Social Justice

In June of 2018 the twenty-eight year old Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez shocked not only New York, but the nation, by upsetting a seasoned politician, Joe Crowley, in the New York primary. Crowley has been a U.S. representative from the Empire State since 1999. For eleven years before that he served in the New York State assembly. For the past couple years he has served as the chair of the House Democratic Caucus. He had a long history of service and was a rising star in the Democrat party. In November Ocasio-Cortez was elected to the House of Representatives.

Yet, what some see as even more shocking in this upset and eventual election is that Ocasio-Cortez is affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America. As a socialist she favors the redistribution of wealth in order to achieve equality in the United States.[1] She advocates this economic and political approach since she believes it will achieve “social justice.”[2]

Thus, this new member of Congress from New York represents what many in the United States have come to value: this thing called “social justice,” which is why she and her like-minded colleague, Bernie Sanders, have engendered excitement among no small number of people. Who could be against justice, and especially as it is applied to the entire population?  Surely this is a good thing, right? Many think so. In fact a Christian ministry that is over forty years old, Sojourners, affirms that social justice is a large part of what it is all about.[3]

Yet, we must ask what is social justice? One might think that it is merely about pursuing justice in the social sphere, i.e. in society. However, it appears that the phrase has come to mean something more specific. Michael Novak explained: [4]

“Social justice” is defined as follows in today’s culture:  …a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth,[5] opportunities for personal activity, and social privileges…. In the current global grassroots movements for social justice, the emphasis has been on the breaking of barriers for social mobility, the creation of safety nets and economic justice…. [In other words,] “uniform state distribution of society's advantages and disadvantages.” (emphasis added)

Elsewhere we find an even more detailed definition and history:

Social Justice as a concept arose in the early 19th century during the Industrial Revolution and subsequent civil revolutions throughout Europe, which aimed to create more egalitarian societies and remedy capitalistic exploitation of human labor. …early social justice advocates focused primarily on capital, property, and the distribution of wealth.

By the mid-20th century, social justice had expanded from being primarily concerned with economics to include other spheres of social life to include the environment, race, gender, and other causes and manifestations of inequality.[6] (emphasis added)

The current problem is not merely the history of the phrase and what it has come to mean for some. It is also that many are either unclear about what it means or at least unclear in articulating what it means.[7]

Additionally, as Tony Evans highlights, for those who have greater clarity about what it is, there is a great deal of baggage not consistent with biblical truth.[8] William Lane Craig agrees and adds to the problems associated with social justice when he explains that critical theory undergirds the social justice viewpoint.[9] Craig highlights the following four anti-biblical premises that make up critical theory:

·         “Premise 1: human relationships should be fundamentally understood in terms of power dynamics, which differentiates groups into ‘oppressors’ and the ‘oppressed.’”

·         “Premise 2: Our identity as individuals is inseparable from our group identity, especially our categorization as ‘oppressor’ or ‘oppressed’ with respect to a particular identity marker.”

·         “Premise 3: All oppressed groups find their fundamental unity in their common experience of oppression.”

·         “Premise 4: The fundamental human project is liberation from all forms of oppression; consequently, the fundamental virtue is standing in solidarity against the oppressor.”

It is easy to conclude, then, that social justice can easily become equated with absolute equality that is helping the oppressed to catch up. Let me offer an example to help us understand what is meant and to introduce the question, is this really a good idea, after all?

In 1930, because of the rubber industry in Akron, Ohio, a man named Carroll Roush and “Chick” Morrison founded a trucking company named R and M Transportation.[10] What they hauled at first by drivers who owned their own trucks was almost exclusively tires manufactured in Akron to automobile companies. Shortly after the company was founded, Carroll’s brother, Galen, joined the company and by the end of the year the company was re-named Roadway Express, Inc.

Though many companies suffered during the Great Depression, Roadway prospered—both due to the growing need for tires in the U.S. and the business prowess of Morrison and the Roush brothers. After World War II, with more and more cars on the road, the improvement of roads, and trucks becoming the preferred means of transporting goods, the company flourished even more. They purchased their own fleet of trucks, hired more drivers, and have grown throughout the decades.

The history of this company is particularly significant for me since my dad, uncle, and my brother were all employed by Roadway Express, Inc. for many years. It was a means of providing for several families close to me (including my own). And, of course, it was not just our family that benefited, but thousands through the decades who lived well above the material poverty level because of their employment with Roadway Express.

Now, imagine that the United States in the 1930’s decided that it was unjust or inequitable for a company to own more than ten trucks. So, in the 1940’s when Morrison and the Roush brothers purchased a fleet of trucks, a government agency we will name the Social Justice Enforcement Administration informed Roadway when they had thirty trucks that they must get rid of twenty of them. So the SJEA took the twenty trucks and distributed them equally to five different men who had no business or entrepreneurial prowess. Though these five men meant well and may even have worked hard, they never really grew and flourished. And every time Roadway went over ten trucks the excess was taken away. Eventually Morrison and the Roush brothers would have quit trying to expand and would simply maintain where they were. They would have never been able to grow into the successful company they did and to employ my dad, uncle, brothers, and thousands of other employees through the years. So, would such social justice equality have been a good or a bad thing? Would such “equality” have been the road out of poverty and to greater material provision for a great number of people (as was the case with the flourishing of the company)? Would such equality have truly been just or not?

This example introduces some issues we must face in regard to social justice. First, absolute equality may not always be the best thing. We all understand this. We do not believe that all people without exception should have equal access to driver’s licenses and we have good reason for this. For example, we exclude those who are blind and we exclude small children.

A second issue that is raised is this:  Who decides what justice is? This is a huge issue. Though persons who are blind and who are pre-schoolers do not have equal access to driver’s licenses as most of those do who are sixteen years and older, would it be the compassionate or socially just position to take to advocate for such persons to have equal access?

