidence of two separate resurrections. The resurrection of the just is only of the just, no one else.

What we learn from these verses is that there are two resurrections. One resurrection is to life and the other resurrection is to damnation and contempt. Two resurrections! Never is there a single resurrection of both righteous and unrighteous at the same time.

 

[Arthur81]

It works without it but it is important in the translation because two groups of the dead are being discussed. One group lives again meaning they resurrected back to physical life and the rest of the dead not resurrected with them would not also "live again" until a later time. "again" is important for that reason and is supported by the meaning of anazaō.

Luk 15:24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Same word here. Again, it works without "again" but with it the meaning is enhanced and provides better detail. He is not just alive but alive for a second time, which is alive again.





All passages that deal with the dead resurrecting show two resurrections. The righteous resurrect first, and the unrighteous resurrect in a second resurrection. Only Rev 20 gives how much time passes inbetween. "the rest of the dead lived not until..." proves this second resurrection as do all the other passages. Here are all the passages:


Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

First group resurrection: "to everlasting life"
Second group resurrection: "to shame and everlasting contempt"


Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

First group resurrection: "resurrection of life"
Second group resurrection: "the resurrection of damnation"


Acts 24:15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

First group resurrection: "the just"
Second group resurrection: the "unjust"

Take note that in every passage where the resurrection of the saved and unsaved are mentioned that the saved or just is always mentioned first. That's important because it is they that resurrect first! Scripture never deviates in this order. Revelation, John, Daniel and Acts all say the saved first, then the unsaved in that exact order.


Luk 14:12 Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbours; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompence be made thee.
Luk 14:13 But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind:
Luk 14:14 And thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.

He did not say the resurrection of the just and unjust. He said only the just. Again, this is evidence of two separate resurrections. The resurrection of the just is only of the just, no one else.

What we learn from these verses is that there are two resurrections. One resurrection is to life and the other resurrection is to damnation and contempt. Two resurrections! Never is there a single resurrection of both righteous and unrighteous at the same time.

Revelation 6:9, comes in the period leading up to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD; not our future today, 2000 years later. When the book gives us the timing "things which must shortly come to pass" 1:1; "the time is hand" 1:3; and repeated in the last chapter, "things which must shortly come to pass" 22:6; "the time is at hand" 22:10... it means either what is says or at least begins in the 1st century. You can't be literal and then decide this is figurative language and means 2000 years in the future from time of writing!

Whether "lived not' or "lived not again" is proper in Rev. 20:5 must be determined by the immediate context, since a word can have multiple meanings depending upon in which context it is found. I attempt to start by staying within the immediate context and strive to keep my presuppositions out of the interpretation. Do I stay with a Formal Equivalence which is more word for word, or a Dynamic Equivalence translation which involves more interpretation? I'll stay with the Formal Equivalence and interpret as I see the context.

When reading verses showing two groups in resurrection, unless I see evidence of a time relationship, I do not add it into the passage out of a preconceived notion. For example, to quote John 5:29 apart from v28 is very misleading. Together it reads -

"Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment." John 5:28-29 ASV

Can the "hour" be stretched into 1000 years? Or, can "the last day" which includes the resurrection and the judgment be stretched into 1000 years?

"And this is the will of him that sent me, that of all that which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day." John 6:39 ASV
compared with
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day. John 12:48 ASV

The resurrection and judgment are in or at "the last day". The plural, "last days" began in the 1st century at the first advent.

The resurrection of the just is of course the primary emphasis in scripture and at times it is only their resurrection in the context. There is no basis to read into that the idea that there is a second resurrection of the unrighteous 1000 years later. 1 Thess. 4 is written to the "brethren" v1, the focus is the "brethren" all through the chapter and in v13 he is giving assurance to the "brethren". The reprobates are not in the picture here and to read into this passage some relationship to the resurrection of the unjust is to miss the focus of the chapter.

