Revelation 19 Part 3 & Revelation 20 Intro Bible Teaching

WELCOME
PRAYER
MUSIC
SILENCE

Okay, lets wrap 19 up and move on into 20.
We left off at verse 17 but we should read from 15 through 18 to get the whole picture as John writes:

Revelation 19 Part III
Revelation 20 Part I
April 8th 2018
MEAT
Revelation 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, “Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.”

To me we are reading the fulfillment of what was prophesied in Revelation 1:7 which said way back in the first chapter:

“Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.”

Here, in verses 11-16 we read of Christ coming to strike down the nations, and being ready to “tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty” (vs. 15).

Of course this passage is believed by futurists to be describing the famed “Battle of Armageddon” which we talked about at length back in chapter 16.

However, we must note that other details about this battle are also given in two other texts:

[First] Revelation 14:17-20, where the “winepress of the wrath of God” is also spoken of, and

[2] Revelation 16:12-16, where the name “Armageddon” is actually named as a place.

We noted in our study of Revelation 14 and also in our study of Revelation 16 that Tim Lahaye (and other Futurist authors generally say this battle will happen in the plain of Megiddo).

But author John Noe, notes that what the Bible refers to as a “battle on the great day of God the Almighty” (Revelation 16:14) would transpire “at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon” (Revelation 16:16).

We pointed out that in Hebrew it’s actually “Har-Magedon,” as “har” means mountain in Hebrew (“Armageddon” is based on the Greek rendering, since “h” is silent in Hebrew).

Therefore, this battle was to take place primarily on a mountain, not in a valley.

When we studied this we cited Noe who adds,

The most likely case is that Revelation’s “Har” is Jerusalem. Geographically, Jerusalem sits on top of a mountain. To get there from any direction one must go “up to Jerusalem.” (2 Sam. 19:34; 1 Ki. 12:28; 2 Ki. 18:17; 2 Chron. 2:16; Ezra 1:3; 7:7; Zech. 14:17; Matt. 20:17, 18; Mark 10:32, 33; Luke 18:31; 19:28; John 2:13; 5:1; Acts 11:2; 15:2; 21:12, 15; 24:11; 25:9; Gal. 1:17, 18).

Jerusalem is also called God’s “holy mountain” (Psa. 43:3) and the “chief among the mountains” (Isa. 2:2-3; also 14:13; Exod. 15:17; Joel 2:32; 3:16-17)…

“Magedon/Megiddo” may also be comparative imagery.

In other words a great slaughter once took place in the valley of Megiddo (2 Ki. 9:27; Zech. 12:11).

Throughout ancient history, this valley was also a favorite corridor for invading armies and the scene of numerous famous battles (as evidenced by Jud. 4-7; 1 Sam. 29-31; 2 Sam. 4; 1 Ki. 9:15; 2 Ki. 9-10; 22; 2 Chron. 35).

In fact so much blood was shed in this valley of Jezreel or Megiddo that it became a synonym for slaughter, violence, bloodshed, and battlefield, as well as a symbol for God’s judgment (Hos. 1:4-5).

In our day, Armageddon has also become synonymous with and a symbol for the ultimate in warfare and conflict.

We pointed out that in a similar fashion, the word “Waterloo” has garnered a symbolic use. Back in 1815, this town in Belgium was the battleground and scene of Napoleon’s final defeat. Today, we have a saying that some one or some thing has met their “Waterloo.” We don’t mean they have met that city in Europe. We mean, by way of comparative imagery, that they have met a decisive or crushing defeat, or their demise. I suggest Revelation employs the word Magedon/Megiddo in this same manner.

History records that a great slaughter took place on a mountain in Palestine within the lifetime of the original recipients of the book of Revelation.

In A.D. 70 the Roman armies of Titus totally destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. According to Eusebius, 1.1 million Jews were killed.”

And of course to support this and apply it to that day we noted that Josephus also records these details regarding the bloody slaughter that occurred immediately following the burning of the temple:

“[The Romans] ran everyone through [with swords] whom they met with, and obstructed the very lanes with their dead bodies, and made the whole city run down with blood, to such a degree indeed that the fire of many houses was quenched with these men’s blood” (The Wars Of The Jews, 6:8:5).

Then we even recited John Wesley (1703-1791) who also understood this event to be the fulfillment of these passages in Revelation, for he wrote the following in his commentary:

“And the winepress was trodden – By the Son of God, Rev 19:15. Without [outside] the city – Jerusalem. They to whom St. John writes, when a man said, ‘the city,’ immediately understood this. And blood came out of the winepress, even to the horses’ bridles – So deep at its first flowing from the winepress! One thousand six hundred furlongs – So far! At least two hundred miles, through the whole land of Palestine.”

