Transcript

I choose to begin tonight by reading from two of the greatest early church fathers who have statements that pertain to what we have seen so far in our study of Revelation.

First, I'd like to read from Saint Athanasius taken from his famous work on the incarnation.

This is Athanasius: When did prophet and vision cease from Israel?

Was it not when Christ came, the Holy One of Holies?

It is in fact a sign and notable proof of the coming of the Word that Jerusalem no longer stands, neither is prophet raised up nor vision revealed among them.

It is natural that it should be so, for when he that was signified had come, what need was there any longer of any to signify him?

And when the truth had come, what further need was there of the shadow?

On his account only, they prophesied continually, until such time as essential righteousness had come who was made the ransom for the sins of all.

For the same reason Jerusalem stood until the same time: in order that there, in order that there, men might premeditate the types before the truth was known.

So, of course, once the holy, the Holy One of Holies had come, both vision and prophecy were sealed, and the kingdom of Jerusalem ceased at the same time, because kings were to be anointed among them only until the Holy of Holies had been anointed.

Moses also prophesied that the kingdom of the Jews shall stand until his time saying, quoting now from Genesis 49:10, 'A ruler shall not fail from Judah, nor a prince from his loins, until the things laid up for him shall come and the expectation of the nations himself.' And that is why the Savior Himself was always proclaiming the law and the prophets prophesied until John.

Matthew 11:13.

So if there is still king or prophet or vision among the Jews, they do well to deny that Christ has come.

But if there is neither king nor vision, and since that time all prophecy has been sealed, and city and temple taken, how can they be so irreligious?

How can they so flaunt the facts as to deny Christ, who has brought it all about?

And then a shorter quote from the incarnation: The plain fact is, as I say, that there is no longer any king or prophet nor Jerusalem nor sacrifice nor vision among them, yet the whole Earth is filled with the knowledge of God, and the Gentiles forsaking atheism are now taking refuge with the God of Abraham through the Word our Lord Jesus Christ.

That's Saint Athanasius.

Now Saint Irenaeus in Against the Heresies, he raises the objection of, uh, concerning the destruction of Jerusalem.

He says, Further also concerning Jerusalem and the Lord, they venture to assert that if it had been the city of the great King, it would not have been deserted.

Then Irenaeus goes on to say, Well, wait a second.

You know, here's this objection.

If Jerusalem was the city of the great King, the city of God, why is it destroyed?

Says, Since then, the law originated with Moses, it terminated with John the Baptist as a necessary consequence.

And therefore, Jerusalem, taking its commencement or beginning from David and fulfilling its own times, must have an end of legislation when the new covenant was revealed.

For God does all things by measure and in order.

Nothing is unmeasured with Him, because nothing is out of order.

So the end of Jerusalem comes at the end when everything in the old covenant is fulfilled, when the new covenant is revealed.

And God does all these things by measure.

All of these fall into the covenant order of God's plan.

That is really the main point that we're going to consider as we take a look at what Corsini and many scholars rightly call the most enigmatic section of the Apocalypse, chapter 20.

Now, before we tackle chapter 20, let's turn to the ch- let's turn to Revelation 20.

But before we just dive straight into it, let's step back and get our bearings just for a moment.

We've seen so many details in our study of Revelation.

All along, though, I think the centerpiece of our interpretation has been clear and straightforward.

That is, we're studying a historical prophecy of the significance of the transition from the old covenant to the new covenant.

So the primary application of these prophecies is in the first century, when history shifts from the old covenant to the new covenant.

But ultimately, we see that these prophecies point forward to a time when the old covenant order ceases in terms of the whole creation.

That is, when the old heavens and the o- old Earth pass away and issue forth in the new heavens and the new Earth.

So that's been the central theme and emphasis in our study all along.

But as we've gone through Revelation 1 through 20, we only have two chapters left for tonight, three chapters left for tonight and, and next week where we close it out.

As we've gone through this, we've seen many different ways of describing these events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, and also the passing of the old to the new.

Scholars that use the term'recapitulation' to describe the way in which Revelation describes the same reality in many, many different ways.

This week I was reading a, a commentary written by a Protestant scholar named William Hendricksen.

It's a very popular commentary and also very readable.

It's entitled More Than Conquerors: An Interpretation of the Book of Revelation.

It's well-known, especially among Protestants, and it's widely respected because the, the author has some very good insights.

I want to just take one insight from the book, because I think it might help us just summarize and prepare ourselves to study chapter 20.

He stakes out Revelation in a very interesting way.

He argues that Revelation can be neatly divided into seven sections.

That shouldn't surprise us, because the number seven is used three or four dozen times throughout the, throughout the book.

Here's a chart on page, uh, 48 of, uh, the way he lays out these seven sections.

You can't really see much.

I'm gonna leave this book here at the end so you can look at it.

But what he argues is that these seven sections of Revelation are arranged in an ascending climatic order.

In other words, as people experience the coming of the new covenant and have to abandon the old covenant, there's a struggle.

That struggle takes place at first on Earth.

The seven letters to the seven churches, where Jesus is enthroned among the seven lampstands.And then in chapters four through seven, we have the second level, where we see the same struggle only from a higher perspective.

And there, we remember the heavenly liturgy, where the saints and the angels are, uh, are gathered around the throne of the Lamb to worship, and it's their worship that brings about the breaking open of the seven seals.

And with the seven seals come judgments that ultimately issue forth in the establishment of the new covenant kingdom of Christ.

The third level is the seven trumpets in chapters eight through 11.

That's where you have a more angelic or heavenly perspective of this conflict.

