Here is my attempt to show the main tenets of fulfilled eschatology in a brief (17 pages) document. If any think it may be helpful to friends, feel free to save for printing or share via social media. If it seems lacking please let me know how it might be improved. Thanks for reading.
It seems most Preterists have adopted the corporate view regarding the resurrection of the 1st century saints. The New Testament does speak of the corporate body of Christ made up of individual members who died to sin and were made alive from that death by believing in Christ. But, is 1 Corinthians 15 talking about that raising, or the raising of the individual members after they physically died? I think the latter so let's take a closer look. Corporate view proponents argue that the present tense of 1453 (raise/rise) in verses 15,16,29,32,35 indicates the resurrection of the saints was a present reality at the time Paul wrote. The Interlinear Scripture Analyzer free download from http://www.scripture4all.org/ seems to lend credence to that idea. The ISA allows searches for every occurrence of a Strong's number, the transliteration of the word, or the exact spelling of the Greek word. 1453 occurs 144 times in the NT, the spelling ἐγείρονται occurs 9 times, 5 of which are in 1 Co. 15 and rendered "are being roused" ("are raised" in most Bibles). The same is true in Mt. 11:5 and Lk. 7:22 which tell of Jesus' miraculous healings of the blind, lame, deaf, lepers, and dead being raised (1453). The other 2 occurrences are:
Mk. 12:26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I [am] the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.
Lk. 20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. 38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
"Rise" in Mark and "are raised" in Luke are also rendered "are being roused" in ISA (the parallel of Mt. 22:31,32 has similar language except "resurrection" [386] is used instead of 1453). "Dead" in those parallels is from 3498, dead ones. How are we to understand that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were being roused at the time Jesus spoke? David and his fathers were in the grave (Acts 2:29; 13:36). Frankly it's rather confusing. Perhaps the process had begun with Jesus' advent, but wouldn't be actually accomplished until the proper time, but with "are being roused" being applied to the long dead fathers as well as those Paul wrote to, it does not seem decisive that the phrase could mean the 1st century saints were being resurrected at the time he wrote. There are also other verbs in chapter 15 assigned a present tense, but there are statements that seem to contradict the idea that resurrection was happening when Paul wrote. No wonder the saying, "It's all Greek to me" came to be! :) Let's consider some of those statements.
1 Co. 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
"Coming" is from 3952, parousia; presence, coming, arrival, advent. The 24 occurrences can be seen here. The word is used 6 times referring to the coming or presence of Paul and other individuals, once it refers to the "lawless one," 2 Pe. 1:16 refers to Christ's incarnation. The first occurrence is in Mt. 24:3 when the disciples, no doubt a bit shaken after hearing the searing indictment and prophecies in chapter 23 followed by the shocking prediction of the destruction of the temple, asked Jesus when those things would happen and what would be the sign of His parousia and the end of the age. Jesus then used the word 3 times during His prophecy of the signs and events that would precede the great tribulation. The other 12 uses of parousia in the epistles reflect the apostles expectations of that event and the blessings that would follow. Many have correctly noted that Jesus was with the saints during the transition period, however, in Mt. 24:3 He was also very literally with the disciples, yet they asked about a future advent or presence, which they associated with the destruction of the temple and end of the age. And the epistle writers while speaking of being "with Him, in Him," etc. still expected an even more intimate relationship at His parousia.
1 Co. 15:24 Then [cometh] the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
"The end" in the context of the parousia must refer to the end of the age Jesus predicted. The tense of the verbs notwithstanding, the 2 verses above surely place the resurrection in the near future (AD 70) from the time Paul wrote.
Paul repeatedly used "dead ones" (3498) to tell what state the raising would be from, but did he mean "dead in trespasses and sins," or dead in the grave? In verse 6 he told of the 500 brethren of which some had "fallen asleep" (2837). Clearly he spoke of those that had physically died. Now, let's consider these:
1 Co. 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith [is] vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
Believing in and accepting Christ as Savior could not possibly be described as "fallen asleep," so verse 18 must refer to believers that had physically died, i.e. those dead in Christ. He concludes this negative argument saying in effect that if Christ was not raised he and his readers had no hope for an afterlife. In the following verses he assured them Christ had risen, thus their faith and hope was not in vain. With this in mind, consider Paul's answer to the question, "How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?" from verse 35. He explained the dead are sown a perishable body, raised an imperishable body; sown in dishonor and weakness, raised in glory and power; sown a natural body, raised a spiritual body. Since he was speaking about those that had or would fall asleep, "sown" brings to mind burial of the corpse, the soul of which God would give a spiritual body as He wished. It is the soul that can survive death and rise:
Mt. 10:28 "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." James 1:21 ...in humility receive the word implanted, which is able to save your souls. 1 Pe. 1:9 obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls, Re. 6:9 When the Lamb broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been slain... 20:4 Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus...
Nearing the end of his discourse, Paul offered more details on the timing:
1 Co. 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
Those verses and many more exclude human bodies being taken up. I wonder how that doctrine ever came to be. Some of Paul's audience would live until Christ's coming, as would some of Jesus' audience in Mt. 16:27,28. In these verses "changed" (236) and "raised" (1453) are in the future tense, and would occur at the last trump (7th trumpet, Re. 8:2,15). We have confirmation from a very reliable Source:
Mt. 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."