We also noted that the phrase “the nations” in verse 15 does not necessarily need to be understood as worldwide in scope, for in 70 AD the land of Palestine was made up of the following nations: [1] Phoenicia [2] Galilee [3] Samaria [4] Judea [5] Idumea [6] Philistia [7] Gualanitis [8] Decapolis [9] Perea [10] Nabatea.

Gentry adds his own reasons for allowing that the destruction of “the flesh of all men” (verse 18) could legitimately have been a local judgment, rather than a global one by saying:

[A]pocalyptic imagery often engages in hyperbole by making universalistic statements. For instance, Isaiah speaks of the destruction of Idumea in Isaiah 34 as if “all the nations” are to be “utterly destroyed” (34:2) and the universe is to collapse (34:4–5)…

Second, even in more mundane contexts Scripture can make universal statements without requiring a global interpretation. Paul states that in his day the gospel was “proclaimed in all creation under heaven” (Col. 1:23), “in all the world” (Col. 1:6), “throughout the whole world” (Rom. 1:8).

All agree that he is not claiming the gospel had been preached in South Africa, Antarctica, and Detroit. Elsewhere he is accused by the Jews of preaching “to all men everywhere [pantas pantachç]” (Acts 21:28).

Again no record exists for his preaching in Cleveland or even in Gaul. If these statements can be made in mundane narratives, why can they not in apocalyptic drama?

On the fleshly feast prepared for “all the birds that fly directly overhead” (verse 17) Preterist Sam Storms has these thoughts:

“Here the angel announces the coming destruction of the beast, false prophet, and their followers through the same imagery found in Ezek. 39:4,17-20 where the defeat of Gog and Magog is described. The picture of vultures or other birds of prey feasting on the flesh of unburied corpses killed in battle (see also Rev. 19:21b) was a familiar one to people in the OT (cf. Deut. 28:26; 1 Sam. 17:44-46; 1 Kings 14:11; 16:4; 21:24; 2 Kings 9:10; Jer. 7:33; 15:3; 16:4; 19:7; 34:20; Ezek. 29:5).

And then Steve Gregg comments further (pp. 452, 454),

The calling of the birds…for the supper of the great God (v. 17) is no doubt intended as a contrast to the marriage feast referred to in verse 9.

Jay Adams writes: “Chapter 19 is the story of two suppers. They contrast sharply. One is a joyous marriage feast; the other the carnage of vultures.”
Chilton, who sees the losers of this battle—those who become food for birds—as Israel in A.D. 70, reminds us that “a basic curse of the covenant is that of being eaten by birds of prey (cf. Deut. 28:26, 49). Israel is now a sacrificial corpse (Matt. 24:28), and there is no longer anyone who can drive away the scavengers (cf. Gen. 15:11; Duet. 28:26).

John’s language is borrowed from God’s invitation through Ezekiel ‘to every bird and beast of the field’ to devour the corpses of His enemies (Ezek. 39:17-20).”

Gregg’s conclusion that Israel had become the sacrificial corpse spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24:28, fit to be the prey of birds, is interesting in light of one fact that the Jewish historian Josephus recorded concerning the Roman armies that decimated Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Again, we cite Jesus in Matthew 24:28,

“For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.” Without being dogmatic on the meaning of this phrase, we note that not only was Israel fit to be described as a carcass in 70 AD; being spiritually, politically, and judicially dead; but it was also a curious fact that the eagle was the principal figure on the Roman ensigns which were planted throughout the city of Jerusalem and finally in the temple itself.”

In the preterist section of the book “Four Views on the Book of Revelation,” Kenneth Gentry points to another interesting detail recorded by Josephus (p. 81):

Christ is Israel’s ultimate judge (Matt. 24:29-30; 26:64); he is the one who makes war against her (Rev. 19:11; cf. Matt. 21:40-45; 22:1-7).

He so severely judges her that her citizens receive no proper burial, being consumed by birds (Rev. 19:17-18).

Robert Thomas says: “The worst indignity perpetrated on a person in that culture was to be left unburied after death (cf. Ps. 79:2-3).”

Josephus notes that the bodies of the dead in Jerusalem were “cast down from the walls into the valleys beneath” (Wars 5.12.3).

Indeed, “those valleys [were] full of [unburied] dead bodies, and the thick putrefaction running about them” (Wars 5.12.4).

No doubt these thousands of unburied dead bodies would have been the very thing needed to attract “the birds that fly directly overhead.”

We would also do well to remember that Revelation 17:16 states that the 10 horns, along with the beast, would not only burn the prostitute with fire, but would also “devour her flesh“ these would be the Roman Eagles.

Alright, verse 19-21

19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

These passages briefly portray one of the three judgments pronounced against the beast—the other two woes can be found in Rev. 13:10 and Rev. 16:10.

In verse 20 we see that the beast is captured along with the false prophet, and thrown alive into the lake of fire.