That's where the church is avenged and protected and ultimately victorious.

That leads us to the hinge, the center part of the book, and that's chapter 12.

He argues that from chapter 12 through 14, you not only enter into the fourth section, but really the second half of the book.

That's where the action speeds up.

That's where the judgments become much more vivid.

That's where you're moving away from a lot of liturgical symbolism, and you're seeing the judgments actually being poured out upon Satan and the harlot and the beast and so on.

So, the fourth section, which begins the second half, goes from chapters 12 through 14.

This is Christ's, uh, struggle with the dragon and with the beasts and so on.

And then we have the fifth section in chapters 15 and 16, where the seven bowls or the seven cups of wrath are poured out.

And then the sixth section is chapters 17 through 19, where you have the burning and the destruction and the judgment upon the harlot city, Babylon.

And then finally, the seventh section, the consummation, chapters 20 through 22.

That is where you have the highest perspective of all the drama of the apocalypse.

That's where you see everything from the vantage point of the throne of God in the highest heavens.

So, you have this repetition.

You have the same thing being, being described over and over again, but from a what you could call a gradual transcendence of perspective, where you're looking at it from a higher perspective, then a still higher perspective, until you see the whole struggle, the drama of redemptive history.

The passing of the old and the establishment of the new from the perspective of Christ Himself.

Hendriksen argues convincingly that chapter 20 triggers or initiates the final, the seventh section.

And he also argues that this is a recapitulation.

Now, I mentioned Hendriksen is a Protestant scholar, but I think it's also worth mentioning Eugenio Corsini, who I've de- who I've, who I've quoted from and, and studied, gained a lot from throughout our study of Revelation.

Corsini has this commentary entitled The Apocalypse: The Peren- Perennial Revelation of Jesus Christ, and he sees chapter 20 in a very similar way.

He argues, for instance, that chapter 20 is a summary.

It says on page, wha- 357, Chapter 20, like many others which we have seen, is a repetition, a summary of events already described so the author can further deepen his reflections on the profound significance of these events.

He argues that the battle of Gog and Magog, for instance, at the end of Revelation 20, is a repetition of the battle of Armageddon in chapter 16.

It's the same thing, only viewed from a higher perspective.

And then on page 360 and following, he uses Ezekiel to explain or to, to, to, to argue that Revelation 20 and following is a recapitulation.

He's arguing that, uh, what we find in Revelation 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, all of this, this whole section actually draws materials from Ezekiel in a way that any Jewish reader in the first century might have recognized very easily.

And so he, he argues from that, that, uh, Revelation 20 is not something that points sometime off in the distant future, but it's looking at events and recapitulating events that are occurring in the first century.

He says, In Revelation 20, then, we find a summary of the history of salvation all the way up until the coming of Christ.

Let's see, um, I'm not gonna read all of this, but I just want to read one more, one more section here.

As we shall see, then, the 1,000 years' reign is the allegorical representation of the salvation obtained by some just ones within the context of the old economy.

Corsini's the only scholar that I know of who has offered this insight.

It might not strike you as very significant right now.

It strikes me like a brick between the eyes.

It hit me really hard.

Corsini, I, I respect Corsini a great deal, because as a scholar in Turin, he has access to the most ancient patristic commentary manuscripts on the apocalypse, and I believe he's drawing not only on the manuscripts, but the wisdom that he's gained from studying them to see this.

He's the only commentator that I know of who says decisively that the 1,000-year reign in Revelation 20 should not be seen as something that comes after the coming of Christ.

It's something that pertains to what some righteous Old Testament saints obtained during the old, the old economy.

It is on account of the 1,000 years' reign, i.e., on account of those just ones who, despite Satan, are saved, that Satan is chained and rendered impotent.

What I'd like to do in our study tonight is to deepen and strengthen the argument that Corsini has set forth, and also to, to focus on this perspective and perhaps clarify it even more.

And then again, uh, on page sixty- 369, he says the same thing, that the 1,000-year reign refers to the old economy and is an allegory on the salvation obtained through it.

That's gonna be our point of departure now.

Let's just dive right into Revelation 20, then, and we're gonna read through the chapter and just get some tidbits along the way, just pick up some nuggets, and then go back again and focus upon the more important points.

Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain.

We've seen this angel descending from heaven earlier in Revelation, for instance, in chapter 12 .

verse 9, verse 7 through 9: War arose in heaven, and Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought, but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven.

And the great dragon was thrown down, presumably by Michael.

So we have this angel coming down again, from heaven, holding in his hand the key of the bottomless pit.

We've, we've seen the image of the key several times throughout this book.

I think the most significant time we see it would be in Revelation 1:18 and Revelation 3:7.

When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead, but he laid his right hand upon me saying, 'Fear not, I am the first and the last, and the living one.

I died and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys, I have the keys of death and Hades.' So we have the keys there in Revelation 1:18, and then we also have a similar image there in Revelation 3:17.

Let's see here.

Revelation 3:7, And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; the words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens.

Now that's a, that's a quotation from an ol- an Old Testament passage found in Isaiah 22:22.

We're not gonna go back and study Isaiah 22:22 but I do call your attention to it because it's very, very rich in symbolism.

Notice here that the key of David is a symbol of the Davidic Kingdom.

It's the key of the House of David found in Isaiah 22:22.

And the House of David, of course, refers to the dynasty or the kingdom of God established by covenant with David 1000 BC.

It was discovering this 1000 BC kingdom that really set my imagination going several years ago after I'd been studying the bo- the book Revelation, chapter 20, and the millennium for many years.