And Paul affirmed the same to the Thessalonians:
1 Th. 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive [and] remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
There's no ambiguity in those verses about when; at the parousia of the Lord, with the trump. The Lord's descent, the rising of the dead ones, the catching up, and being with the Lord are all in the future tense. Noteworthy perhaps, the words rendered "alive" (2198) and "remain" (4035) are in present tense even though Paul was speaking of their state at the future parousia. Maybe it was in that sense he used present tense of 1453 in 1 Co. 15. For instance, if I say to you, "If we are not taken to heaven the Bible is false." That surely would be understood to mean when we die as opposed to right now. Maybe Paul could have used words/phrases that would have been clearer, but I'm not an expert grammarian... and maybe Paul wasn't either! ;-)
Finally, looking at the 42 occurrences of "resurrection" (386) here we see Lk. 2:34 can be understood in a corporate sense. Other than that the rest refer to resurrection of Jesus and individuals. It is never used referring to conversion, sanctification, or the raising up of living persons. Other words such as 1453 can refer to that kind of raising as well as resurrection of dead ones depending on context. In 1 Co. 15 note that 386 occurs 4 times and is apparently synonymous with 1453. If resurrection other than that of Jesus is covered by a blanket corporate view, then the NT has little or nothing to say about the fate of those that were in Hades, or about to be there.
I'll finish by saying I don't expect a resurrection after death, rather a transition since I believe the resurrection applied to those waiting in Hades until the parousia. Since then I feel Christians' souls bypass the grave at physical death and go to heaven.
Well, those are my thoughts, I hope they are helpful and stimulative.
Several years ago TLC aired a series called "Mummy Detective" with Archaeologist Bob Brier. A particularly interesting episode called “Mummy Detective - The Three Kings” first aired in December 2004 in which Dr. Brier was joined by astronomer Michael R. Molnar, author of "The Star of Bethlehem: The Legacy of the Magi." Together, examining evidence and tradition, they presented very intriguing theories about the wise men and the star that led them. Following is a brief summary I wrote to share with my granddaughters.
The Bible does not say how many so how do we know there were three? We can't be sure, but an ancient drawing shows 3; 1 young, 1 middle aged, and 1 old. The clothes they wore showed they came from Persia, which is the country now called Iran. The Greek word for wise men is magi which means magicians, who were also dream interpreters and astrologers. Astrologers believe the signs in the stars can tell of the future, and special events.
Many have thought the star they saw may have been a comet. Some believe God magically caused a star like light to appear and lead them to Baby Jesus. Could God do that? Of course he could, but He often seems to work using His natural creation. This theory says the "star" they saw was probably Jupiter. They likely didn't know about planets yet, and thought Jupiter was a star. On April 17, 6BC, just before sunrise they would have seen Jupiter in the eastern sky, and it would have been in the constellation Aries the Ram, which was a symbol of Judea. To astrologers this was a sign that a new king was born in Judea.
Now, did they start following this star? No because they would have been going the wrong way. Judea was to their west. The Bible says they came to Jerusalem because they had seen His star in the east. And they didn't come the same night Jesus was born like the shepherds. It was a long way from Persia to Jerusalem, it took them about 8 months to get there. In Jerusalem they found out from those that understood prophecy that Messiah was to be born in the city of Bethlehem, which was south of Jerusalem, so on about the 19th of December they started toward Bethlehem, and saw the star (Jupiter) that they had seen in the east before, but now it was in the southern sky and that is when they started following it (Astronomical software confirms Jupiter's position at that time). Bethlehem is about 6 miles south, but the route they took may have been 2 or 3 times that. If they started just after dark toward the star, they would be going south/southeast. As a few hours passed and the star moved, their direction would change to the south, then southwest, and finally west. As they arrived in Bethlehem, probably around 10-12PM the star low in the western sky might have appeared to "stand over" the birthplace of Jesus. Or they may have left later and got to Bethlehem just before Jupiter sat a little after 2AM. Looking to the horizon from a modest distance, that could have looked even more like a star directly over Jesus birthplace. Now, remember how the angel told Joseph to take the young Child and His mother and flee to Egypt? The gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh that they brought were very valuable and could have helped Mary and Joseph pay for that trip. If this theory is true, how impressive that God caused all those earthly and celestial events to happen at precisely the right moments in time!
Finally, there are 3 skeletons buried in the Cologne Cathedral in Germany that many say are the three wise men. The mummy detective could not get permission to examine them, but he was allowed to make pictures of their skulls. Because of the way the skull bones were knit together, he was able to tell that 1 was young, 1 middle aged, and 1 old. So, they could be the 3 magi that traveled so far so long ago to worship the baby Jesus.
******************************
This press release provides some info on Dr. Brier and the program.
Discovery of an ancient coin led to astronomer Molnar's research into the Star of Bethlehem. See the coin and article at this link.