 

[Arthur81]

In biblical prophecy the language is often figurative, symbolic and apocalyptic, not to be taken literally. True time-tested scholars of Scripture are humble and do not express an 'all knowing' assurance of the meaning of such passages. Interpretation of these passages must be kept in agreement with the more plain and didactic passages, or humbly left uncertain. This leaves even the most honorable of scholars from the past humbled, but it seems in the past 100 years there has developed such a self-assured certainty from some quarters on biblical prophecy. I share what reference works state about the Puritan/Presbyterian Matthew Poole and then his comments on Rev. 20:4-5, and then followed by comments on a couple very difficult OT passages.

From Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature (1880)
Matthew Poole (1624-1679) "Poole is spoken of as profound in learning strict in piety, and universal in his charity. He was more especially distinguished as a commentator. Mr. Cecil observes, 'Commentators are excellent where there are but few difficulties; but they leave the harder knots still untied; but after all, if we must have commentators, as we certainly must, Poole is incomparable, and I had almost said, abundant of himself.'”

From The New Shaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Vol 9, Page 124 (1911)
Matthew Poole (1624-1679) "In 1662 he was ejected from his charge, for non-conformity, and devoted himself to Biblical studies. The fruit of these was produced, in 1669, in the Synopsis Criticorum (5 vols., folio), a monument of Biblical learning which has served many generations of students, and will maintain its value forever...Few names will stand so high as Poole’s in the Biblical scholarship of Great Britain."

Matthew Poole Commenting on Rev. 20:4 -
"For my own part, I shall freely confess that I do not understand this and the two next verses, nor shall I be positive as to any sense of them: for the spiritual resurrection, as to the martyrs, it was long since past, or else they had died in their sins. But of this see more in the next verse."... then at end of comment on v5 "If this may not be allowed as the sense of these two verses, I must confess this such a [Greek], or difficulty of Scripture, as I do not understand. I shall proceed with the following verses upon this hypothesis, that this is the sense, though I dare not be positive in it." * What great humility from a highly respected historic Bible scholar

John Gill on Ezekiel 40-48
"This and the eight following chapters contain a vision of a city and temple herein described, and are thought to be the most difficult part of the whole Bible. The Jews forbid the reading of it till a man is arrived to thirty years of age; and then he must expect to meet with things in it he does not understand, and which must be left until Elijah comes to explain them. Many Christian commentators have omitted the exposition of these chapters; and all acknowledge the difficulties in them." *Gill was historic pre-mil, but NOT dispensationalist.

Jamieson-Faussett-Brown Commentary on Eze. 40
"There are things in it so improbable physically as to preclude a purely literal interpretation...The description involves things which, taken literally, almost involve natural impossibilities. The square of the temple, in Eze 42:20, is six times as large as the circuit of the wall enclosing the old temple, and larger than all the earthly Jerusalem. Ezekiel gives three and a half miles and one hundred forty yards to his temple square. The boundaries of the ancient city were about two and a half miles. Again, the city in Ezekiel has an area between three or four thousand square miles, including the holy ground set apart for the prince, priests, and Levites. This is nearly as large as the whole of Judea west of the Jordan."

On Zechariah chapter 14 by Charles John Ellicott(1819-1905) Anglican
"The eleventh book of the minor prophets is acknowledged on all sides to be the most difficult of all the prophets. Jews (Talmudists, cabbalists, and literalists) and Christians (fathers, orthodox divines, and rationalists) are all loud in their complaints with regard to the difficulties of interpreting this book. But, difficult as are all the preceding chapters, this chapter surpasses them all in obscurity. It is a chapter which seems to defy all historical explanation."

I respect the humility of men of God out of the past. I do indeed believe the resurrection and judgment are in our future... maybe later today, or 10,000 years from today; and I believe it for it was promised by Jesus who cannot lie. I reject any idea of a Judaizing millennium in the future which demeans the cross of Christ! God's people are one, not two groups.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Then I look at the word "throne(s)" -

The word "throne(s)" is found 37 times in Revelation, 73% of the occurrences in the NT. They all seem to refer to the throne(s) of God or his own in heaven which is stated explicitly in -

"At once I was in the spirit, and there in heaven stood a throne, with one seated on the throne!" Rev 4:2 NRSV