I had taken practically every single view, the pre-mil, the amil view and the post-mil view, the ones that we reviewed last week, and I was convinced that all three views had certain strengths but certain fatal weaknesses that made each and every one of them untenable.

So I went back to this chapter, and I, I asked the Lord for the grace to help me to see it as though for the first, as for the first time, and then just, you know, pick up everything and leave no stone unturned and try to find every clue as to interpreting it properly.

I'm not saying that I'm infallible.

I could be, I could be in error here, but I do have, uh I- I- I have made some connections, I have made some discoveries that I- I think are very interesting.

In fact- in fact downright fascinating and pertinent to whatever the infallible or the, uh, inerrant view or interpretation of Revelation 20 would be.

So, this angel's coming down from heaven holding in his hand the key of the bottomless pit.

Before we consider the bottomless pit and some of the other images, the key, I would then argue, refers to the key, the keys that Jesus holds in 1:18, the keys of death and Hades, and also the key referred to in Revelation 3:7, the key of David.

It's a symbol of the Davidic dynasty which was established a thousand years before the coming of Christ.

Corsini points out that an angel is the one holding the key.

This is one of the reasons why he argues that this points to the old covenant, because it's in the old covenant that the angels are the ones who are conquering evil, conquering Satan.

In the new covenant we see a decisive shift, Corsini argues, where you have the angels fighting the Lord's battle and defeating evil in the Old Testament.

In the new covenant you have the people of God empowered.

And so it's Christ having assumed humanity and all of his people who are human who enter into the conquest and the victory of the new covenant.

But here at this point you have an angel holding the key exercising dominion over Satan.

What is this Abussus, the bottomless pit, holding in his hand the key of the bottomless pit?

Well, we found the image elsewhere in the book Revelation, but it isn't really clear from the times that we found it exactly what it refers to.

I believe it was in Revelation 11, I forgot to jot it down, the other place where this is, is mentioned, but, uh No, it isn't Revelation 11.

Try 14.

I can't find it right now but, uh, in both cases where there is this abyss and where Satan is being, is coming down and- and- and- and is closely connected to the abyss, there is no clear explanation for what the bottomless pit or the Abussus or this pit, this abyss really is.

That's perplexing, but this is another place where my own study led me to some very fascinating discoveries, and I want to call your attention to them just now here, because, uh, when you see the thousand years Just- just adopt as a working hypothesis that the thousand years refers to 1000 BC until the coming of Christ, and the key is the key of David referring to the Davidic dynasty which was established then.

It was established in Jerusalem, and in Jerusalem we know that the, uh, the symbol of the Davidic covenant was the temple.

And the temple stood upon a particular place, a rock, and the rock was Oh, it's still there.

I have a, a book here called The Dome of the Rock published by Newsweek in the no- in the Wonders of Man series, and here's a picture of Jerusalem.

You've all seen pictures of Jerusalem, and you can see that golden dome building centering, a- at the center of every picture of Jerusalem, and the golden dome building is called the Dome of the Rock.

And the rock is considered to be a very sacred, uh, piece of real estate by the Arabs as well as the Jews and the Christians.

The rock is said to be the Even Shetiya, the foundation stone according to the Jews from which the whole Earth was first created.

Revelation 9:1-2.Yeah, the one in Rev- Revelation 11:7 I think was the one I was thinking, but Revelation 9:1-2.

Thank you, Kimberly.

That's it, sure.

I saw a star fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key of the shaft of a bottomless pit.

He opened up the shaft to the bottomless pit, and from the shaft rose smoke like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke from the shaft.

And then 11 What was that again?

11:7.

Yes.

Oh, yeah.

When they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them.

Okay.

Let's get back then for a second to this, uh, bottomless pit, because, uh, the, uh as I might have mentioned last week or I might have mentioned in, in weeks previous weeks, ancient Jews, Muslims, and Christians, especially in the in, in the Syriac branch of Christianity, have this view that was well-known in antiquity, but it's, it's almost completely unknown in this century, even among good scholars.

I have several scholars who know of it, but the majority of scholars seem to be, um, abysmally ignorant, you might say.

Sorry, I couldn't, couldn't resist that.

What I did once I, once I developed this working hypothesis based on the key being the Key of David symbolizing the Davidic dynasty established 1000 BC, I went and, uh In fact, it was at a time when Kimberly was away.

Uh, I- I had like three or four days.

You were in Cincinnati visiting, uh, your folks and I had like three or four days just to, just to basically not answer the phone, do no work.

I just studied Revelation 20, and I made this deal with Lord, uh, I'm not gonna go to sleep until I- I really crack the code here.

And once I, uh, I- I- I studied the key, saw it as the Key of David, saw that as a symbol of the d- dynasty established 1000 BC, I was excited enough to go to bed.

The next morning before picking up my study Revelation 20, I just went shopping.

And of all places, I go to a used bookstore, as I always try to do whenever I go shopping.

I went to this place called Evangelical Used Books in, uh, Arlington, Virginia, and he had no books on the shelf that I hadn't seen before, but I noticed as I was leaving a box of books that had just come in.

And I first book I pulled out was this book called Legends of Jerusalem.

Uh, so, it's, it's call- it's Legends of Jerusalem, The Sacred Land Volume One by Zev Vilnay, V-I-L-N-A-Y.

The Jewish Publication Society of America published back in '73.

And after a couple minutes of browsing, I, I turned to this place, uh, I turned to this book on page, uh, 41 and following, and there I found the, uh, explanation of the abyss and the stone and the Dome of the Rock.