There are many good arguments that Jesus was born during the Feast of Tabernacles. One of the better ones is by David Curtis of Berean Bible Church. Search this page for "date of Jesus' birth" for the beginning of his explanation. Considering that, perhaps Jupiter in the constellation Aries the Ram was a sign a new king was about to be born, rather than had been born. Timing between the events would have been close to the six months difference between birth of John the Baptist and that of Jesus.
Merry Christmas to all!
From time to time on internet forums will be speculation about the identity of the abomination of desolation Jesus spoke of in Mt. 24:15 and Mk. 13:14. When I discovered the Preterist view the first explanations I found agreed the answer was the caution in Lk. 21:20 of Luke's parallel account of the Olivet Discourse, i.e. when armies would be seen surrounding Jerusalem her desolation was near, thus the Roman army was the abomination. That made perfect sense, but over the years I encountered other explanations that also seemed plausible; the abominable atrocities committed by the rebellious zealots, resisting rule of Rome as well as the Jewish leadership, spilling their blood on the altar, and many other atrocities. Josephus recorded their acts, and indeed blamed them for bringing on the destruction by the Romans. Of course, had Josephus and the other priests faithful to Judaism looked in a mirror, they would have seen the rest of the people that brought on that destruction.;) Others have offered studies on the word abomination (H8251 - shiqquwts), and cited verses in many places in the Old Testament describing abominable acts, and seeing possible parallels to those acts prior to the Jewish revolt. Such arguments can sound persuasive as there were indeed many abominations occurring, however, we must remember:
(NASB) Matthew 24:15 "Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)
Not through Josephus, not through Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel etc., but through Daniel. So, what can we find that Daniel spoke of?
From PDF notes of Ed Stevens 10-24-10 Then and Now program:
Dan. 11:29-32 (168-167 BC) - Antiochus made another attempt to plunder and
subjugate Egypt, but it did not work out the way he wanted. Roman ships from
Cyprus came against him and stopped his progress against Egypt. The Romans
ordered him out of Egypt. Enraged at his failed attempt, he returned back through
Israel and vented his anger on the Jews. Forces from Antiochus desecrated the
sanctuary fortress in Jerusalem, stopped the regular sacrifice to Yahweh, and set up
his own altar to Zeus in the Temple. This was the abomination which caused the
land of Israel to be polluted by pigs being sacrificed to Zeus. An additional altar was
set up in Modin, but Mattathiah refused to sacrifice the pig, and immediately
sounded the alarm and gathered the outraged Jewish warriors (the Hasidim) to repel
Antiochus and cleanse the abomination from the land. This was the Maccabean
revolt, which began in 167 BC and lasted about three years (until 164 BC). The
books of first and second Maccabees record the history of this period. The temple
was cleansed and the sacrifice restored. Every year after that the festival of
Hannukkah (Feast of Lights) celebrated the cleansing of the temple.
To this day Hannukkah is a major remembrance in modern Israel, celebrating the victory over the foreign king and his army that forced the Jews to abandon their worship practices, to stop circumcising their children, and to offer sacrifices and worship to his god Zeus, whose statue he placed in the holy place. I think that desecration called an "abomination of desolation" in Da. 11:31 would have come to the minds of those believing Jews familiar with Hannukkah as they were contemplating Jesus' words.
They likely would also have thought about Da. 9:2 where Daniel noted the nearing completion of the 70 years of desolation which had been brought on by God's judgment using another foreign ruler and army, followed by Daniel's prayer confessing the sins and rebellion of his people that brought on that judgment, as well as their continued failings. Then in Da. 9:16-19 he beseeches the Lord to turn His anger and wrath away, for the Lord to hear his prayer and let His face shine on His desolate sanctuary. For God to listen and hear, to open His eyes and see the desolation of the people and city called by His name, not because the people merit it, but because of God's great compassion. Daniel closes urging God to hurry for His own sake because the people and city are called by God's name. Then in Da. 9:20ff Gabriel appears to Daniel to relay the answer to his prayer, compliments him calling him highly esteemed, then begins revealing the 70 weeks prophecy. Determined for the people and the holy city; finish the transgression, make an end of sins, make reconciliation for iniquity, bring in everlasting righteousness, seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy. The long awaited great hope, the Messiah! Daniel must have been feeling pretty good at that point, but then...
Messiah would be cut off! And following that (hindsight shows 40 years later), again a people of a prince would come and destroy the city and sanctuary. To its end war and desolations determined, Da. 9:27 elaborates on that desolation. I think confusion results from Preterists repeatedly referring to a 3 1/2 year war from AD 66-70, when in fact the war between the Jews and Romans was a 7 year war, AD 66-73. True, the main point is the burning of the temple ending forever the Mosaic sacrificial system, but as Daniel wrote, the ending of those sacrifices was to happen in the midst of that war (one period of seven). Translators have had difficulty with verse 27 as evidenced here. NLT seems to have a dispensational influence. NASB and some others err in concluding destruction is "poured out on the one who makes desolate." Of those YLT is the best rendering, "...even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one." Compare here and LXX here . Also note, nothing in the Hebrew or Greek indicates the covenant would only be "for one week." The events of that week - especially the midst - were to strengthen or empower (compare H1396 and G1412) the eternal New Covenant instituted at Calvary.