A third issue that is raised in the examples is this:  What is the standard for justice? If there is no recognized and agreed-upon standard, then the sky can become the limit for what we term “social justice.” It might simply be this: “I perceive you have more resources or more opportunities than I do and this needs to be equalized. After all, it is not fair!” The end-result can be individual persons or voting blocks or even a government advocating for their piece of the pie and whoever can make the most noise (or have the greatest power) can get more resources and opportunities. If that is the case, would it really be just?

It appears that for many people this is what social justice has become—a fight for equality by my own standard against your standard or by the government’s standards—and the end result doesn’t appear to resemble true justice. For example, if you are a photographer or baker and serve all kinds of people who come through your door, yet do not want to photograph or bake a cake for a same-sex wedding since your religious convictions about marriage would be violated, there is a strong push in the country to say the couple has the right to force you to serve them, but you don’t have the right to hold to your convictions in the public arena. Is this just?  By whose standards?  Who decides? Which definition of justice wins the day and is best for society as a whole?

This raises another problem with the current social justice viewpoint. It has been recognized for decades centralized governments that advocate socialism tend toward authoritarianism and the removal of personal freedom.[11] And yet, though there is this recognition, socialism is gaining popularity, especially among younger adults:

When Bernie Sanders backer Kara Eastman in May became the Democratic nominee for a Nebraska congressional seat centered in…[Omaha]…, many conservatives took that as one more indication that America is oozing toward socialism.

Eastman, born in 1971, upset an older liberal, former Congressman Brad Ashford. Fretting conservatives added that data point to another: Millennials (sometimes defined as those born between 1977 and 1996) are going politically left rather than right by an almost 4-1 margin.

Other data points were also troubling. One poll showed half of American millennials saying they prefer socialism to capitalism.[12] Membership in the imaginatively named Democratic Socialists of America has grown sevenfold since the 2016 election. The number of chapters has almost quintupled.[13]

It has been my observance that even young Christians are open to socialism since it appears, on the surface, to provide a means of bringing about social justice. Now, I believe we can show the problems of a social justice approach that is undergirded both by critical theory and socialism by looking at their history and the results they bring. However, even more important for the Christian should be the query, what does the Bible teach about social justice?

That is the question I want to take up and answer in this series of blog posts and the new sermon series we are starting Sunday. What I will do in the next post (and the March 10 sermon) is to define “justice” according to the Bible (i.e. biblical justice). Then, in the following posts and sermons we will discover how true biblical justice should shape all we do and how it should move us to pursue biblical justice.  

Along the way, what we will discover is that true God-honoring biblical justice is different than the social justice that most advocate.

Joyfully Seeking Justice With You,

Tom

---

[1] For these two sentences, see The American Prospect, June 27, 2018 (on-line).

[2] Alana Levene, “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Championed Social Justice At Boston University,” Boston Globe (June 27, 2018, on-line).  

[3] Rose Marie Berger, “What The Heck Is ‘Social Justice’?”  Accessed 7/11/10 at sojo.net/magazine/february-2007/what-heck-social-justice.

[4] The following is taken from Michael Novak, “Social Justice Not What You Think It Is.” Accessed 6/17/18 at heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/report/social-justice-not-what-you-think-it.

[5] One cannot miss the presence of Socialism or Communism here. Merriam-Webster (on-line) defines socialism this way: “Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.”  Merriam-Webster (on-line) defines communism in this manner: “A system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed; …a theory advocating elimination of private property.” The difference is that with socialism there is still private property, but the government owns or directs means of production and distribution of goods. With communism private property is also taken away.

[6] “What Is Social Justice?” accessed 6/17/18 at pachamama.org/social-justice/what-is-social-justice.

[7] As Steven C. Roy, “Embracing Social Justice: Reflections From The Storyline Of Scripture,” Trinity Journal, 30, 1 (Spring 2009): 3-4, also affirms.

[8] Tony Evans, Oneness Embraced: Reconciliation, The Kingdom, And How We Are Stronger Together (Chicago: Moody, 2011), 215.

[9] William Lane Craig, “The Dangers Of Critical Theory,” at reasonablefaith.org/media/reasonable-faith-podcast/the-dangers-of-critical-theory.

[10] This account of the founding of Roadway Express, Inc. (now known as YRC) is found at ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Roadway Express.

[11] See F. A. Hayek, The Road To Serfdom (Chicago: The University Of Chicago Press, 1994, repr., fiftieth anniversary edition).

[12] Merriam-Webster (on-line) defines socialism as follows: “Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.” Merriam-Webster (on-line) defines capitalism this way: “An economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.” Merriam-Webster (on-line) defines “capital” in this manner: “relating to or being assets that add to the long-term net worth of a corporation [such as] capital improvements.”

[13] Marvin Olasky, “Between Anywhere and Somewhere: An afternoon with U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse,” in World (July 21, 2018).

The Problem Of Hell (Revelation 20:7-15)

Recently Annette Olsen of Layton, Utah told the following true story in Reader’s Digest:

For the second week in a row, my son and I were the only ones who showed up for his soccer team’s practice. Frustrated, I told him, “Please tell your coach that we keep coming for practice, but no one is ever here.”

My son rolled his eyes and said, “He’ll just tell me the same thing he did before.”

“Which was?”

“That practice is now on Wednesdays, not Tuesdays.”

There is nothing that makes us feel like we are in the right place at the wrong time any more than the Bible’s teaching on hell. Many of us can think it is out-of-date, no longer worthy of belief. To affirm it might place us in the right place with some Christians of days gone by, but it sure makes us seem like we are stuck in the 20^th century at best or stuck in ugly dogma centuries ago at worst.