I'm not gonna read the whole thing to you, but let me just read you a few salient portions of it.

Page 78.

The ancients believed that a great abyss lay deep beneath the foundation stone, and at the bases of the temple on Mount Moriah That's from 2 Chronicles 3:1.

The same place where Abraham sacrificed Isaac is the place that Solomon was later to build the Holy of Holies.

So the bases of the temple on Mount Moriah were laid in the depths of the Earth above the great abyss.

The idea of building the temple was, according to legend, one of the seven things which were contemplated before the creation of the world.

This was something that God had in mind.

When King David began to bi- to dig the foundations of the temple, the waters of the abyss burst forth and hastened to cover the whole world.

And it goes on describing how David took action to prevent that.

And, uh, Immediately the, the abyss receded.

When David saw this, he said, 'The closer the abyss is to the Earth, the more the Earth drinks of its waters and is blessed thereof.' What did he do?

He sang the 15 Songs of Degree, that's Psalm 120 through Psalm 135, the famous Psalms of Ascent that supposedly correspond in Jewish tradition to the 15 steps that lead from the area of women to the t- uh, to the area where the men worshiped in the temple proper of Jerusalem.

Each stair was to signify one of the Psalms of Ascent.

And the abyss After he sang these 15 psalms, the abyss rose again 15,000 cubits and there it remained 1,000 cubits beneath the surface of the earth, so there could be a endless source of water for Jerusalem and all the world.

Then he then the same book describes this, uh, very similar legend.

When King David came to dig the foundations for the temple around the foundation stone, he dug to the abyss to a depth of 1500 cubits.

At leng- at length, he found a projecting stone which he wished to remove, but the stone said to him, 'This thou canst not do.' David asked, 'Why not?' And it answered, 'Because I cover the mouth of the abyss.' But David would not hearken and wished to remove the stone, and as he tried the waters of the abyss rose in great torrents which appeared to be about to flood the world.

And it goes on talking about the same thing.

Now, in this book we have all kinds of assorted details.

For instance, on page 24, uh, we have, Rabbi Moses Hagiz, a Jerusalemite of the 17th century describes the Dome of the Rock.

He speaks of the foundation stone, this enormous rock, as hovering.

Within it a stone hovers in the air known by us as the foundation stone.

Uh, let's see.

Rabbi Lilienfeld, who went to the Holy Land in 1847, writes his impressions of his visit to Jerusalem and to the site of the holy temple in which a mosque, the Dome of the Rock, has been erected.

He says, 'In one of the mosque's hall there is, according to the general belief, the foundation stone, which is not fastened, but is suspended above the floor.

The Turks, that is the Muslims, hold that when the stone falls, it will be the sign that the Messiah comes.

Therefore, they have built it at a they built it a base and a support, and thus do the Turks hope to prevent the advent of the Messiah of Israel.

Strange views.

You'll find that the Jews have held to these legends and opinions for as long as records are around.

It goes back to the time of Christ.

It goes back long before that as well.

All of this fits in with a much larger vision of Jerusalem that Vilnay describes on page 129.

The temple is built in the heights of the firmament.

In heavenly Jerusalem He describes how there's a heavenly Jerusalem that corresponds to an earthly Jerusalem, and whatever the high priest does in the Jerusalem temple on Earth, Michael the Archangel is performing the same corresponding ritual in the heavenly temple.

And God created a temple on Earth, and correspondingly, he created a temple in heaven, each facing the other.

And at the time when the temple stood, while the high priest sacrificed and burnt incense below, the archangel Michael sacrificed and burned incense above.

So that would explain why Michael the Archangel is so closely connected to Revelation 20, to this abyss, and to this, uh, the Key of David and these Jerusalem symbols.

Uh, more of the same on pages 156 and 157.

In the upper Jerusalem there's also a temple, and when the high priest of Israel entered the temple on Mount Moriah and offered sacrifices and incense, the archangel Michael entered the heavenly temple and offered sacrifice and incense.

There's another book that I've been studying recently.

It's, uh, by a European scholar by the name of A.J.

Wensink, or Vensink.

The, uh, the title, believe it or not, is The Idea of the Western Semites Concerning the Navel of the Earth.

Odd, isn't it?

But Ezekiel actually refers to Jerusalem.

In Ezekiel 38, verse 12, Ezekiel calls Jerusalem the center of the Earth, but the Hebrew word for center is literally the navel.

That's right, like the bellybutton.

They saw, they saw the Earth as in a, in a sense, a cosmic body, and Jerusalem was the place where, like the umbilical cord feeds the embryo, that's the place where heaven feeds Earth.

That's where Earth and Heaven intersect.

Uh, on page, let's see, oh, there's so many.

The idea is already expressed in a well-known passage in Ezekiel, also in chapter 5, verse 5.

So speaketh the Lord Yahweh, 'This is Jerusalem.

I have set it in the middle of the nations, and round about it are the countries.' It is also found in pseudepigraphic literature in the Book of Jubilees, chapter eight, verse 19, Mount Zion is called the center or the navel of the Earth.

And he goes on to talk about how the Muslims and Syriac Christians also believe this view as well.

The sanctuary, he says, is not only the center of the Earth, it possesses also an other characteristic of a navel, that of being the place of communication with the upper and the lower or nether worlds.

So Jerusalem there is the place where Heaven intersects with Earth, where Heaven funnels its grace and life and power down to Earth, but it, Jerusalem is also where the plane of the nether world intersects.