I believe those hearing and understanding Jesus' unified Olivet prophecy would have reached the conclusion that "the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet" would be the fulfillment of Da. 9:26,27. Jesus even used the same words for "abomination of desolation" (G946, 3588, 2050) that are in verse 27 in the LXX. So, once more a foreign leader and army would come against Jerusalem as Lk. 21:20 warned, and that impending desolation would be the sign for the saints to flee Judea. We know from history that the Roman coalition was the desolating force, the instrument of judgment that left the city in utter ruins (Wars 7.1.1ff). Therefore, I believe Lk. 21:20 does in fact explain Mt. 24:15 and Mk. 13:14.
An interesting aside: While working on this post I was following a forum debate about whether the "he" in Da. 9:27 referred to Messiah in verse 26, or (according to the futurist) the evil prince in verse 26. See THIS POST that shows the Hebrew actually agrees with the wording of the LXX. The post also links to a second person that reached the same conclusion, and clicking the 'Home' button at the bottom of that link shows that person is a futurist! Very interesting.
On 9-12-11 I blogged about the Rod MacArthur podcast during which he pointed out that in Heb. 9:28, "time" is not in the text, and "out of" which is in the text is not in our Bibles! The verse should read 'out of the second,' meaning 2nd chamber of the temple not made with hands, the most Holy place. Related to this I recently saw a forum post linking here to a Pantelist view of 9:27. Commenting on the traditional translation of 9:27 the author wrote (red emphasis added):
Accordingly, this translation is mostly understood to assert a post death individual judgment, but is this what is really being said – the Pantelistic view does not believe so. Read in the larger context of verses 23-28 the focus of this passage is in accordance with the perpetual sacrificial ministry of the high priests, typifying and in contradistinction to Jesus' once for all atoning death. The conventional reading does not reflect the true intent of the passage, nor the flavour of Hebrews as a whole i.e., the "better priesthood" or "better sacrifice", etc. Between the words "it is appointed for" and "men to die once" is the Greek definite article "the" and correctly parsed reads "those" [tois – τοις]. This word is used again in the very next verse of "…those who eagerly wait for Him…" – so it should rightly read:
Heb 9:27-28 And as it is appointed for those men [the high priests] to die once [ceremonially], but after this the judgment [acceptance-acquittal], so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.
Read in this fashion gives those two little words as and so their proper and essential contextual meaning and application. It was in this foreshadowing ministration of the Old Testament priesthood of those men that the pattern was laid for Israel's Messiah to come and perform the ultimate sacrifice, of Himself, "to put away sin" by His better and more perfect offering, that now sees all redemptive and prophetic history sealed – for the Great High Priest has returned.
To me that makes a great deal of sense of 9:27, keeping the verse in the context of comparing the perpetual substitutional blood sacrifice of those high priests with the once for all time blood sacrifice of Christ. The traditional interpretation seems a divergence from the subject at hand. Note also that in Jn. 6:14 and Re. 9:4 the same exact phrase (G3588 & 444) is translated "those men" (KJV).
As the first sentence of the excerpt above shows, the common understanding of 9:27 - by many Preterists as well as futurists - is a post death individual judgment for all. In my blog noted above I stated my belief that, "Unlike that first century generation, we are not waiting for Christ to appear out of the second, so I believe post mortem 'judgment' in 9:27 was applicable to people under the Old Covenant only." But, if the rendering by the author above is correct, an individual post mortem judgment is not even under consideration by the verse. I know there are other passages that seem to indicate an individual judgment of all, but let's first consider these (NASB):
John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life."
1 John 5:13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.
If John accurately quoted Jesus, we must conclude that believers are exempt from judgment, and through belief possess eternal life which John reiterates in his epistle (see also Jn 3:15,16; 6:40; 11:25; 1 Jn 5:11-13). I now believe the verses above apply to pre AD 70 as well as post AD 70 believers. See here all occurrences of G166 and the multitude of times it speaks of eternal/everlasting life for believers.