They are captured because they had “gathered to make war against Him who was sitting on the horse and against His army” (verse 19).

In earlier posts, we have noted that the phrase “the earth” (also properly translated as “land”) in Revelation is a frequent reference to Israel/Palestine.

So I don’t think that scripture indicates a future battle in the plain of Megiddo, the ancient Canaanite stronghold, and that there is no such place as the Mountain of Megiddo (the literal rendering of Har-Magedon).

Okey dokey, that was a brief look at chapter 19 in large part because it was a recapitulation of many things we have read described in earlier chapters.

At this point we jump squarely into the wrap up of the book, as agreed upon by most readers no matter their eschatology.

Some include 19 as part of the wrap up too but because we still see judgment meted out in it, I tend to see 19 as part of the pre-wrapping of the up.

Before entering into the text of the chapter lets talk a bit about the respective views of what is called full preterism and partial preterism.

Full Preterism is the view that the Consummation of everything discussed in the Old and New Testaments are complete, having occurred in 70AD

For full preterists, the “last days” are the last days of the Mosaic Covenant, which are contained in the (brief) period between Christ’s ascension and his (spiritual) Parousia or return with reward and judgment upon Israel in 70 AD.
During this time the whole (Jewish and Roman) “world” was evangelized, the fullness of ethnic Israel came in, the Antichrist (i.e., Nero) arose, and the Great Tribulation (which lead up to Titus’ invasion) occurred, and then in 70 AD, the Parousia (or return of Christ as promised) the Resurrection, and the Last Judgment all took place.

Now, I believe, UNLIKE most full preterists that this all took place actually where most full preterists believe it all took place spiritually rather than physically.

At this time the Kingdom (in its spiritual fullness appeared) the new heavens and the new earth arrived (spiritually) with the New Jerusalem (as opposed to the OLD) being established in heaven rather than on earth.

Since then, according to Full Preterists, believers, at their death, are resurrected into the World to Come; unbelievers, at their death, are resurrected into the Lake of Fire: spiritually, rather than physically.

I tend to believe that the Lake of Fire is a purgative and temporary passing through of all souls instead of a punative eternal place for some and I believe this because it is in the presence of the Lamb and His angels and was made for Satan and his angels – and not man.

People wonder, “Well, what lies ahead for the physical remains of the saints like you and I and/or for our sin-cursed earth?”

To me what lies ahead is what has lied behind for 2000 years. God calling, true seekers responding, and God adding to His Kingdom Sons and Daughters.

Now there is a group of people called amillenniels believe that there is no millennium and from what I can tell most full preterists agree with this but from what I can tell the millennial is a representation of any and all time and not a thousand years – but I have a sneaking suspicion we are going to learn about the millennium more in the chapters to come.

But to amillennarians and Full Prets, the Kingdom is the direct reign of God, through Christ, by the Spirit; that it is entered through faith in the Person and Work of Christ; and that it is, in essence, the promise of the Eternal Covenant.

Also, amillennials and Full Prets seem to agree that the Kingdom enters the world in two stages (but they conceive of these quite differently).

I believe that the second stage of the Kingdom (with the first being at Pentecost with the coming of the Holy Spirit) began in 70 AD at the Return of Christ in glory at the end of that “present evil age,” when He himself cast out all things that offend and He destroyed every enemy, the last of which is death itself (as we read about in both Matthew 13:36-43 and 1st Corinthians 15:20-28). It is my opinion that this stage includes the promises that God’s will IS done on earth exactly as it is done in heaven and He reigns over all things.

There are passages that futurists take from scripture that describe this reign (like His making all things new and others (like Romans 8:18-25 and what we will read in Revelation 21:1-5, and 22:3) and they conclude that no “amount of preterist spiritualizing” can rid the Scriptures of these glorious promises, which belong essentially to the Blessed Hope of the Church.

The consummation of the age to a full preterist, to a futurist, is one that completely undermines Christ’s teachings about the Consummation and leaves the Church unprepared for the trials of the end of the age, and also robbing her of her Blessed Hope.

They say it does so by misreading the Olivet Discourse and then making a flawed interpretation thereof into a “Procrustean Bed” for the rest of NT eschatology.

Procrustean bed means that we take a framework of scripture and make everything fit into it.

I do not see this criticism as fitting in my views.

Critics of Full PReterism maintain that the last days are not the last days of the Mosaic Covenant rather, they are the days in which the New Covenant has been manifested in the earth.

These suggest that they began with Christ’s incarnation and will conclude on the last of the last days, at his Parousia, which awaits us.

Let’s wrap this preface material up with a few words about the partial preterist take on the Revelation.

Regarding chapters 1-19, partial preterists are in accord with full preterists: all is focused on the Jewish/Roman persecution of the Church, the rise of the Beast (Nero), and the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

However, with regard to Revelation 21-22, partial preterists typically stand with dispensationalists and what some might believe is a more “historic orthodoxy,” viewing these chapters as a picture, cast largely in OT language, of the glorified Church situated in the glorified World to Come.