So this foundation stone is a place where you sacrifice in order to commune with God in Heaven, but it's right over top of this abyss, this shaft, that is the main entryway known as the Tehom in Hebrew or the Abyssos in Greek, the hallway leading into Sheol or Hades, the nether world, where the Old Testament saints would go, or at least many of them as we'll see.

Uh, let's see.

The communication between the sanctuary and Heaven is a fact so well known that it will not be necessary to give a large collection of literary evidence, which he goes ahead to do anyway.

The connection between Jerusalem and Tehom, that is, the abyss, is in the first place expressed in a number of traditions which represent the holy rock as the stone which is connected with the Tehom or the deep.

Other traditions link the altar with the deep, or the Tehom, the abyss, by means of the channels which conducted the blood of the sacrifices and the water to a subterranean cave.

And again, it quotes from Re- Rabbi Johann, When David dug the channels, the abyss, Tehom rose and threatened to submerge the world again, just as it had done back in the time of Noah.

So here's this stone on which the blood of the sacrifices is poured, and the sacrificial blood actually goes underneath the stone, down the shaft, and the blood covers the souls of the departed until ultimately the blood of the Lamb can cover them and bring about real redemption, the blood of Christ.

A well-known tradition maintains that the 15 Psalms of ascent had a certain analogy with the 15 steps in the Jerusalem temple which lay between the enclosure of the women and that of the men.

The steps are that which conduct from the Tehom or the abyss to the temple proper.

The likeness, he also, has been, Sinks also speaks of the likeness between the earthly and the heavenly sanctuary.

It's made complete by the correspondence between the nether, the lower, and the upper rites of worship.

Then he describes the High Priest performing on Earth what Michael the Archangel performs up in Heaven.

Uh, Likewise, if our, if our, if our con- this is in page 65, if our conclusions as to its significance in connection with the navel are right, some familiar facts concerning Jerusalem appear in a new light.

Kittle has shown it to be probable that the Stone of the Serpent was in the immediate neighborhood of the Source of the Dragon, that the stone and the spring had a peculiar religious importance, blah, blah, blah.

It goes on and just describes how the dragon is in the spring of water that flows in the abyss.

There's a stone, the Stone of the Serpent is, is placed atop of the abyss to keep the serpent underneath, chained, or, or, or, or locked, or imprisoned in this abyss.

And it goes on, talking about how all of this represents God's divine plan for governing the world, for overcoming Satan.

Now, all of this is mythology.

All of this is symbolism.

All of this is mythological cosmology.

What business does it have doing, in Revelation, or in my interpretation of Revelation, you're wondering.

At least, I'm wondering.

C.S.

Lewis once had a interesting point.

Uh, he, he talked about how myths can be properly introduced into Christian theology because ultimately, what was, was unhistorical mythology in all the pagan religions of antiquity becomes historicized with Christianity.

Christ, in other words, historicizes mythology.

In a sense, they believed in myths because history for them was too bleak to hold hope.

You had to create non-historical, or anti-historical mythical symbols in order to preserve hope.

But Christianity finds, in history, events which the myths point to, but ultimately, the events surrounding Jesus' redemptive work for us exceed the greatest hopes contained in the myths.So, it isn't inappropriate for John, therefore, to convey the meaning and the message of Jesus' triumph in mythical terms, using mythical symbols of actual earthly objects like a stone covering a pit underneath the temple which David built 1000 BC as a symbol of something far greater that Christ Himself would introduce in Himself, the true temple which He would build upon the rock, which is Peter.

And what did he give to Peter?

The keys of the kingdom of Heaven, so that the gates of Hades would not prevail.

So, the keys are the keys to the kingdom of Heaven, opening the doors of Heaven, but the keys that Jesus gave to Peter are also the keys which unlock the gates of Hades which won't prevail against the church, so that Peter and his successors can plunder Satan's kingdom and release the souls in Sheol, Hebrew, Hades, Greek, Purgatorio, Latin, on the basis of the authority of Christ which he is given to his church through Peter and his successors.

So, many scholars see that what Jesus does in Matthew 16:17-19 is best explained in terms of this mythical symbolism centered around Jerusalem.

A scholar as reputable, as world-class as Ben F.

Meyer says this concerning Matthew 16.

Many scholars have seen it as well.

For instance, I have a book here by, uh, Thomas W., uh, Thomas Fawcett, Hebrew Myth and Christian Gospel, and, uh, he likewise describes the meaning of Jesus' words spoken to Peter in light of all of this Jerusalem mythology.

On page 195, he also explains how Jesus was buried and entombed around Jerusalem.

He was interred at the very place where the entry point of the Great Abyss was located in Jewish myths.

The Hebrews spoke of the flood waters of death lying immediately below the mountain of Jerusalem.

The city of Yahweh stood directly above, Heavenly Jerusalem, and so victorious over the realm of death and destruction.

Consequently, the psalmist contrasted the Rock of Zion with the Pit of Death.

And the author of First Enoch located the Abyss at the center of the Earth.

Rabbinic literature developed the idea and made it most explicit.

The Rock of Jerusalem was said to stand exactly over the Tehom, the Temple Mountain closing its mouth and holding down the subterranean waters of the flood.

And it goes on describing other traditions along these lines, and how as one who was buried within the rock of Jerusalem, Jesus had passed through the portal leading to the Great Abyss.

Here more than anywhere else than for the Jew was to be found the entrance into Hades.

It's also interesting that, uh, in the early church there was a book that was circulated not as canonical inspired scripture, but a book that was very popular and read widely among early believers.

It was known as the Gospel of Nicodemus.

It's actually printed today in this, uh, collection known as the Lost Books of the Bible.

It's, uh, a misnomer if ever there was one.