Now, let's consider a few that seem to affirm a judgment for all. For instance, Ro. 14:10&12 For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. ... So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God. That sounds like Paul was telling his readers they would face judgment, but consider his criticisms of them in the first nine verses. They were being judgmental toward one another, and would have to give account of that, but there is no hint of judgment for or against eternal life. In fact verse 8 affirmed, for if we live, we live for the Lord, or if we die, we die for the Lord; therefore whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. In 2 Co. 5:10 Paul again tells Christians they must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. Rewarded based on deeds doesn't equate to judgment for or against eternal life. Indeed, in verse 18 Paul said he and his fellow saints had been reconciled to God through Christ. So, it seems he was speaking of a level of reward they would receive based on their actions. Compare 1 Co. 3:11-15 which speaks of reward or loss based on works built on the foundation of Christ, but even those who suffered loss would none the less be saved. I expect even the smallest reward in heaven will be awe-inspiring. I suggest bēma translated as 'judgment seat' in the two verses above is a bit misleading, suggesting possible condemnation. Most versions render it such, but Young's reads, "...before the tribunal of the Christ..." That indicates more of a procedural process, i.e. determining measure of reward. For what it's worth, compare 'judgment seat' above at G968 with 'throne' at G2362. The judgment determining eternal destiny occurred at the great white throne (Re. 20:11f). At the first resurrection (Re. 20:4, the dead in Christ that rose first) were also thrones, and nothing is said of judging those that sat on them, rather they were given authority to carry out judgment (cf Mt. 19:28; 1 Co. 6:2). Now let's look at one more verse:
(NKJV) 1 Peter 4:17 For the time [has come] for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if [it begins] with us first, what will [be] the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
Wow! What was Peter thinking? That might bolster futurists' claims of a future end of the church age! Could it be that Peter has been misquoted? I checked a dozen versions and most agree with the above, but 3 didn't. Darby and LITV agree with:
(Young) 1 Peter 4:17 because it is the time of the beginning of the judgment from the house of God, and if first from us, what the end of those disobedient to the good news of God?
'From' (G575) agrees more with Strong's definition #2 here than 'at' or 'with' in the majority versions. Those majority versions contradict Jesus' statements above as well as 1 Co. 6:2 which said that the saints would judge the world.
Now, getting back to Hebrews 9:27, the verse as we have it in our Bibles says men - without excluding those saved - face ultimate judgment. Well, that plainly contradicts Jesus' statements above. Consider the context of the excerpt below with the last two verses modified based on the two sources cited earlier.
(NASB) Hebrews 9:23 Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. [27&28 modified] 27 And as it is appointed for those men [the high priests] to die once [ceremonially each year], but after this judgment [for or against substitutional sacrifice for atonement], 28 so also the Christ, once being offered for bearing the sins of many, out of the second [behind the second veil, verse 3] apart from sin shall appear to the ones awaiting Him unto salvation.
Thus, AS those high priests performed their annual ceremonies, SO Christ as the true high priest was about to return from the heavenly second chamber to fulfill what their ceremonies typified. Makes better sense to me. Anyone else?
(NKJV) Re.20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is [the] Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; 3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while.
"No more" as related to time (not yet), or degree (as before)?
Strong's G2089 - eti
Number of occurrences in the KJV; yet 51, more 22, any more 5, still 4, further 4, longer 3, misc 10.
(a) of time: still, yet, even now, (b) of degree: even, further, more, in addition.
If related to degree it would mean no more deceiving nations like he had before he was bound, but the OT has relatively little to say about Satan's actions. The word occurs in the KJV 19 times, 15 of those in Job, and in one of the other four - 1 Ch. 21:1 - it was God that was called Satan! Compare to 2 Sam. 24:1. Serpent occurs 32 times, 5 in the Genesis garden account, 4 times referring to snakes in Exodus, 3 references to the brass serpent Moses made, many of the rest seem metaphoric and a few prophetic. None of the 16 occurrences of adversary nor the 6 of dragon speak of Satan. Devil occurs 4 times referring to a demon to whom sacrifices were made.
In the NT Satan (G4567, satanas) occurs 36 times and in Re. 12 & 20 is equated with the serpent of old and the devil (G1228, diabolos) which occurs 38 times. G1139, daimonizomai refers to demons/demoniacs (as rendered by modern versions like NASB) which possessed many people causing physical or mental infirmities. All uses are in the four gospels, telling mostly of Jesus casting them out. G1140, daimonion is used similarly in the synoptic gospels. G1141, daimoniōdēs is used only 1 time in James 3:15 speaking of demonic wisdom. Here I'll focus only on G1228 and G4567 which designate the devil called Satan.
The first mention of the devil is his temptation of Jesus, ending when Jesus tells Satan to go. The links above show the devil called Satan tempting or entering people and various other acts in the record of the Gospels, but not deceiving nations. There are two occurrences of each word in Acts where the devil is called an oppressor and enemy of righteousness; and Satan's dominion is equated with darkness, and he caused Ananias to lie. In the epistles are many warnings to people and groups to beware of the devil's schemes, snares, etc. Also, are predictions of Satan's doom, warnings of his temptations, various actions but no deception of nations, nor even explicit account of deceiving persons. However, tempting and seducing them could be considered such and there seems to have been quite a lot of that during the transition period. Since we have record of many believers succumbing to that temptation and falling away, it seems safe to say much more so would unbelieving Jews throughout the inhabited earth (G3625, oikoumene, Re. 12:9) have been deceived and become pawns of Satan. From the time Jesus said, "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out" (Jn. 12:31) until that judgment was complete seems an unprecedented deception of people, so I believe Re. 20:3 related to time (i.e. not yet) as opposed to degree (no longer). The first mention of Satan deceiving nations is Re. 20:3,8, but I question whether "nations" was what John meant. A dozen translations agree Satan's deception would resume as before, but deception of "nations" as the word is commonly understood doesn't seem to match Satan's record, so let's consider another possibility.
(NKJV) Revelation 20:3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while. ...7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number [is] as the sand of the sea.