And keeping in mind that this week begins Advent, surely hell would not be a suitable topic for this time of year when we celebrate the first coming of Christ. What is more, what impact could it possibly have for us as we look forward to the second coming of Christ!

Yet, what we will discover in this post focused on our next passage in Revelation (20:7-15), is that there are good answers for these objections  many of us have toward hell.

Where we must begin is by looking at the passage.

1. A LOOK AT REVELATION 20:7-15. 

John writes in these nine verses the following: 

And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea. 9 And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them, 10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

What we see here is that at the end of this age, when Jesus Christ returns, all believers and unbelievers will be resurrected, their eternal destiny and judgment pronounced, and unbelievers, along with Satan and his demons, will be cast out of God’s favorable presence into their permanent place of judgment, what we often call hell.

Revelation will go on in chapters 21-22 to look in detail at the eternal dwelling of those who are in Christ (the new heaven and new earth). However, here in this passage we find a shorter focus upon the eternal conscious punishment of those outside of Christ.

Here is how the 28^th question and answer of The New City Catechism summarizes the biblical teaching on hell: “What happens after death to those not united to Christ by faith?  Answer: At the day of judgment they will receive the fearful but just sentence of condemnation pronounced against them. They will be cast out from the favorable presence of God, into hell, to be justly and grievously punished, forever.” 

It seems clear enough that Revelation 20:7-15 teaches the reality of hell and that it includes eternal conscious punishment. Yet, truth be told, for many of us, this biblical teaching causes us great problems—so much so that we have either ceased to believe in it or we at least have ceased to teach it.

Some would argue hell teaches a form of unjust “torture” and this for the majority of mankind. It is not only those who heard and rejected Christ who go to hell, but, as some would term them, the “noble pagan,” the person who never heard the gospel and has never received and rested upon Christ alone for salvation, even though they may have lived a relatively moral life. So, many ask, “How can anything like the traditional doctrine of hell be consistent with an all-powerful and all-loving God?”  Or to word it in another way, “If God is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent, hell wouldn’t exist.”

Let me now offer a six-part response to these objections to hell. Please contact me or enter into discussion on this blog post, if you still have questions after reading this.

2. THE SIX-PART RESPONSE TO HELL’S OPPOSITION. 

To begin, God is always and, at one and the same time, both all-powerful and all-loving (or all-good).  In other words, God is not sometimes all-powerful and full of his attributes that may tend to bring with them more of what we might first see as severe outcomes (his holiness, wrath, justice, etc.) and sometimes all-loving and full of his attributes that may tend to bring with them more of what we might first see as kind outcomes (his love, mercy, grace, etc.). Nor is God always one without the other. Multiple times in Scripture God reveals that he has ordained the events of history he has, in the way he has, to reveal his various attributes that he always possesses (see Exodus 34:6-7; Deut. 6:4; Rom. 3:26; 9:22-23). In fact, in regard to God judging those who reject him and acting in mercy toward those who trust in him, Paul writes (Rom. 11:22): “Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness.”

I would take all this to mean that hell does not cancel out God’s love, goodness, and mercy at the same time it displays his justice, holiness, and wrath against sin. This also suggests there is something(s) good seen in the existence of hell and eternal conscious punishment of the unbelieving at the hands of God.

This prepares us for the rest of our six-part response.

Second, and flowing out of the first truth, we must see that hell is in existence because of God’s justice. We see that clearly in Revelation 20:7-15 and the fact that God as judge—a just judge who operates in conformity with all his other attributes—condemns to hell those who remain rebellious against and apart from Christ. The Bible is clear that God as judge of the earth does what is right, that is, he judges people in a manner that fits who they are, what they have done, and in a way they deserve (Gen. 8:25; Dt. 32:4).

So, in our first two answers we see that hell is both good and just and, at the same time, does not cancel out God’s love, mercy, and grace.

The third response offered flows out of the second: We see that God does not send people to hell who have not chosen their own road in life and, at least, chosen to ignore the knowledge of himself he has given in creation.

Consider what Paul writes in Romans 1:18-23: 

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Paul clarifies here that God reveals in creation he exists and something of what he is like to all people. Because of this, no one can ever stand in front of him in judgment and say, “God, I never had a chance and so you are unjust!” Since Paul says later in Romans that a person must hear the gospel to be saved (Rom. 10:13-17), I take Paul to mean in 1:18-23 that if a person responded in faith to the revelation God has given, God would make sure they heard the gospel so they could be saved.

Part of the implication of this is that people truly choose their path and thus their end. This is why Paul goes on in Romans 1 do say three times, “God gave them up…” (verses 24, 26, 28). Paul seems to be saying that God has affirmed, “Ok, fine, if you want to go down that road, then go ahead, I will allow you. But you will face the consequences.”

Fourth, though Scripture teaches God is absolutely sovereign (1 Chronicles 29:10-19) and so works all things after the counsel of his will (Eph. 1:11-12), nevertheless, he is not the author of sin, nor did he force man against his will to sin (James 1:13-14; 1 John 1:5). It is not as if God made men robots, that they lack the ability to make real choices, and yet he has decided merely to cast them into hell, even though they may have truly wanted to know and follow God.

Fifth, we must see that God’s justice and wrath against sin are compatible with his love, mercy, and grace. These first five reasons are all making the case that hell is consistent with God’s character and deserved by humans who ignore and/or reject him. To prove this point, think about a situation in which a man kidnaps, rapes, and kills five different women over the course of two months. If God created a world in which the sins of this man would not have to be paid and accounted for—either through him facing his own just desserts or through him trusting in Jesus Christ who paid the penalty for the sins of sinners, what would this say about the lives of those five women?  It would say they are not very valuable!