These are not lost books of the Bible, but they were books that were regarded by some as, as of great religious significance.

The Gospel of Nicodemus, chapters, um, 15 and following describe Jesus' descent into Hades.

Not Gehenna, not Hell proper, but Hades, the abode of the dead.

Uh, there's a quarrel that chapter 15 describes between Satan and the, the Prince of Hell.

Uh, when they hear that Jesus is coming down, uh, it says, uh, Perhaps it is the same who took away from me Lazarus after he had been four days dead and did both stink and was rotten and of whom I had possession as a dead person, yet he brought him to life again by his power.

Satan answering replied to the Prince of Hell, It is the very same person, Jesus of Nazareth.

Which when the Prince of Hell heard, he said to him, I adjure thee This is the Prince of Hell talking to Satan now.

I adjure thee by the powers which belong to thee and me that thou bring him not to me.

He's afraid to have Jesus come down to the abode of the dead.

He fears his power.

And then in chapter 16 we have Christ's arrival at the gates of Hell, or the gates of Hades, and all the confusion that occurs.

And then, uh, in chapter 16 we also have David, uh, rebuking the Prince of Hell, describing how he'll be delivered soon enough.

And sure enough, over in chapter 19 we have Christ greeting Adam and taking him by the hand, and delivering Adam and all of these other faithful saints who had repented of sins in the Old Testament out of Heaven.

And as, as, uh, Then the Lord, holding Adam by the hand, delivered him to Michael the Archangel, and he led them into paradise, the Heavenly Jerusalem, filled with mercy and glory.

And two very ancient men met them, and were asked by the saints, 'Who are you who have not yet been with us in hell, or Hades, 'and have had your bodies placed in paradise?' One of them answering said, 'I am Enoch, who is translated by the word of God, and this man who is with me is Elijah, the Tishbite who was translated in a fiery chariot.

Here we have hitherto been and have not tasted death, but are now about to return because of the coming of Antichrist, being armed with divine signs and miracles to engage with him in battle and to be slain by him at Jerusalem.' Just like in Revelation 11, the two witnesses were slain in Jerusalem.

Many people see this passage in the Gospel of Nicodemus explaining the two witnesses who came up from the Abyss to bear witness against the Antichrist there.

So, you know, what, what do we make of all this?

I mean, we have so much mythology, so much symbolism.

What do we make of it?

I mean, how much of this to incorporate into our interpretation of Revelation 20?

Well, I think any interpreter who's honest has to admit that Revelation 20 confronts us with images, with themes that nobody finds it easy to interpret, even if they want to avoid mythology at all costs, even if they want to have nothing to do with Jerusalem legends.

I would argue, though, it's very proper in Matthew 16 and Revelation 20 for the Holy Spirit to take these legends or these cosmic myths and to invest them with redemptive meaning, and to use these symbols to convey some of the truth concerning what the New Covenant has ushered in.

Because if the meaning of the Old Covenant was locked up in these earthly symbols, the rock, the Abyss, the key, the chain, and so on then why not invest them with New Covenant meaning?

And this is following C.S.

Lewis.

I would argue then that these symbols or these myths are historicized and spiritualized by the New Testament.

For instance, in Matthew 16, where Jesus gives to Peter the gates, uh, the keys of the kingdom, promising to build the church upon him, upon this rock, and arguing that the gates of Hades will not prevail against Peter, who holds these keys.

And likewise, Revelation 20.

Now, here's another question.

How in the world would John's readers have known how to interpret these symbols?

Were they well known back then?

Well known enough for John to expect his readers to know, to understand them?

I would argue that yes, indeed they are.

You find many Rabbinic legends and myths in the New Testament.

For instance, in First Corinthians chapter 10, Paul describes a rock which followed Israel around the wilderness, and he says this rock is, of course, that- what supplied water to the Israelites.

And that, of course, is found in Numbers.

But then he says the rock which followed them was Christ.

If you go back to Numbers, you see some typological symbolism.

The rock can stand for Christ.

But nowhere does it say the rock followed them in the Book of Numbers.

That's only found in Rabbinic writings, in the legends of the Jews.

So likewise, you find in the Book of Timothy, First Timothy, where Paul is describing the false teachers who stand against, who stand against I'm sorry, Second Timothy 3, verse 8.

The false teachers who stand against Timothy, he says, As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth.

Now, Jannes and Jambres, of course, are the magicians of Pharaoh who opposed Moses in Egypt.

But if you go back to Exodus, you discover that there are no names given to the magicians of Pharaoh.

On the other hand, throughout the Rabbinic writings and commentaries on Exodus, these names are introduced not as something argumentative, but as common knowledge.

Every Jew knows Jannes and Jambres are the names given to the two magicians of Pharaoh.

Yet they're not found in Exodus.

This was part of the oral tradition.

Now, I would contend that if legends circulated down through the ages in oral tradition concerning Jannes and Jambres were well known enough for Paul to know them, for Paul to assume that Timothy knows them, for Paul to assume that everybody reading Second Timothy 3 would understand what he's talking about, then how much more legends surrounding the holiest spot on Earth, Jerusalem, and the temple, and the Holy of Holies, and the foundation stone, and the altar, and the abyss, where Satan is trapped, the Gates of Hades, and the Keys of David?

If Jannes and Jambres were well-known legends that the New Testament can assume we're familiar with, how much more legends focusing upon the Holy of Holies?

So that's why I would defend the use of these images in our interpretation of Revelation 20.

Because we know, nobody can deny the fact that these Rabbinic legends are used elsewhere, and nobody can deny the fact that these legends illuminate the meaning of New Testament texts found elsewhere as well.