This passage tells of a past time when the devil was bound, and speaks of his release in a future sense. This vision must be briefly adding details about the time before he was cast out for a short time in Re. 12 which John recorded there as a past event.
How are we to understand Satan deceiving the nations to gather them for the war? In the Old Testament it was God who caused nations to be instruments of His judgment. The same was true in the judgment of Jerusalem according to Re. 17:17 which says God put it into the hearts of the ten horns (kings) to fulfill His purpose, to be of one mind with the beast until God's words fulfilled.
Strong's definition for deceive (G4105) says; to cause to stray, to lead astray, lead aside from the right way, lead away from the truth or into error. Were there any first century nations practicing the right way, i.e. governing in a moral and truthful manner? Maybe those definitions are too limited, perhaps influence or cause would fit, but, we've already seen it was God who decreed the Roman coalition would carry out His judgment. Another possibility is that the word nations is in this case not the best translation of G1484, ethnos. Number of occurrences in the KJV; Gentiles 93, nation 64, heathen 5, people 2. Strong's definitions are:
1) a multitude (whether of men or of beasts) associated or living together
a) a company, troop, swarm
2) a multitude of individuals of the same nature or genus
a) the human family
3) a tribe, nation, people group
4) in the OT, foreign nations not worshipping the true God, pagans, Gentiles
5) Paul uses the term for Gentile Christians
Could it sometimes mean the Jewish tribes, or even more simply, people, as in people sharing a common cause. Mt. 21:43 and Acts 8:9 in the NASB and Acts 8:9 and Ro. 10:19 in the KJV do translate G1484 as "people." A few other verses come to mind where "people" would seem a better translation, e.g. Mt. 25:32 which relates the nations gathered and the sheep separated from the goats. Clearly the verses that follow speak not of nations, but of people gathered, those who were to be blessed for their actions, and those that were to be cursed for their inactions (Compare GWT judgment, Re 20:11f). Consider Jesus' command to teach and baptize nations in Mt. 28:19, did the disciples ever baptize a nation? In Re. 16:19 what does "cities of the nations fell" mean? No city of the Roman coalition fell, but cities of the Jewish people did. Would it make more sense if Re. 21:24 said people will walk by its light? Many nations today could use some healing, but is the main purpose of the tree of life in Re. 22:2 for healing nations, or people? A healed people will result in a healed nation.
There was indeed a people that were heavily influenced by Satan, those who were of their father the devil (John 8:44). After the Jewish polity rejected and crucified Jesus, their lot was doomed to deteriorate exponentially culminating with those rebellious zealots that resisted all authority, formed armies and began the Jewish revolt (which also caused the severe internal civil strife) that brought the Romans to quell it. Those rebels would certainly fit the definitions in red above.
Re. 13:1-4 tell of the beast from the sea that received his power from the dragon. That surely had to have been Nero who epitomized evil. As for those since - Hitler for instance - whose evil seemed to exceed Nero's, it's only because they had better technology with which to commit their atrocities. Then in 13:11-17 we see the beast from the earth (land) who spoke as a dragon and who exercises all the authority of the first beast, and who deceives those who dwell on the earth (land). J.S. Russell made a good argument here that this man-beast could have been Gessius Florus, the Roman procurator of Judea from AD 64-66 under Nero. He was succeeded by Marcus Antonius Julianus in 66, of whom the only historic info is mention by Josephus in Wars 6.4.3. At any rate, those deceived surely refers to the Jews in Judea and those scattered in neighboring areas. 19:20 reiterates the deception by the beast from the land (aka false prophet) of those who had received the mark of the beast and worshipped his image. If 20:3&8 used people instead of nations the reader would be directed back to those deceived mentioned in 19:20, and thus 13:14,16. See Wars 5.13.4,5,6 on the level of depravity the Jewish people had reached. Josephus closed paragraph 6 with:
... And here I cannot but speak my mind, and what the concern I am under dictates to me, and it is this: I suppose, that had the Romans made any longer delay in coming against these villains, that the city would either have been swallowed up by the ground opening upon them, or been overflowed by water, or else been destroyed by such thunder as the country of Sodom perished by, for it had brought forth a generation of men much more atheistical than were those that suffered such punishments; for by their madness it was that all the people came to be destroyed.
I don't read Greek, but sometimes comparing variant spellings can give a clue about the meaning in a particular verse, not however with the six variants of ethnos. Except for a couple places ἔθνος (ethnos), ἔθνει (ethnei), and ἔθνους (ethnous) are singular. The rest are mostly plural, but it seems completely arbitrary whether various translators render those variants Gentiles or nations. Perhaps futurist expectations have biased translators toward the more global sounding usage of "nations" in passages that speak of a past covenantal judgment. At any rate, the devil deceiving nations - specifically Rome's allies - to cause the war does not match the biblical or historical record. Lastly, the phrase "Gog and Magog" might seem to suggest external nations, but in light of all the above, it seems possible it was a metaphor for the length and breadth of the preceding phrase, "four corners of the earth (land)" from which the rebels and zealots were gathered. Or, since Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon were used as metaphors reflecting the depravity to which Jerusalem had sunk, perhaps the phrase was added to emphasize God was against Jerusalem and He was about to send fire upon her as He had on Gog and Magog of Eze. 39:1,6.