What is more, it is not just the rapist, murder, or even the Hitler-like figures of the world who must face judgment or else it calls into question the goodness of God and his world. It is also all of us, for rebellion against God runs through every one of our hearts. Were God to ignore that, what would it say about his value, his worth?  It would certainly belittle him!

This fifth response leads to the sixth and final response. Some of us may say at this point, “Ok, Tom, we can agree with you to some extent. However, when you realize that most people live and sin against God only 60, 70, or 80 years, 100 at most, eternal conscious punishment seems very overblown to say the least.”  However, we must see that eternal conscious punishment is not too harsh for those who ignored and/or refused to worship the infinite eternal God. We know this for at least the three following reasons:

·         In other cases, do we conclude that the amount of time it took to commit the crime(s) should determine the length of punishment?  No, of course not. Take the example of our rapist and murderer above. If a judge sentenced him only to two months in prison, we all would cry that this is an injustice. It would belittle those five lives and would not be an equitable and just punishment for the crimes.

·         The Bible makes it clear that justice is served in crimes when the punishment fits the crime (e.g. Lev. 24:17-22). We must see that continuous sin and rebellion against the infinitely holy, good, loving, merciful, gracious, and glorious God must face an equitable punishment—one that is eternal. Otherwise, it belittles the true worth of God. In fact, the eternal conscious punishment of hell heightens and emphasizes how glorious and worthy God is!

·         We must also realize that sinners whose hearts have never been changed and perfected will continue to sin against God for all eternity and thus continue to accrue the need for more and greater judgment against them.

CONCLUSION

As Proverbs 16:4 reminds us (my amplified translation): “The LORD has done all that he does, even his responses of judgment, in ways that fit the sins done, and this includes the wicked facing their day of trouble.” Hell is just and right.

Yet, how does this subject fit with Advent? In this way. It reminds us that God sent his son into the world the first time (the first Advent) so that through his life, atoning death, and resurrection in the place of sinners, we would not have to face eternal conscious punishment when he returns again (the Second Advent). This should lead us to even greater love toward God and appreciation for the birth of Jesus!

May this deepen our love for and worship of our Savior this Christmas!

Joyfully Delighting In Our Savior With You,

Tom

Understanding Revelation 20:1-6, Part 2

In our first look at Revelation 20:1-6 we focused on introductory and contextual issues that lead us to believe Revelation 20:1-6 cycles back and focuses upon events that take place during the current time and before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

Now we will look in more detail at the passage itself, which is best divided into two parts. To begin, we have verses 1-3, which describe the binding of Satan. Then we have verses 4-6, which describe the thousand-year reign of Christians with Christ.

2. A Closer Look At Revelation 20:1-6 Itself. 

We will start by focusing on verses 1-3.

Revelation 20:1-3:

Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. ² And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, ³ and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.

There are several things we can say about these verses.

Satan is bound for 1,000 years. What is the purpose? “So that he might not deceive the nations any longer.” This binding is reminiscent of other texts in which we learn Satan is defeated and contained in Jesus’ victory over him through the cross and resurrection (Mt. 12:26-29; Rev. 12:7-9). It also coincides with a greater coming to Jesus by the nations, as prophesied in the Old Testament (Isaiah 59:19-62:12). This binding of Satan is best taken as the ending of the times of ignorance (Acts 17:30), that time when the nations were, for the most part, lost—during the years of God’s working primarily through Israel.  Since once Satan is released, he will gather the enemies of Christ to band together to attack the church (7-9), “We conclude, then, that the binding of Satan during the gospel age means that, first, he cannot prevent the spread of the gospel, and second, he cannot gather all the enemies of Christ together to attack the church.”[1]

Since Revelation is full of symbolic numbers, it would be consistent that the 1,000 years is a symbolic reference. “Since the number ten signifies completeness, and since a thousand is ten to the third power, we may think of the expression ‘a thousand years’ as standing for a complete period, a very long period of indeterminate length”[2] which would occur between the first and second comings of Christ in light of the structure of Revelation.

“Since the ‘lake of fire’ mentioned in verses 10, 14, and 15 obviously stands for the place of final punishment, the ‘bottomless pit’ or ‘abyss’ mentioned in verses 1 and 3 must not be the place of final punishment. The latter term should rather be thought of as a figurative description of the way in which Satan’s activities will be curbed during the thousand-year period.”[3]

That this binding is real, but that the words in the text which depict it are symbolic and not literal are seen in the fact that a non-corporeal being is being bound with chains.  How does that take place literally?  It does not.

So, what is Revelation 20:1-3 talking about?  It addresses a greater working of God among the nations, through the Church, so that people from all over the world will come to know Christ and take their place among the Church. Though Satan still works and brings much damage (cf. Eph. 6:10-13; 1 Peter 5:8; Rev. 6:1-8; 12:1-6, 10), nevertheless God also is currently bringing about a great work and a great harvest at one and the same time that many trials and much persecution are taking place.

Revelation 20:4-6:

These verses read: 

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. ⁵ The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 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 a thousand years.

There are several points I want to make about these three verses that should help us understand them better.

The thousand year period of verses 4-6 should be seen as the same period verses 1-3 addressed. We have already seen that period extends from the first to the second comings of Jesus Christ and so, just like there, the reference to a thousand years is figurative, rather than literal.

Justice, especially for those martyred, is an important theme in Revelation (cf. 6:9-11). It is significant, then, that these saints are pictured seated on thrones and given authority to judge in some manner (Mt. 19:28 shows that reigning and judging go together). These three verses picture Christians who have died (martyrs probably stand for all Christians who have died as is the case earlier in the book (6:9-11). We must note that these saints are in heaven. After all, the word “throne” is used 47 times in Revelation and all but three (2:13; 13:2; 16:10) appear to be in heaven. There is little doubt, then, that this reigning is taking place in heaven and not on earth. It might even be said that verses 1-3 picture what takes place on earth from the first to second comings of Christ and verses 4-6 picture what takes place in heaven.