Hooray! Shout all eschatologists of a non fulfillment ilk.

However, regarding Revelation 20 there are serious differences of opinion and since this is where we have landed, lets try to understand the various views.

First the basics of the amillennial view:

We have those who identify the Millennium with the entire Church Era.

On this view, the binding of Satan is a work of the Spirit made possible by the Cross of Christ.

Because of these two great redemptive events, Satan can no longer deceive the nations so as to prevent the ingathering of the elect, nor can he launch the Last Battle until God so decrees (which we will read about in chapter 20 verses 1-3).

The first resurrection and the reign of the saints are spiritual rather than physical, and (perhaps) heavenly rather than earthly (20:4-6).

Revelation 20:7-10 gives us the book’s one and only prediction of the Last Battle against the Church, in which the Antichrist, who has already come (in the person of Nero), plays no part.

Other texts in the Revelation that seem to predict the Last Battle were actually fulfilled during the Great Tribulation of 66-70 AD, when the Church was persecuted by Israel and Rome (11:7-10, 16:12-16, 19:19- 21).

As for 20:11-14, it gives us the Revelation’s one and only description of the Last Judgment at the end of the world.

This is the fundamental amillennial view of Revelation 20.

On the other hand, we have interpreters (like Ken Gentry and Doug Wilson) who give us a “postmillennial view” of Revelation 20.

For postmillennarians the Millennium is a Golden Era still future to us, the binding of Satan has yet to occur (but it certainly will happen) perhaps when ethnic Israel at large turns to Lord (Romans 11:15).

This will bring about “the first resurrection” and “the reign of the saints,” these being understood as a fresh burst of gospel vitality that will fill the earth, not only with multitudes of devoted Christians, but also with widespread Kingdom righteousness, peace, and joy.

Alas, the Golden Era will indeed be marred by the release of Satan, and by a final rebellion against Christ and his faithful remnant (which we will read about in 20:7-9).

But the mysterious reversal will be offset by the fact that the Lord himself will immediately come again, visibly, in power, and with great glory (20:9), to raise the dead, judge the world in righteousness, and bring in the new heavens and the new earth (20:10-15).

Note that for all partial preterists, Revelation 20 alone gives us the supernatural Parousia of Christ, the bodily Resurrection, and the Last Judgment.

But all the other texts that seem to predict these things were actually fulfilled in 70 AD (6:12-17, 11:11-19, 14:14-20, 16:17-21,19:11!)

To me this makes the partial preterist view non-sensical for how could we have passages in Revelation 6, and 11, and 14 and 16 and even 19 fulfilled when they are clearly describing events that would occur only at the very end and total consummation of the age!???

So, entering into chapter 20 – I stand with the idea that thus far chapters 1-19 have been fulfilled – and the question remains, can we reasonably read chapters 20-22 in the same light? If not, then partial preterism is NOT a reasonable response because elements of partial preterism suggest fulfillment of verses where fulfillment is impossible if He hasn’t returned.

So at this point I will either finish revelation as a full preterist or a historicist of some sort or another.

So lets read out text from chapter 20. Hang on to thy hats!

Revelation 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that 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, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

TO quote a noted fulfillment scholar:

Revelation 20 is probably the best known and most hotly debated chapter in Revelation. This is the chapter (the only chapter in the Bible!) that mentions Christ’s ruling and reigning with His saints for 1000 years…

An extremely important issue arises as we move from Revelation 19 into chapter 20.

The question arises regarding the relationship between these two passages: Is it one of recapitulation (i.e., repetition of the same events) or sequence (two different episodes with one following as a result of the other)?

The prevailing scholarly (non-premillennial) consensus today holds that the relationship between these two chapters is one of recapitulation.

The recapitulationist sees Revelation 20:7–10 covering the same ground as and repeating Revelation 19:11–21.

In other words, they argue that the final eschatological battle at the second coming of Christ appears in both 19:11–21 and 20:7–10.

This, of course, destroys the premillennial argument that sees the second coming (19:11–21) leading to Christ’s subsequently establishing his millennium (20:1–10).

Consequently, premillennialists insist on sequence rather than recapitulation.

Oddly enough, my evangelical preterist view agrees with the premillennialist regarding the relationship between these two passages — though with quite different results.

I hold that Christ’s coming from heaven to wage war in Revelation 19:11 represents His judgment coming on Israel in AD 70.

As such it reflects the theme of the book found in 1:7, where he comes against those tribes who pierced him (the Jews).

Consequently, 20:1 presents the consequence of Christ’s judgment of Israel, Christianity’s first major enemy: the binding of Satan, the vindication of the martyrs, and the spiritual rule of believers with Christ in the present age.