And He did, in the year of our Lord 70.
In this comparison of some key passages in chapters 12 and 20 I'm using color to show what I see as interrelated statements in those passages, and to relate those statements to my comments. First the passages together then comments on them individually for your consideration.
(NKJV) Revelation 12:9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(NKJV) Revelation 12:10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, "Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.
(NKJV) Revelation 12:12 "Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time."
(NKJV) Revelation 20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is [the] Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; 3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while.
(NKJV) Revelation 20:7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number [is] as the sand of the sea.
I believe the colored portions link the same (or closely related) events - with chapter 20 adding the detail of Satan's bondage before he was cast out. At first it seems strange that 20:3,7,8 speak of his release and going out to deceive in a future sense, especially since verse 9 has those deceived surrounding the camp in a past sense. It almost seems like a quote of an OT prophecy followed by a statement of fulfillment, but apparently not. Rather it seems John was moved to write from the perspective of a past time, then in verse 9ff from the perspective of events in his near future having been completed. That's typical throughout the book, like history recorded before the fact. Now some observations on the individual passages.
(NKJV) Revelation 12:9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Phrases identifying the dragon, at time of writing he was deceiving whole inhabited earth. He and his angels thrown from heaven to earth. From heaven above, or from earthly representation of heaven, the temple? I presently lean toward the latter. The OT records the increasing shortcomings of God's covenant people. Jer. 3:8,9 show that God divorced Samaria/Israel and sent her away, but that did not deter Jerusalem/Judah from continuing her idolatrous adultery. Eze. 23 graphically details how Jerusalem became even more corrupt in her harlotries than her sister. However, that marriage was maintained as Jesus was to come from the lineage of Judah. In Mal. 1 the LORD of hosts reproaches His people, and especially their priests, for their ungratefulness, and for their defiled offerings. He also expresses His great displeasure and says that He will not accept an offering from them. Then in Mal. 2 the priests are specifically addressed and their corruption is condemned. Even while receiving the warning of the curse, they become cursed because they are not taking it to heart. The covenant with Levi is detailed, then they receive condemnation because of their corruption of it. So, I feel that Jerusalem and the temple had become an abyss, a bottomless pit of corruption, the place of Satan's bondage. From there he was cast to the earth (land) to begin his deception.
(NKJV) Revelation 12:10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, "Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.
Present at time of writing. YLT, LITV, RSV, NASB render G2723 'accusing' or 'accuses' instead of 'accused' agreeing with grammar notes in interlinears. Who accused brethren? Jewish leaders who were of their father the devil (John 8:44), thus his angels. The gospels record their many accusations of Jesus, and Acts details the accusations of Stephen and Paul.
(NKJV) Revelation 12:12 "Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time."
Earth and sea = land of Judea, and Gentile nations. "Come down" must parallel "released" after thousand years in 20:3&7, and "short time" must parallel "little while" in 20:3.
(NKJV) Revelation 20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is [the] Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; 3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while. ...7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison
20:2,3 recounts time prior to him being cast out in chapter 12. Most Preterists hold that thousand years period to have occurred during the transition period, but if it was indeed literal (or very nearly so), from the time of Jesus being taken up (Re. 12:5) we are taken back to a very significant period - the reign of King David followed by the reign of King Solomon (c. 971-931 BC), the son of David. Solomon was credited with great wisdom, wealth, power and was the builder of the first temple. But, his sins, including idolatry, led to the kingdom being split in two during the reign of his son Rehoboam. Compare cast out/down in Re. 12 and released in Re. 20 with John 12:31 "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out." Spoken by Jesus on the way to Jerusalem a few days before His death. "Now" referenced what was imminent, the harlot Jerusalem murdering her husband making judgment irrevocable. The finale of that transitional judgment was in AD 70, in the midst of the seven year war between the rebellious Jews and the Romans.
As I listened to the 9-6-11 podcast of the Rod MacArthur program, I was very impressed as usual with his ongoing series on Isaiah including relating it all with other Scriptures, especially New Testament ones. Then at 41 minutes into the program he dropped a bombshell about Heb. 9:28. To paraphrase, "time" not in the text, and "out of" which is in the text is not in our Bibles! The verse should read 'out of the second,' meaning 2nd chamber of the temple (not made with hands), the most Holy place. As the high priest entered the second chamber once per year then returned to announce sacrifice had been accepted, Christ was about to appear to those awaiting Him to announce His blood sacrifice for salvation had been accepted, fulfilling the type of the earthly ceremony. Rod also noted Christ was offered to bear the sins of "many," not all. Obviously correct as not all then nor now avail themselves of grace, but 9:12 (and 7:27; 10:10) says "once for all" in most versions. The phrase suggests universalism, G2178 in those verses is rendered better in Young's Literal Translation.
With this in mind, consider the whole of chapter 9 (emphasis added).