It needs to be noted that this text says nothing about Christ or saints reigning on earth (what would be necessary for it to reference a 1,000 reign of Christ and saints on earth). That concept needs to be brought into the text by implication. If, however, as we are suggesting, the better explanation for this entire passage is what the amillennialist puts forth, then there is no need to bring in that concept of an earthly reign.

Even though the words, “they came to life” (v. 4) can refer to a physical resurrection (See Mt. 9:18; Rm. 14:9; 2 Cor. 3:14; Rev. 2:8 where the same verb is used for physical resurrection) and certainly the words in v. 5, “this is the first resurrection,” let us know that this coming to life is a kind of resurrection, we are led away from seeing it as the future bodily resurrection of saints since that appears to be covered later on in verses 11-13.[4] What we have here involves those in Jesus Christ passing from this life to even greater life in heaven.  It is so much greater, even though it still does not involve the future bodily resurrection, that there is no way to describe it other than this—it is as if they are coming to life; they are being raised! Those who have true life are coming to know even greater and fuller life.

Most likely the words “first” and “second” (Rev. 20:5, 6, 14; 21:1) are not intended merely as ordinal numbers. Rather they describe what has to do with this present age (“first”) and the eternal age to come (“second”). What we learn, then, in the larger context is that those who have been given new life in this age and experienced that first resurrection will not undergo the second death. Rather, they will experience the new heaven and new earth (which is equal to the second heaven and earth—that of the new age). Additionally, those who have not experienced the first resurrection will experience the second death (which is equal to the lake of fire) and will not experience the second or new heaven and earth.

In verse 5, John’s clause, “the rest of the dead did not come to life unto the thousand years were ended,” is parenthetical. So, the subsequent clause, “this is the first resurrection,” refers back to the end of verse 4, before John offers the parenthesis. This parenthetical statement in v. 5 appears primarily to be stressing that those apart from Christ do not experience the greater life during this age. And, the only “greater” life they will have is that of being resurrected to face judgment and eternal conscious punishments (cf. vv. 11-15).

Finally, in verse 6, the fact that these “raised” believers who are reigning with Christ are “priests of God and of Christ,” suggests that the picture here is parallel to Rev. 5:9-10, a vision of heaven that takes place during this inter-advent age.

So, in all aspects of Revelation 20:1-6 (the explanation of the six verses, as well as structure and context) we conclude that the best explanation is that offered by Amillennialists (or Realized Millennialists).

What is left to do is to outline what is significant about properly understanding this text. In other words, what are some points of application that arise from this passage?

3. Some Points Of Application That Arise From This Passage.

To start, we should gain courage and boldness to proclaim the gospel to the ends of the earth. During the present age, though Satan still has great power and can wreak much havoc, he has not only been defeated, but his ability to deceive the different ethnic groups through the world and to keep them in spiritual darkness has been very much curtailed. This is why we have seen so much success in missions in this age. It is also why we can step out in faith and great hope that God will continue to work mightily to bring the different ethnic groups to himself in salvation.

Additionally, we are certain that if we know Jesus Christ as Savior, if we die before he returns, we will go from experiencing true life in this age to even greater life in his presence. And, we will still look forward to even greater life than that when our bodies are resurrected and we are reunited with them as spiritually and physically glorified (perfect) saints.

What is more, we are certain that the future second death has no power over us. We are assured in Christ we will go from life to more life and enter into our eternal joy.

Though the circumstances of this world often seem to suggest otherwise, Jesus Christ presently reigns over all things. Though this reign is not recognized and appreciated by all (which awaits a future time), it does bring encouragement to his people as we go through this hostile age and face hostile cultures.

Finally, we are reminded the next big thing we are awaiting that arrives with the future coming of Jesus Christ is the full future, eternal kingdom of God the Father and Son, the new heaven and earth. There is no need to have an additional period or kind of kingdom as all the promises made to Israel under the old Covenant are fulfilled in the true end-times Israel, comprised of Jews and Gentiles. Truly we as the New Covenant Church are the people of God, the apple of his eye, and not part of a second-class group of God’s people—a Plan B.

Joyfully Following Our Reigning Christ With You,

Tom

---

[1] Hoekema, The Bible And The Future, 228.

[2] Hoekema, The Bible And The Future, 227.

[3] Hoekema, The Bible And The Future, 227-28.

[4] Anthony Hoekema explains: “Premillennialists understand what is described in verses 11-13 as the resurrection of unbelievers which, they claim, occurs after the millennium, since the resurrection of believers has taken place before the millennium.  The separation of the resurrection of unbelievers from that of believers by a thousand years, however, must be challenged, particularly in view of Jesus’ words in John 5:28-29.” That text reads:  “Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.”  So, it is better to take verses 11-13 as referring to the resurrection of all—believers and unbelievers.

Understanding Revelation 20:1-6

One of the most controversial and debated issues among Christians when it comes to our view of the end-times and the second coming of Jesus Christ has to do with the interpretation of the “millennium” mentioned in Revelation 20:1-6. The word “millennium” comes from a Latin word that means “one thousand years.” It arises from Revelation 20:1-6 and the mention five times of a thousand year period in that text during which time Satan is “chained” (20:2, 3), i.e. his work is somehow hindered, and during which time saints reign with Christ (20:4, 5, 6).