Dan. 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. 9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. 10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. (Jesus will be ruling for 1000 years from earth, men who died as Martyrs will be RAISED and JUDGED, not us who were n the Pre Trib Rapture, again, getting the Raptures timing wrong will keep one in disarray on all subsequent timing understandings)

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

"When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slaughtered for the word of God and for the testimony they had given; they cried out with a loud voice, “Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long will it be before you judge and avenge our blood on the inhabitants of the earth?” They were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number would be complete both of their fellow servants and of their brothers and sisters, who were soon to be killed as they themselves had been killed." Rev 6:9-11 NRSV

These are those Martyrs spoken of in Rev. 20:4 ONLY THEY live and rule with Christ (with Glorious Bodies). They ARE NOT in Heaven at the 5th Seal, Pssttt, they are nor even DEAD YET, Jesus is only Prophesying what the Trumpet Judgments will soon bring. Seals 1-5 (Anti-Christ) and Seal #6 only begin after the 7th Seal opens the Judgment Scrolls that is why it is over in Rev. 8, what is complex for most is not for me because I have been blessed with the answers because I refuse to accept OTHER MENS IDEA, and I simply asked God to SHOW ME Lord, what this means.

Those 5th Seal Martyrs are telling you what they WILL SAY, after the have become Martyrs. Never have seen so many trying to teach that which is not their calling. Prophesy and understanding prophesy needs to be left to those called unto it, unless God calls you to it, anyone who does not understand the timing of the Rapture is not called unto Prophesy. Find your callings so you can build up your talents. I see things on here that just make me SMH.

 

[Arthur81]

Have you ever found God's word difficult to understand? If you have, then you're not alone. Many Christians find it difficult to comprehend. But the truth is, we sometimes make it harder for ourselves than it needs to be. Why? Because we cannot accept it means what it says.

My friend, "what it says" takes hard work and study in these areas of doctrine. It is wise to get views from various perspectives and see what their biblical reasonings are. We form our understandings by study, and if we are wise, we keep examining and revising as we learn. I confess, as I studied today, I found a reason to refine a minor point in my thinking on Rev. 20:4-5. I am still trying to give myself a satisfying understanding of this passage, but maybe it as of more importance, how do I apply it to my daily life now? I do not think myself some theological "brainiac", so I consult many respected men of God to help in my study. But God's word rules! Even those replies challenging what I post spur me on to deeper study. Isn't that the importance of this? It may be the idea of how we approach this that is important in our studies in any doctrine.

 

[jeffweeder]

My friend, "what it says" takes hard work and study in these areas of doctrine. It is wise to get views from various perspectives and see what their biblical reasonings are. We form our understandings by study, and if we are wise, we keep examining and revising as we learn. I confess, as I studied today, I found a reason to refine a minor point in my thinking on Rev. 20:4-5. I am still trying to give myself a satisfying understanding of this passage, but maybe it as of more importance, how do I apply it to my daily life now? I do not think myself some theological "brainiac", so I consult many respected men of God to help in my study. But God's word rules! Even those replies challenging what I post spur me on to deeper study. Isn't that the importance of this? It may be the idea of how we approach this that is important in our studies in any doctrine.

You are a breath of fresh air.
God bless and thank you for your posts.

 

[ewq1938]

Revelation 6:9, comes in the period leading up to the destruction of the temple in 70 AD; not our future today, 2000 years later. When the book gives us the timing "things which must shortly come to pass" 1:1; "the time is hand" 1:3; and repeated in the last chapter, "things which must shortly come to pass" 22:6; "the time is at hand" 22:10... it means either what is says or at least begins in the 1st century. You can't be literal and then decide this is figurative language and means 2000 years in the future from time of writing!

That was written less than two days ago.

When reading verses showing two groups in resurrection, unless I see evidence of a time relationship, I do not add it into the passage out of a preconceived notion. For example, to quote John 5:29 apart from v28 is very misleading.

Not at all. As I said, only one passage mentioned the time in between. Ignoring that will affect how the others are interpreted. "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" proves some dead resurrected and some had to wait for resurrection.

Together it reads -

"Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment." John 5:28-29 ASV

Can the "hour" be stretched into 1000 years?