So I think it's entirely proper here.

I should also mention this, that in the book I mentioned earlier, The Dome of the Rock, there is, on page 71, a description of something besides the Dome of the Rock.

Just a few feet away from this large Dome of the Rock, there's a smaller dome as well.

It's the Dome of, uh, let's see, the Dome of the Chain.

At dawn, attendants arrive to purify themselves in special baths.

In the Dome of the Chain, they change into garments of rare cloth woven in distant Khurasan and Afghanistan, shawls from Yemen.

It goes on describing this.

What is the Dome of the Chain?

Well, once again, I went to Legends of Jerusalem, and there I discovered I won't read this whole thing, but, uh, the Dome of the Chain, East of the Dome of the Rock is a small domed building, which is known as the Dome of the Chain, to commemorate the chain that once hung there, which was used by King David, and then later by Solomon, to test the honesty of the people who stood before him for judgment.

In ancient times, when Israel dwelled in, dwelled in this land, a great chain was suspended from this dome.

What was it used for?

It describes, Litigants or witnesses about to take an oath, and you know how important oath swearing was.

It was by putting somebody under oath that you would bind them to God, or bind them to Satan if they lied under oaths.

Witnesses about to take an oath took hold of a chain.

If any man lied, a link would fall from the chain, so the falsehood stood revealed.

Well, do we really believe this is true?

I don't know.

I have no idea.

All I know is that we have a chain in Revelation 20 that needs explanation.

Where do we go to explain the great chain?

Well, I would say the same place we go to explain the key.

The key is the Key of David, so why not argue that the chain is also traceable back to the Dome of the Chain and the Chain of David?

And after all, it's used to seize and chain the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and to bind him for a thousand years, for what purpose?

Verse 3, So that he might lie and deceive the nations no more.

The whole idea of binding, if you go back and study the Rabbinic use of the word binding, oath swearing and binding and loosing are two ways of describing the same act.

When I adjure you to do something, I bind you by oath.

Satan is bound by oath.

The chain was a symbol of the oath, so that you grab the chain when, when you swore an oath.

Here's the chain being used to bind Satan.

We usually think of Satan being bound only in terms of exorcism, right?

But look at the word exorcism.

It's a compound.

Ex- is the prefix meaning out of.

Horkea is the Greek word meaning oath.

When you exorcise Satan, literally you're oath-, you're othing Satan out .

exchorkia, to oath out.

Chain was used for oath swearing, oath swearing binds Satan in exorcisms, and Satan is being bound by the chain.

I think these coincidences are more than startling, I think they're illuminating and suggestive of things that scholars should probably be studying for the next three or four hundred years to really understand this passage better.

So how would I put it all together at this point?

I would argue that what Revelation 20:1 and following describes is how God set up a prototype of the new covenant in the old Jerusalem, 1000 BC, so that for 1,000 years the old Jerusalem served as a mock-up, as a scale model of the new Jerusalem.

For 1,000 years, God established a provisional kingdom, the kingdom of God on Earth was connected directly to Jerusalem, the temple and the Davidic kingdom.

So for a thousand years, the Key of David and the Chain of David and the stone that was the altar stone for the Holy of Holies and the temple of the Son of David, which was serving as a lid stopping up the abyss, so that, in effect, Satan was trapped in this cellar, he was trapped in this pit so that he couldn't come out and deceive the nations; all of this describes God's purpose for old Jerusalem for a thousand years.

Now, that's my working hypothesis.

Let's just see as we go what other things we It might interpret.

So it threw him into the pit and shut it and sealed it over him so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were ended.

After that, he must be loosed for a little while.

Now, two things come up in my mind.

First of all, what does it mean to bind Satan so that he might not des- so that he might not deceive?

Let's turn to Matthew 12.

Matthew 12, Jesus describes something remarkably similar.

Jesus is now in Jerusalem and He's healing a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath.

The Pharisees accuse Him of breaking the Sabbath.

Then in Verse 22 and following, a blind and dumb demoniac comes forward, and Jesus exorcises the devil out of him.

The Pharisees now accuse Jesus of casting out Satan by Satan's own power.

Knowing your thoughts, He said to them, every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste and no city or house divided against itself will stand.

So He's saying, It's foolish for you to argue or to accuse Me of casting the devil out with the devil's own power.

Give the devil his due.

I mean, he's not so dumb.

That's not what the devil is doing these days, casting himself out.

But notice that Jesus describes this in terms of a kingdom, a city and a house.

That points to Jerusalem.

By the end of Matthew 12, Jesus had described that first century generation of Jerusalem leaders as Well, in Verse 43 and following, When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he passes through waterless places seeking rest, but he finds none.

Then He says, I return to my house from which I came, referring to His body.

And when he comes, he finds it empty, and he brings in seven more demons worse than him, and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first.

So shall it be also with this evil generation.

So this evil generation there in Jerusalem with the Pharisees is likened unto this man, this house, with seven demons.

Let's go on, Verse 28.

But if it is by the Spirit of God, Jesus says, that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Or how can one enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods unless he first binds the strong man?

Then indeed he may plunder his house.

Jesus is coming to Jerusalem, which has now become the stronghold of Satan.

He's coming to cleanse it, to drive Satan out.

The Pharisees have one last chance.

If they cooperate with the grace of Christ, all well and good, but they don't.

So Satan returns at the end of that generation, bringing in seven demons to make this house, to make this man, to make this generation far worse.

But how does Jesus describe his exorcistic activity in terms of binding this strong man and plundering his house?