The three major positions on the millennium are as follows:

1. The Premillennial position. Most who hold to this position believe the thousand years is a future reign of Christ on earth and saints with him for a literal thousand year period (though some Premillennialists give room for the amount of time not to be taken literally). The prefix “pre-” refers to the fact that Christ will return before this millennium. Many who hold this position believe the millennium is necessary so that God can fulfill literally (or close to it) promises he has made to the nation of Israel in the Old Testament.

2. The Postmillennial position. Most who hold to this position believe the gospel in this age will advance so extensively that as more and more people come to Christ and live under his reign a future world-wide reign of Christ (and saints) will be ushered in prior to his second coming. Since, in this view, Christ returns after this millennium (which may or may not be a literal 1,000 years), the prefix “post-” is affixed to the word “millennial” to label this understanding.

3. The Amillennial (or Realized Millennial) position. This position has been falsely labeled the “no millennial” view (since the prefix “a-” means “no”). This gives the impression that those who hold this position do not believe in a millennium at all. The truth is they do not believe in a future millennium and believe that the 1,000 years, like almost all numbers in Revelation, is to be taken figuratively as a long and full period of time. The better label for this view is the “realized millennial” position. Here “realized” means that it has already been experienced, already come, already started. The amillennial position believes the millennium runs concurrently to the current New Testament church age in which we now live.

Which position should we hold?  I hold to the third position for a number of reasons I blogged about in 2016. However, one of the big reasons I hold to it has to do with my understanding of Revelation 20:1-6, the passage we will look at this coming Sunday in our sermon series through Revelation.

In the remainder of this post and my next post I will explain how I believe this passage should be understood and why it does not speak of a literal future millennium.

1. A Look At Some Introductory and Contextual Issues. 

The only mention of a 1,000 year reign of Jesus Christ in the Bible is found in Revelation 20:1-6. This text is best understood in the context of the book of Revelation to refer to a reign of Christ in heaven (not on earth) with saints who have died—and this during the age between his first and second comings (in other words, right now).

Here is what we read in Revelation 20:1-6:

Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. ² And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, ³ and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.

⁴ Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. ⁵ The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 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 a thousand years. (emphasis added)

I emphasized the phrases and clauses that lead people to believe this speaks of a future thousand-year-reign of Jesus Christ and saints on earth—thus a millennium. However, there are a number of reasons why I believe this instead refers to the reign of Jesus Christ and saints in heaven for a long period of time that spans the entire New Testament church age—in other words, right now.

Here are some introductory and contextual reasons for that conclusion.

1. My first reason merely removes an obstacle as it reminds us that the amillennial stance is not new or strange, but has a long history in the Church.  “The amillennial understanding of Revelation 20:1-6 as describing the reigning of the souls of deceased believers with Christ in heaven has good standing in the church since the days of Augustine.”[1]

2. Premillennialists commonly assert that the millennium is a reigning of Christ on earth, as well as a reigning of believers with him on earth who have died and been raised, as well as a reigning of believers with him on earth who have not died. However this text says nothing of believers who have not died. The late theologian and scholar, Anthony Hoekema, puts it this way:

The millennium of the [premillennialists] is not the millennium described in Revelation 20:4-6…. When…we read Revelation 20:4-6 in the way [premillennialists] want us to read it, we find in the passage no reference whatever to people still living at the time the millennium begins or to people with “unresurrected bodies”…. We conclude that Revelation 20:4-6 does not describe the millennium of the [premillennialists], even when it is understood as [they] want us to understand.  The [premillennial] understanding of the millennium, in other words, is not based on a literal interpretation of this most important passage.[2]

Sam Storms agrees and disputes those who say the premillennial understanding of Revelation 20 is superior because it is literal. He cites Arthur Lewis, The Dark Side Of The Millennium: The Problem Of Evil In Rev. 20:1-10 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 50:  “The essential and concrete aspects of the text may not be ‘spiritualized’ out of existence. The martyred and enthroned saints are real, the angel who binds Satan is real, Satan himself is very real, and the wicked nations in revolt against the King are real nations and part of history. The question is not, therefore, which view is the more literal, but which correctly understands the place and purpose of the thousand years.”[3] (emphasis added)

Storms concludes: “The point is simply that the [amillennial version of the] millennium for which I will argue is just as real and literal as the millennium for which the premillennialist contends.”[4]

3. As we will see with greater clarity when we look in detail at the six verses, nothing is said in this passage at all about a reign of Christ and saints on earth (the view of both premillennialists and postmillennialists)! This is rather a reign in heaven.

4. If the main purpose of the millennium has to do with Jews and the nation of Israel, as some premillennialists assert, “is it not passing strange that Revelation 20:4-6 says not a word about the Jews, the nation of Israel, the land of Palestine, or Jerusalem?  This would not be so serious if the idea of the restoration of Israel were only an incidental aspect of the millennium.  But, according to dispensational [premillennial] teaching, the restoration of Israel is the central purpose of the millennium! It is therefore all the more significant that nothing of this alleged central purpose is mentioned in the only biblical passage which deals directly with Christ’s millennial reign, Revelation 20:4-6.”[5]

5. Finally, we must grasp something about the structure of the book of Revelation itself that has bearing upon the meaning of Revelation 20:1-6. Revelation “consists of [six] sections which run parallel to each other, each of which depicts the church and the world [in recurring cycles] from the time of Christ’s first coming to the time of his second coming.”[6]   “The [sixth] section, chapters 20-22, narrates the doom of the dragon (who is Satan), thus completing the description of the overthrow of the enemies of Christ. The final judgment and the final punishment of the wicked are depicted at the end of chapter 20…vv. 11-12, 14-15. In addition, this section describes the final triumph of Christ and his church, and the renewed universe, here called the new heaven and the new earth.

