I have written a brief introductory case for the world being destined to become Christian in history (followed by a case for a general resurrection and judgment at the end of history). In my first post, I briefly discussed Revelation 20:1ff to bring up a possible implication of the Devil being released “to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth.” But I could have easily constructed my case without mentioning anything from that chapter in Revelation and I have done so in the past.
However, a common label attached to the view of the future for which I am arguing is “postmillennialism.” That name is entirely derived from Revelation 20:4, 6, 7. The millennium refers to the “thousand years” mentioned in those verses.
It recently dawned on my that the only reason my position is commonly called “postmillennialism” is because of the popularity of the “premillennial” position. If we weren’t dealing with a premillennial Christian culture, would I or any likeminded person ever have coined a term based on Revelation 20:1-6. I doubt it. Our view is derived from many places in Scripture (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 67; Daniel 2, 7; Isaiah 49:1-7; Matthew 28:18-20; etc). I don’t recall ever hearing or reading a postmillennialist make his primary argument on the basis or Revelation 20.
Contrast the postmillennial case, with the premillennial case: there only argument is that it can be read out of Revelation 20:1-6.
One text is enough, of course. I don’t fault them for holding to what they think God said just because, if He said it, He only said it once…
But what an amazing claim! In a book with Seven Spirits, Jesus as a lamb with seven horns and seven eyes, a dragon, sea monster, land monster, a giant sky mother with temporary eagle wings, a wine press that pours out an ocean of blood, and a whore that drinks that blood, being dumped out by angels in heaven… We are nonchalantly assured that John’s vision in that book of beheaded saints coming to life and ruling on thrones is a straightforward account of what we will witness one day on planet Earth.
Does that make any sense? Why should the saints come to life be any more literal than the dinosaurs or Jesus’ form as a monster ram?
I think I am within my rights as a rational Bible-believing Christian to ask for a consistent hermeneutic that work for all revelation that leaves Revelation 20:1-6 as a literal description.
Until I see such as argument, I will point out that, in addition to being the only report of this special resurrection, it is missing from passages that are explicitly summarizing the future resurrection.
In Paul’s preaching about the resurrection, he spoke of two resurrections, the first being the resurrection of Jesus and the second being the resurrection of everyone. In I Corinthian 15, Paul writes the same message. First Christ is raised and then there is a general resurrection when “The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (1 Corinthians 15:26). Does Paul anywhere indicate a group will be resurrected long after Christ was raised but centuries before the final resurrection?
I don’t find any of this credible. If we want to understand what the Bible says about the future I think we need to drop this idea from our thinking. I may offer some suggestions about Revelation 20, but there is no reason it has to be taken literally.