By way of illustration, Gentry later makes some statements on the mention of Gog and Magog in Revelation 20 and says:

R. Fowler White notes [that Revelation] 19:17–18 is “virtually a verbatim quotation” of Ezekiel 39:17–20 (1989: 326), and [Revelation] 20:7–10 specifically mentions “Gog and Magog” (Ezekiel 38:2; 39:1, 6), showing God destroying them with fire from heaven (cp. Rev 20:7–10; Eze 38:22; 39:6).

Clearly then, John bases both “the Armageddon revolt (19:17–21) and the Gog-Magog revolt (20:7–10) on the same prophetic passage” (1989: 327)… both [Revelation] 19:19–21 and [Revelation] 20:7–10 allude to the same OT eschatological battle prophecy (Ezekiel 38–39).

Gentry notes that there are those who draw from these facts the premise that the events of Revelation 19:19-21 and Revelation 20:7-10 must therefore refer to the same historical event. However, he adds:

Though “significant correspondence” of a “highly peculiar” nature exists between Rev. 19 and Ezekiel 39, problems confront this interpretation:

First, similarity does not entail identity. Simply because John patterns both the battles of Rev. 19 and Rev. 20 on Eze. 38–39 does not mean they are the same battle. Similar language is used because similar fundamental realities prevail: God is catastrophically judging oppressive enemies of His people.

Many scholars see AD 70 as a microcosm of the final judgment. Consequently, we may expect the same imagery to apply to both AD 70 and the end.

For instance, of those first century events, Bloesch states:

“The catastrophe that befell the Jewish people in A.D. 70 is a sign of the final judgment.” Morris agrees, saying:

“…[We see that there is] a theological unity between the two judgments, and that some of what Jesus says [in the Olivet Discourse] could apply equally well to both.”

Second, as Bøe notes, John often makes double use of Ezekiel’s images (Bøe, 275). The imagery from Ezekiel’s scroll vision in Eze. 2:8–33 applies both to Rev 5:1 and 10:8–11; Ezekiel’s measuring imagery in Eze 40–48 appears in quite distinct passages in Rev 11:1–2 and 21:10–27 (Bøe 371).
…If John had wanted us to understand recapitulation rather than sequence in this passage [Revelation 20], John “did us no favor” by:

(a) recasting the beast and false prophet (19:20) as Gog and Magog (20:8);
(b) inserting a thousand year period between the two battles (20:2–5);
(c) representing the period of Christian history from the first century to the end as “a short time” (12:12) and as “a thousand years” (20:2–6)…
(d) offering no hint that Satan is bound before Rev 19:11ff while emphasizing his being bound before Rev 20:7ff; and
(e) telling us that Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet already are (20:10).

…[The judgment of] AD 70 (in Rev. 19:11–21) anticipates the final eschatological battle (Rev. 20:8–10)… It even seems that the NT emphasizes AD 70 more frequently — probably because it was looming in the near future, directly relevant to first century Christians, and of catastrophic significance in re-orienting their thinking regarding the flow of redemptive history…

Indeed, it seems that the NT knows of only two great battles remaining in redemptive history: AD 70 which closes the old covenant era (and inaugurates the new covenant) and the Second Advent which closes the new covenant era (and history).

Jesus certainly seems to link AD 70 and the Second Advent in his large Olivet Discourse… In addition, John limits Revelation’s prophecies to the near term (1:1, 3; 22:6, 10), which suggests a strong emphasis on AD 70.

So that’s one view – and we will stop here.