“Note that though these [six] sections are parallel to each other, they also reveal a certain amount of [end-times] progress.  The last section, for example, takes us further into the future than the other sections.  Although the final judgment has already been briefly described in 6:12-17, it is not set forth in full detail until we come to 20:11-15. Though the final joy of the redeemed in the life to come has been hinted at in 7:15-17, it is not until we reach chapter 21 that we find a detailed and elaborate description of the blessedness of life on the new earth (21:1-22:5). Hence this method of interpretation is called progressive parallelism.”[7]

The significance of this structure of Revelation is that each of the cycles shows us a picture of what is happening in the world now—each of the cycles also progressing further as the book unfolds. So, we should not be surprised that Revelation 20:1-6 gives us insight into what is happening now (just like with previous cycles in the book) that goes beyond anything revealed earlier in the book. Nor should we be surprised that the final cycle goes further and gives us a picture of the future climactic new heaven and new earth—one not previously given in Revelation. 

6. At the end of chapter 20 (verses 11-15), attention is focused upon God’s judgment—something we have already seen in the book of Revelation. Consider that the twenty-four elders announce the time of judgment (11:18); the Son of Man’s coming begins the day of judgment (14:14–20); God pours out wrath leading up to the final judgment (16:17–21); the white horse rider judges and defeats his enemies (19:11–21); and God opens the books to judge each person at the last judgment (20:11–15). These all appear to be parallel events at the end of various cycles in Revelation –each cycle covering events from the first coming of Jesus Christ to his Second Coming and subsequent judgment.[1] If we are right about this, it would place Revelation 20:1-6 before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ and not depicting a post-Second-Coming millennial reign.

7. The phrase the war, a literal translation, found at three different places with almost identical wording around it each time (16:14; 19:19; 20:8) seems to be different than the previous six uses of the same word for “war” (without the definite article, “the”) in Revelation. It appears that as Revelation cycles back through the events from the first to second comings of Christ, it progresses forward as it goes. So, the result is this: In these later chapters the cycle moves to the final war that accompanies the Second Coming Of Jesus Christ. This also points to the likelihood that 20:1-6 takes us to events that happen during this present time and predating the Second Coming of Christ, rather than referring to a future thousand year reign of Christ that is after his Second Coming.

8. We must consider the descending of an angel in 20:1. In regard to the three previous times angels are said to descend or ascend in Revelation (7:2; 10:1; 18:1), whatever chronological activity has been taking place is suspended so that the text can cycle back to earlier events. If the same holds true in 20:1, this suggests that the events of 20:1-6 are not happening chronologically after those of chapter 19 but are cycling back to look again at events that preceded chapter 19. So, again, in 20:1-6, we are not dealing with a post-Second-Coming Millennial reign of Christ, but with the depiction of events that take place during the present time—between the First and Second Comings.

9. There seems to be a close relationship between the events of chapter 12 and that of chapter 20 in regard to the binding of Satan. The devil was cast out of heaven in chapter 12 after losing a battle against Michael and his angelic warriors (12:7-9). As a result, the activities of the Deceiver were restricted (12:13-17). This appears to be parallel to God’s binding of Satan in 20:3—again suggesting that chapter 20 is taking us back to another look at events taking place from the First to Second Coming of Christ.

10. Finally, a linear or chronological understanding of the relationship of chapters 19-20 runs into difficulty with respect to those forces that oppose Christ and his people. They are completely destroyed in 19:18, 21 and yet reappear in 20:8. What we have most likely, then, are events that are parallel to each other (20:8 restating what previously happened from another perspective), rather than a chronological depiction (the events of ch. 20 coming after those of 19), which would lead us to see 20:1-6 as referring to a future reign rather than what it instead appears to be—speaking of a reign during the present age.

In summary, the larger context of the book of Revelation and the near context lead us to expect the events of Revelation 20:1-6 to happen during this present time between the First and Second Coming of Christ.

Yet, as we look more closely at the six verses and their meaning, will we find a message that is consistent with what we have set forth in regard to context and introductory issues? We will turn to that question in our next post.

Joyfully Delighting In The Reign Of Christ And His Saints With You,

Tom

---

[1] In Revelation and the rest of the New Testament the final judgment is associated with the Second Coming Of Christ.

---

[1] Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible And The Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986, repr.), 183.

[2] Hoekema, The Bible, 220-21.

[3] Sam Storms, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative (Fearn, Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, Christian Focus, 2013), 428.

[4] Storms, Kingdom Come, 429.

[5] Hoekema, The Bible, 222.

[6] Hoekema, The Bible, 223.

[7] Hoekema, The Bible, 225-26.

On the clause, “And I saw” (20:1a [see also 19:11, 17, 19; 20:4, 11; 21:1]) which some premillennialists argue suggests chronological treatment in chapters 19-20, Storms, Kingdom Come, 430, writes: “The phrase…appears countless times in Revelation and need only indicate the sequence in which John received the visions. It does not necessarily indicate any historical relation among the many visions themselves.”

Judgment On The Babylonian-Like Economic And Religious World System (Rev. 17:1-18:24)

You know you are dealing with a difficult passage when you have a title as full as the one I have ascribed to this post. However, if we read this passage in light of the 3^rd and 4^th cycles in Revelation (12:1-16:21), this passage becomes much easier to understand.

We have already seen the judgment of the Babylonian world system in chapters 14 and 16, there learning that part of the reason the terminology of Babylon is used has to do with the fact that the New Covenant Church is seen in Revelation as the end-times Israel, the true people of God. And just like the evil nation of Babylon that set itself forth in the 6^th and 7^th centuries, B.C. as a false god and was used to purify Israel, but also faced judgment for their sin, so also in these last days there is an evil kingdom, a Babylon-like world-system, that represents a false god (more specifically a substitute Trinity of the Dragon/Satan, the Beast, and the Beast/False Prophet) that is used to sanctify the church, but because of its evil, also must face judgment.