(NASB) Hebrews 9:1 Now even the first covenant had regulations of divine worship and the earthly sanctuary. 2 For there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread; this is called the holy place. 3 Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies, 4 having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron's rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant; 5 and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail. 6 Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship, 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, 9 which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, 10 since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation. 11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. 17 For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. 18 Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, "THIS IS THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT WHICH GOD COMMANDED YOU." 21 And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. 22 And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. 23 Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.
Considering the context of the whole chapter, compare the last verse with the following based on comparison of three interlinears modified to reflect modern syntax:
28 so also the Christ, once being offered for bearing the sins of many, out of the second apart from sin shall appear to the ones awaiting Him unto salvation.
Note here the word ek (G1537) in verse 28 then see Helps Word-studies on that word. There may be many other passages that would be clearer by proper rendering of the word.
The difference may seem minor, but the above seems to provide a better climax to the chapter than our translations. Also, it makes clear the meaning of "apart from sin," i.e. the sins of believers Christ took upon Himself were shed. How comforting that in this New Covenant, by grace our sins are erased from God's memory (Heb. 8:12; 10:17). Unlike that first century generation, we are not waiting for Christ to appear out of the second, so I believe post mortem "judgment" in 9:27 was applicable to people under the Old Covenant only.
Thanks to Rod for his insight, enthusiasm, and desire to share. He may have as many verses in his memory as Jack van Impe, but most importantly, Rod understands what they mean!
Generally, the Preterist view is that the loosing of the devil brought on the intense persecution of the saints and the deception of nations resulting in the destruction of Jerusalem. That was followed by the end of the age, and the resurrection. But, that is not the sequence of events we find in Revelation chapter 20; first Satan's bondage is described, then it jumps to the first resurrection which was to occur after the judgment and parousia (Mt. 24:29-31; 1 Co. 15:23; 1 Th. 4:15-17), then it reverts to Satan being loosed to deceive the nations and gather them to war against Jerusalem during which they were destroyed by fire from heaven, then returns to the resurrection of the rest of the dead and the judgment of them according to their works, then the destruction of death and Hades, and finally recapitulation showing the fate of those not in the book of life.
A few points before proceeding:
As I posited in my previous post Millennial Delay? I think other Scriptures contradict a long delay between the first and second resurrection.
Regarding the destruction of the city in verse 9, we know the saints, heeding Jesus' warning, had left prior to this, and history tells us the Roman coalition was not destroyed - indeed, they were the means through which fire came from God - so "them" devoured by that fire must be those that took over the city and temple, those zealots and rebels (nations) that gathered in armies in rebellion which resulted in the civil war that the Romans came to quell.
In verse 9, "saints" is the rendering of G40 by most versions, and is I believe a result of futurist bias of translators expecting a future war against God's people. It's rendered "holy" 161 times in KJV. "Camp" (G3925) used in Heb. 13:11-13 refers to Jerusalem (see Strong's definition and Arthur Clarke commentary). Since G2532 is translated "even" 108 times in KJV, I believe a better interpretation of the phrase in verse 9 might be, "camp of the holy, even the beloved city." Of course, that was not a statement of the then current status of the city, just a referent using terms of what she had been. I hope to develop these last two points further in a subsequent post.
J.S. Russell in The Parousia saw verses 7-10 as a parenthetical look at a future event, and some agree with him. He conceded difficulty with this chapter, and this is the only thing he saw as yet future. I believe there can be warrant for seeing parenthetical insertions even though not marked as such by translators, but I think Russell picked the wrong verses. I believe all visions of future events John received were constrained by the bookends time statements.
I agree with Russell's seven visions approach to Revelation, the second through the sixth visions offering different views of the same event, each elaborating progressively more on the preceding ones. So far this 6th vision (ch. 17-20) has shown much: the judgment of the harlot (Jerusalem), the fall of Babylon (Jerusalem), exultation by the multitude in heaven for the judgment and avenging of the blood of all the servants shed by her, the announcement of the coming marriage of the Lamb, the false prophet and beast cast into the lake of fire, and those that received his mark and/or worshipped his image judged. Not addressed by any of the visions thus far is the destruction of the devil, death and Hades. In this respect, I believe chapter 20 to be a very brief summary of events leading to the judgment, plus details of the final conclusion of not only this vision, but the previous four also.
What seems to me to be a disjointed layout of events may not have been a problem for those first century Jews having a Hebraic mindset, but I think rearranging the verses in the following order makes better chronological sense to our modern logic and reasoning. Consider the following from the NKJV with my amendments in blue, and red and green denoting verse rearrangements:
Revelation 20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is [the] Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;
3 and he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. But after these things he must be released for a little while.
7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison
8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number [is] as the sand of the sea.
9 They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the holy, even the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them.
10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet [are.] And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then [I saw] the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received [his] mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy [is] he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is [the Book] of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books.
13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works.
14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.
Now, I'm not suggesting wholesale rearrangement of difficult passages to match what I think they ought to say. This is just what I came up with to help me reconcile events in Re. 20 with the Olivet Discourse, the expectations of the New Testament writers, and the general flow of events in the visions of Revelation. I hope my "thinking outside the box" will help fuel deliberation on this difficult chapter that has spawned much confusion. Thanks for your consideration.