Comments/Questions
PRAYER

Eschatology Comparison
This page is broken down into two sections. Chart #1 lists the main distinctives of Dispensational Premillennialism and Historic Premillennialism. Chart #2 lists the main distinctives of Postmillennialism and Amillennialism.
This information was excerpted from For He Must Reign: An Introduction to Reformed Eschatology by Kim Riddlebarger. This audio series gives a good overview of the various positions with an excellent Biblical support for Amillennialism. He hs published A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times as a summary of the audio series.
It should be noted that is information may be a little dated as far as listed in the Leading Proponents sections. The supporting books for the positions may also have newer volumes that support or deny the positions.
This chart is intended to give a brief overview of the perspectives on eschatology and not complete defense or defintions.
Chart #1
Dispensational Premillennialism
Historic Premillennialism
Overview
1. Distinctive Features and Emphases:
a. Dispensationalists argue for the necessity of the literal interpretation of all of the prophetic portions of Scripture. Charles Ryrie makes this point very clearly:
When the principles of literal interpretation both in regard to general and special hermeneutics are followed, the result the premillennial system of doctrine… If one interprets literally, he arrives at the premillennial system.
This means that all promises made to David and Abraham under the Old Covenant are to be literally fulfilled in the future millennial age.
b. Dispensationalists insist that God has two redemptive plans, one for national Israel, and one for Gentiles during the “church age.” This presupposition forms the basis for the dispensational hermeneutic. As John Walvoord states regarding the dispensational hermeneutic, “Pretribulationism distinguishes clearly between Israel and the church and their respective programs.”
c. There is a “rapture” of believers when Jesus Christ secretly returns to earth before the seven year tribulation period begins (the seventieth week of Daniel, cf. Daniel 9:24-27). Believers do not experience the persecution of the Anti-Christ who rises to prominence during this “tribulation period.” The Biblical data dealing with the time of tribulation is referring to unbelieving Israel, not the church. Therefore, church age, or the “age of grace,” is to be seen as that period of time in which God is dealing with Gentiles prior to the coming of the kingdom of God during the millennium.
d. The visible and physical second coming of Christ occurs after the great tribulation. Those who are converted to Christ during the tribulation, including Jews (the 144,000) who turn to Christ, go on into the millennium to re-populate the earth. Glorified believers rule with Christ during his future reign.
e. Jesus came to earth bringing with him an “offer” of the kingdom to the Jews, who rejected him. God then turned to dealing with the Gentiles — thus, the church age is a parenthesis of sorts. The rapture is the next event to occur in Biblical prophecy. The signs of the end of the age (i.e., the birth of the nation of Israel, the revival of the Roman empire predicted in Daniel as seen through the emergence of the EEC [common market], the impending Russian-Arab invasion of Israel, etc.) all point to the immediacy of the secret return of Christ for his church. Antichrist is awaiting his revelation once the believing church is removed.
f. The millennium is marked by a return to Old Testament temple worship and sacrifice to commemorate the sacrifice of Christ. At the end of the millennium, the “great white throne” judgement occurs, and Satan and all unbelievers are cast into the lake of fire. There is the creation of a new heaven and earth.
1. Distinctive Features and Emphases:
a. While often popularly confused with “dispensational premillennialism” with but a mere disagreement as to the timing of the “rapture,” historic premillennialism is, in actuality, a completely different eschatological system, largely rejecting the whole dispensational understanding of redemptive history.
b. The basic features of historic premillennialism are as follows. When Jesus began his public ministry the kingdom of God was manifest through His ministry. Upon His ascension into heaven and the “Gift of the Spirit” at Pentecost, the kingdom is present through the Spirit, until the end of the age, which is marked by the return of Christ to the earth in judgement. During the period immediately preceding the return of Christ, there is great apostasy and tribulation.
C. After the return of Christ, there will be a period of 1000 years (the millennium separating the “first” resurrection from the “second” resurrection. Satan will be bound, and the kingdom will consummated, that is, made visible during this period.
d. At the end of the millennial period, Satan will be loosed and there will be a massive rebellion (of “Gog and Magog”), immediately preceding the “second” resurrection or final judgement. After this, there will be the creation of a new Heaven and Earth.
Leading Proponents
a. Dispensationalism was largely popularized through the Scofield Reference Bible, and is now represented, for example, by the notes in the Ryrie Study Bible. Hal Lindsey’s book, The Late Great Planet Earth served to keep the movement in the mainstream of Evangelicalism in the late 60’s and early 70’s. The vast majority of the early Charismatic movement was dispensational in its orientation even though most dispensationalists emphasized that charismata ceased with the completion of the New Testament. As the Charismatic movement has matured and become more consistent in its own theology, dispensationalism has largely been jettisoned. Because of this, and because of the resurgence of questions of ethics (the dispensationalist cannot efficiently use his OT to answer ethical questions) dispensationalism is apparently on the decline.
b. Leading dispensational theologians include John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, J. Dwight Pentecost, Norman Geisler and Charles Feinberg. Popular dispensational pastors and writers include; Charles Swindoll, Dave Hunt, Jack Van Impe and Charles Stan Chuck Smith and the Calvary Chapel movement represent the Charismatic side of dispensationalism.
c. Dallas Theological Seminary is the leading dispensational institution. Other dispensational institutions include: Talbot Theological Seminary, the Master’s College and Grace Theological Seminary.
a. Without question, the best and most influential historic premillennialist was the late George Eldon Ladd of Fuller Theological Seminary. Through the work of Ladd, historic premillennialism gained scholarly respect and popularity among Evangelical and Reformed theologians. Other major historic premillennialists include the late Walter Martin, John Warwick Montgomery, J. Barton Payne, Heny Alford (the noted Greek scholar), and Theodore Zahn (the German NT specialist). The best examples of current historical premillennial work would the many scholars of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Evangelical Free).
b. Historic premillennialism draws its name from the fact that many of the early Church Fathers (i.e. Ireneaus [140-203], who as a disciple of Polycarp, who had been an disciple of the apostle of John, Justin Martyr [100-165], and Papias [80-155]), apparently believed and taught that there would be a visible kingdom of God upon the earth, after the return of Christ.
c. Several major Evangelical seminaries have some historic premillennial representation such as Fuller and Trinity. Surprisingly, a number of the faculty of Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis (a Reformed institution), held to a covenantal form of premillennialism — J.O. Buswell, J. Barton Payne and R. Laird Harris. However, all of these men have recently departed for glory, and the Reformed varieties of premillennialism are probably gone with them.
Bibliography
The standard dispensational textbook is J. Dwight Pentecost’s Things to Come (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978). Other important works include: Charles Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith(New York: The Loizeaux Brothers, 1953); Charles Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today (Chicago: Moody Press, 1977); John Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom (Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation, 1983), and John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question (Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation, 1979). In addition, John Walvoord has authored an updated work incorporating all of his popular writings; Major Bible Prophecies (Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation, 1991).
The best of all the historic premillennial writers was the late George E Ladd. See his works on the subject: A Commentary on the Revelation (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1987), The Presence of the Future (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1981), The Last Things (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1982), and The Gospel of the Kingdom (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1981). Also very helpful is Robert Duncan Culver’s Daniel and the Latter Days (Chicago: The Moody Press, 1977). This is the single best defense of historic premillennialism against the amillennial critique. See also J. Barton Payne’s Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy(Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980). Another important work defending the Biblical basis for premillennialism is, Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend, eds., A Case For Premillennialism:A New Consensus (Chicago: Moody Press, 1992).