There seems to be two main reasons that the judgment of this Babylon-like world system is revisited. To begin, it leads the reader into a sweet picture of the rejoicing in heaven over the ultimate defeat and judgment of evil (19:1-10), as well as a more specific view of the ultimate judgment (19:11-21). Second, in chapters 17-18 we see more specifically both the economic and religious nature of this God-opposing world system.  If I am reading Revelation correctly in general and these two chapters in particular, then what is being unveiled here is a tendency throughout this current age between the two comings of Christ for most kingdoms or governmental entities (which form an overall world system because of their similar worldviews to each other) to do the following:

1. Consolidate and centralize power to the point they control most, if not all, aspects of life and commerce.

2. Reward and penalize citizens economically based upon their allegiance or lack of allegiance to the powers-that-be.

3. Flowing out of the first two truths, persecute the Church because their allegiance is not first and foremost to the human leaders, worldview, and systems, but to Jesus Christ.

Because of these tendencies the Church lives like and is treated like it is in exile, just as Israel was in Babylon in the 6^th and 7^th centuries.

Of course, there are differences between what Revelation 17-18 is addressing from what happened to Israel centuries before Christ. To begin, the people are God are no longer primarily in one nation but are throughout the world. So, it is world-wide and lasts for the duration of this age. Additionally, the evil entity that persecutes and is used as a sanctifying agent is not only a nation but is a world-wide system that also lasts for the duration of this period.

If we understand these underlying themes, then we can grasp what is being communicated here. In the same way that Israel under the Old Covenant went into exile at the hands of an evil kingdom to be purified for the first coming of Christ, so the new and true Israel under the New Covenant is being sanctified and prepared at the hands of an evil world-system for the second coming of Christ. And, just like God fulfilled his promises to his Old Testament people, so also he will to us.

Here is an outline of Revelation 17:1-18:24. Refer to this as you read through this passage in preparation for Sunday’s sermon. Keep in mind that what you are reading is the fifth cycle that gives an overall view of this current age in Revelation. We are saving the last two parts of cycle five (19:1-10; 11-21) for the following two weeks.

I. The Introduction To The Vision: The Angel Announces To John That He is To Witness A Vision About The Judgment Of The World’s Idolatrous Economic Religious System. 17:1-3a

II. The Vision And The Seer’s Response: John Is Frightened And Perplexed By The Magnificent Appearance of The Babylonian-Like Hostile Economic-Religious System In Its Alliance With The State. 17:3b-7

A. The woman is on the beast (3b-c).

B. The woman is royally and wickedly arrayed, as aligned with the state economic system and as an idolatrous persecutor of the church (4).

C. The woman Is The Babylonian world system, mother of idolatry and evil (the contrast to the church) (5).

D. The woman is a voracious, evil persecutor of the church (6).

E. The angel speaks to John, telling him he will explain the mystery of the woman (7).

III. The Interpretation Of The Vision Of The Woman. 17:8-18

A. The interpretation of the beast: the deceptive career of the satanic state and its allies will be revealed as a sham when they are judged by Christ at the end of time. 17:8-14

1. The beast, a Christ-substitute, is described in a manner that shows he sets himself forward as a substitute, but is truly defeated (8a).

2. The response of the unregenerate earth-dwellers to the beast (8b-c).

3. A further explanation of the beast, its heads, and horns, and its ultimate defeat: another picture of the defeat of the Babylon-like God-opposing world system. 9-14

a. Understanding this calls for wisdom (9a).

b. First explanation of the seven heads: they depict a fullness of oppressive power and authority (9b).

c. Second explanation of the seven heads: they depict government, religious, and gate-keeper authorities who exercise great power, but have already been defeated in Christ (10).

d. Explanation of the beast: affirmation that the previously-mentioned entities comprise the beast throughout the church age who is defeated and will someday face eternal perdition (11).

e. Explanation of the ten horns: Leaders who have power at the end of this age, which they give in alliance with the beast (12-13).

f. The anti-God beastly governmental and religious leaders of the Babylon-like world system will war against Christ and he will defeat them (14).

B. The interpretation of the woman in relation to the waters and to the beast: At the end of history God will inspire the state and its allies to turn against the economic-religious system in order to remove its security and destroy it. 17:15-18

1. The explanation of the waters (15).

2. A revelation that the kings and beast (the government and gatekeeper entities) will turn on the woman, Babylon (economic and religious system) (16).

3. The reason God has sovereignly ordained this turning on Babylon: Destruction (17).

4. Another explanation of the woman, Babylon: Her universal influence (18).

IV. Unlike the Rest Of The World Who Will Be Judged With Babylon, Saints Who Do Not Compromise With The Idolatrous World Are To Rejoice over God’s Judgment Of It Because This Demonstrates The Integrity of Their Faith And of God’s Justice And Glory And Leads To God’s Consummate Reign And Union With His People. 18:1-19:10

A. An angel announces Babylon’s judgment (its fall) and its severe effects, which will come because of her idolatrous economic and religious seduction of people. 18:1-3 

B. God’s people are exhorted by an angel to separate from cooperating with the Babylonian religious and economic system before her judgment, lest they suffer punishment with this arrogant world system that believes it is invincible. 18:4-8

C. Those cooperating with the Babylonian religious and economic system (e.g. kings, merchants, shipmasters and their crews) will lament after her swift judgment because it means their own demise. 18:9-19

D. The faithful (those who separated from Babylon) should rejoice over her judgment once it is accomplished because it vindicates their faith and God's just character. 18:20-24

Joyfully Trusting God In Babylon With You,

Tom