Of course. Haven't you looked at the definition?

Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,



There will come a time/hour that all baseball teams will play against another team but that doesn't mean all on the same day. A time will come for all the dead to be raised. First, the dead in Christ rise, then after a thousand years "the rest of the dead" will rise. That's what we find when looking at all of the related passages. Leaving the most important passage out of this is clear error.

Another analogy:

"For the hour is coming, in which all who start and complete highschool shall graduate."

No one would argue that every single person who completes highschool will all graduate the same hour, or same day, or even the same year. Obviously, freshmen don't graduate when seniors do.



To understand this even more fully the word "hour" must be understood:

"hour" can be any amount of time since it can be literal or figurative:

G5610
??´?a
ho¯ra
ho'-rah
Apparently a primary word; an “hour” (literally or figuratively): - day, hour, instant, season, X short, [even-] tide, (high) time.
Total KJV occurrences: 108

It's been translated as hour, day and even season.

Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

So, in this unknown amount of time there will be two resurrections. First (called the first resurrection) the dead in Christ will be resurrected. Then much later in this same "hora", at it's end, will the second and last resurrection take place and that's "the rest of the dead" who did not rise with the first group.

Or, can "the last day" which includes the resurrection and the judgment be stretched into 1000 years?

"And this is the will of him that sent me, that of all that which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day." John 6:39 ASV

That is speaking of the resurrection of the just on the last day before the Millennium.

compared with
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day. John 12:48 ASV

After the Millennium is a short period and there is a judgment on that last day before the eternity begins. Did you know there is a last day of each week? Month? Year? And of course a last day of other periods of time?

The resurrection and judgment are in or at "the last day".

Not the same day though. Two different last days. A last day of this age, and a last day of a short age after the Mill ends.

The resurrection of the just is of course the primary emphasis in scripture and at times it is only their resurrection in the context. There is no basis to read into that the idea that there is a second resurrection of the unrighteous 1000 years later.

It comes from Rev 20 so we know assuredly that there is a time period inbetween the resurrection of the faithful known as the first resurrection and those not worthy of resurrecting with them: "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished"

 

[Ronald D Milam]

My friend, "what it says" takes hard work and study in these areas of doctrine. It is wise to get views from various perspectives and see what their biblical reasonings are. We form our understandings by study, and if we are wise, we keep examining and revising as we learn. I confess, as I studied today, I found a reason to refine a minor point in my thinking on Rev. 20:4-5. I am still trying to give myself a satisfying understanding of this passage, but maybe it as of more importance, how do I apply it to my daily life now? I do not think myself some theological "brainiac", so I consult many respected men of God to help in my study. But God's word rules! Even those replies challenging what I post spur me on to deeper study. Isn't that the importance of this? It may be the idea of how we approach this that is important in our studies in any doctrine.

This says it all, you can study all you want, look at the Pharisees, but that will avail nothing unless the holy spirit is guiding via his hand of teaching, SADLY, most everyone, especially in prophecy, will not take teaching from those called unto prophecy, and try to teach it themselves, and most are not given the understanding because God is "whispering unto them" do this, or that, instead of hearing His voice they wat to be in prophecy, thus since they refuse to hear God's calling/voice, they get stymied on everything else. So, instead of obeying God's calling people miss what God is trying to do in their lives, and then when they try to reveal Prophetic TRUTHS they fail, because it is not their calling.

 

[Ghada]

When I seek to find how a verse fits into some associated teaching of the Scriptures, I wish to know facts in the verse, and only then can I attempt to put it into a fitting 'proof text' series or system of understanding.

This is a very good approach to reading the Bible. It takes discipline to be loyal to the words and their meanings as God uses them.

We first believe simple straightforward verses that cannot be explained differently, such as the Word was God. We then continue with that fact applied to other verses having to the do with the Godhead, that could be interpreted differently.

I call it believing the proof text first, and then unlocking the future series of verses having to do with the same subject. What we find in Bible arguments, is if the proof verse is not believed by others, then the rest of the series will be interpreted by unbelief. That's why Christian created christ teachers will never agree with believers on any verse having to do with the Godhood Jesus Christ.