Chart #2
Postmillennialism
Amillennialism
Overview
1. Distinctive Features and Emphases:
a. Generally speaking, postmillennialists affirm that the millennium is a period of one thousand years of universal peace and righteousness in this world, which precedes the return of Jesus Christ to earth in judgement. Postmillennialists are divided as to whether or not the period of time is a literal one thousand years, and whether or not the millennial age begins abruptly or gradually. Some see the millennial age as entirely future, others argue that it may have already begun to gradually emerge. Postmillennialists also disagree as to the events that mark the beginning of the millennial age, such as the conversion of Israel (Romans 9-11), the binding of Satan (Revelation 20), and the defeat of Antichrist.
b. Postmillennialism is in one sense the historic position of the church since the days of St. Augustine. Since all amillennial Christians (to be discussed below) are also technically postmillennial in their understanding of the millennium, (though self-consciously “postmillennial” Christians cannot not be “amillennial” in any sense) and since the term “amillennialism” was not coined until after the beginning of the twentieth century, it was common for Protestant dogmaticians to speak of the contrast between “pre” and “post” millennialism, without distinguishing between “a” and “post” millennialism. Therefore, the difference between amillennial and postmillennial Christians centers upon the character and length of the millennial age. Postmillennialists see the millennial age as commencing at some point during the present age, and as a period in which the kingdom of God triumphs over the kingdoms of this world. Amillennial Christians see the millennial age as occupying the entire period of time between the first and second coming Christ. Generally speaking, amillennial Christians see the millennial age as one of both the triumph of the spiritual kingdom of God and the corresponding rise of evil in opposition.
c. According to postmillennialists, there will be universal preaching and acceptance of the Gospel, and a complete and total victory of the kingdom of God, over the forces of Satan and unbelief. Postmillennialism is an optimistic eschatology of the victory grace of God in subduing evil in the world. During this period Satan will be effectually bound by the triumph of grace. Israel be converted somewhere near the beginning of the millennial Postmillennialists do disagree however, about the nature and details of these events.
d. At the end of the millennial period, Satan will be released the period of great tribulation and the apostasy described in Revelation 20 occurs, culminating in Gog and Magog and the Battle of Armageddon. Christ then returns in judgement (the “great throne judgement”), the resurrection occurs, and there is the creation of a new heaven and earth.
1. Distinctive Features and Emphases:
a. The “a” millennial (literally meaning “no” millennium) position is the eschatological view of historic Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed Christianity. It would be my educated guess that about two-thirds of the Christian family espouse an amillennial eschatology. The amillennial position is as well the position of the vast majority of Reformed and Lutheran theologians. The position portrayed in these lectures is the Reformed understanding of amillennialism, which is better understood as “present” millennialism [or “realized” millennialism], since Reformed eschatology argues for a real, present, though “invisible” non-spatial millennium.
b. Amillennialists insist that the promises made to national Israel, David and Abraham, in the OT are fulfilled by Christ and the Church during this age, which is the millennium, that is the entire period of time between the two advents of our Lord. The “thousand years” are therefore symbolic of the entire inter-advental age. Satan is bound by Christ’s victory over him and the establishment of the kingdom of God via the preaching of the gospel, and Satan is no longer free to deceive the nations, through the presence of Christ is reigning in heaven during this period with the martyrs who come out of the great tribulation. At the end of the millennial age, Christ returns in judgement of all men. The general resurrection occurs, final judgement takes place for all men and women, and a new Heaven and Earth are established.
C. In most forms of amillennialism, immediately before the return of Christ, Satan is unbound, there is a great apostasy, and a time of unprecedented satanically inspired evil. This last Satanic gasp and subsequent rebellious activity is destroyed by our Lord at his return.
Leading Proponents
a. Postmillennialism was popular among American Evangelicals in the period of unprecedented technological growth between 1870 and 1915. World War I largely served to squash the tremendous optimism regarding the growth of technology and the related optimism about the future of man, which was carried over in church in the form of an optimistic eschatology. Many Reformed theologians of this period are generally considered postmillennial, including the “Old-Princetonians,” Charles Hodge, A. A. Hodge, and B. B. Warfield.
b. Recently, postmillennialism has seen a resurgence, with the rise of Christian reconstructionism and theonomy. In addition, there is mass confusion generated by critics of postmillennialism, such as Dave Hunt and Hal Lindsey, who portray the movement as taking two quite different and confusing forms — that of “Theonomy,” and that of “Dominion Theology.” Thus many Evangelicals fail to see these two forms as distinct and divergent movements. Setting out the differences between the two forms then is helpful.
?
1). The “theonomic” form of postmillennialism was initially presented by J. Marcellus Kik, and reworked into a full–blown ethical system known as “theonomy” or “reconstructionism” by R. J. Rushdoony. The business of the church was to work to see a theocracy restored upon the earth by emphasizing the continuity of OT law (civil, ceremonial and moral) with the NT. Once established, this victorious church would be the divine vehicle from which the ever advancing kingdom of God would bind Satan and subdue all evil in the world. The emphasis of theonomic postmillennialism is that it is God who exercises dominion through his church establishing His law as the law of the land. Other theologians in the postmillennial theonomic movement are, the late Greg Bahnsen, Ray Sutton and Gary North. Popular writers include Gary DeMarr, Kenneth Gentry, and Peter J. Leithart.
2). The “dominion” form of postmillennialism (though not all “dominion” advocates are postmillennial) is exclusively Pentecostal. This form believes the charismatic revival “Latter Rain”) is God’s means of binding Satan and allowing the Spirit-lead church to reclaim material possessions and wealth, which had been surrendered to unbelief and the kingdom of Satan. Once the Church understands its role and potential for dominion, through the work of the Spirit, be able to establish the kingdom of God on earth in it fullness, thereby bringing in a millennial age. The emphasis here is that it is the believer who must learn to exercise dominion if he is to take part in the advancing kingdom. Bishop Earl Paulk, Paul Yongli Cho and perhaps Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin and Pat Robertson.
d. The older form of postmillennialism, as practiced by Reformed theologians such as Hodge and Warfield, has little in common in emphasis with the modern theonomic approach to eschatology, which emphasizes the rise of a theocracy as the vehicle of dominion. The modern form raises serious questions about the Reformed understanding of the distinction between law and gospel. The result in many circles a peculiar hybrid, (a tertium quid, if you will) with a propensity for making strange bed-fellows.
a. Amillennialism has always been the majority position of the Christian family. It was first articulated by St. Augustine, and has been given a distinctive Reformed emphasis through the work of Geerhardus Vos (the “Biblical-Theological” approach). As the “dispensational” movement captured the hearts and minds of conservative American Evangelicals, amillennialism was equated with “liberalism” or Roman Catholicism. The supposed interpreting prophecy “spiritually” or “not-literally” has lead to the rejection of amillennialism by many. In addition, amillennialism suffered greatly from the failure of Reformed and Luthern writers to defend the position against the likes of Dave Hunt, Chuck Missler and Hal Lindsey, who has labeled the position as “demonic and heretical,” and the root of modern anti-semitism.
b. Leading contemporary “amill” theologians would include popular writers such as J. I. Packer, Mike Horton, [the late] Calvin seminary professor, Anthony Hoekema, and RC Sproul. In addition, all of the Reformers, as well as the Reformed and Lutheran confessional traditions, as a whole, have been amillennial.
Bibliography
Standard classical Reformed postmillennial works are: Lorraine Boettner, The Millennium (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed publishing Company, 1957); Roderick Campbell, Israel and the New Covenant(Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1954); Marcellus J. Kik, An Eschatology of Victory (Nutley: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1974). A classic expression of the older form of “postmillennialism” is found in the recently reprinted work; David Brown, Christ’s Second Coming: Will It Be Premillennial? (Edmonton: Still Waters Revival Books, 1990).
The most important and useful amillennial work is the excellent book by Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1982). Also helpful are: Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church(Phillipsburg: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1947); Arthur Lewis, The Dark Side of the Millennium (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980); William E. Cox, Amillennialism Today (PhilIipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1966); William E. Cox, Biblical Studies in Final Things(Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1966).