So Jesus binds Satan to plunder his kingdom and his house.

Now, if Jesus has bound Satan to plunder his house, then there must not be any sin or evil left, right?

Wrong.

Jesus is clearly binding a strong man and plundering his house, but while He's doing it, evil people remain evil, and remain free to become even more evil.

That's why I think many interpreters misinterpret Revelation 20:3, where they say that if Satan is bound for a thousand years to deceive the nations no more, then we should expli- expect this millennium of total peace, total righteousness, total goodness.

That's the picture that most people have of the millennium.

Most millennialists argue for a kingdom which is like nirvana, this state of almost sinless perfection.

I'd argue that no, that if Satan's bound here, Satan's bound in Matthew 12 by Jesus Himself.

If Satan is bound in Matthew 12 while Jesus plunders his house, and yet evil Pharisees can still abound and become even more evil, then if Satan is bound for a thousand years at this point, we shouldn't be looking for a future period of perfection.We should be willing to see that 1000 BC to the coming of Christ is a time when Solomon and others had incredible power over Satan to use that power to bind the evil one.

If you go back, historians go back and they actually discover that many Jewish and extra I should say, uh, non-Jewish sources describe Solomon, the son of David, the king of Israel, the temple the builder of the temple, as having just that.

Solomon's reputation among Gentiles is well-known for exorcism.

Solomon was supposedly the greatest exorcist in world history, according to the rabbis and Jewish sources, but also according to many, many Gentile sources as well.

So the kingdom of David, established with the son of David, with a temple built by Solomon, becomes a centerpiece signaling or signifying the place where God gave humans incredible power over the evil one.

Some would argue that when God made a covenant with David, the purpose for making a covenant was to bring about the education of all the nations in the ways of God, so that through the wisdom of Solomon, but also through the exorcistic power of David, the keys that David handed on to Solomon, and exercised there in Jerusalem at the temple.

The temple was to be a pilgrim a place of pilgrimage.

The nations were to go up to, to Jerusalem every year to see this beautiful place, but also to hear and to learn of the wisdom of Solomon.

All of this was a scale model of the Heavenly Jerusalem coming yet in the future.

For a thousand years, God was creating a kingdom so that the nations on Earth could learn the ways of God.

Turn to 2 Samuel 7.

We can discover that this is how David himself understood God's covenant with Him.

In 2 Samuel 7, verse 14 and following, we have God des uh, swearing the, the covenant with David.

Beginning in verse 11 where we read, Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house when your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom.

So, God will make David a house by raising up one of his sons and establishing his kingdom.

Verse 13, He shall build a house for my name.

The son of David, Solomon, builds a house for God's name, the temple.

And I will establish the throne of His kingdom forever.

I will be his father, and he shall be my son.

So, Solomon is a type of Christ; son of David, king of Jerusalem, and the builder of the temple.

Jerusalem on Earth is a symbol of the Heavenly Jerusalem, the kingdom that Christ establishes when He ascends into heaven.

Verse 16, And your kin Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me.

Your throne shall be established forever.

And then David responds to this covenant in verse 18 and 19: Then King David went in and sat before the Lord and said, Who am I, oh Lord God?

And what is my house that you have brought me so far?

And yet this was a small thing in your eyes, oh Lord God, for you have spoken also of your servant's house for a great while to come, and you have shown me The RSV is a mistranslation here.

The literal Hebrew is, it's in the fo- it's in the marginal footnote there, You have shown me the law for mankind.

The Torah, that's the Hebrew word for law, and the word for mankind is Adam.

The Torah for Adam.

David is saying, I n- I r- I see what you're doing, God.

The covenant that you made with Moses before me gave the Torah to Israel, but now the covenant you're making with me through my son and through this kingdom, through this temple, is going to establish a Torah for Adam, a law for mankind.

So as Moses' law shed light upon Israel to know the ways of God, so my covenant will shed light upon all the nations.

And this is what Isaiah 2 promises.

Isaiah 2 envisions this for all the nations in verses one through four: The word which Isaiah, the son of Amos, saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be raised above the hills.

And all the nations shall flow to it, and many people shall come and say, Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob, that He may teach us His ways and that we may walk in His paths, for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, He shall judge between the nations and shall decide for many peoples.

And they shall beat their swords and the plowshares and their spears and their pruning hooks.

Nations shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.

Now, this was provisionally realized in Solomon's day when the nations went up to Solomon, whose name means peace.

It comes from the Hebrew word shalom.

But ultimately, Jerusalem became corrupt.

David's dynasty became wicked.

And so, the scale model of the real Heavenly Jerusalem, of the real new covenant kingdom established by the real son of David, the real king of Israel, who builds for us the real temple in heaven, ultimately this, this scale model is going to have to be done away with.

But Isaiah promises in Isaiah 65 and 66 that ultimately, in the end, God is going to destroy Jerusalem, but in the end He's going to rebuild Jerusalem, a new Jerusalem.

In Isaiah 65:18, Be glad and rejoice forever in that which I create, for behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing.

And it talks about how a child shall die 100 years and the sinner 100 years shall be accursed.

They shall build houses and inhabit them.

They shall plant vineyards and eat their fruits.

And it goes on talking about the prosperity and the blessing of the new Jerusalem.

And then in Isaiah 66 it describes this new Jerusalem, which I'm arguing corresponds to what?

What is the new Jerusalem?

The new covenant.

It's the Church, the Heavenly Jerusalem that comes down after the earthly Jerusalem is burned and destroyed in 70 AD.You can see this again in, uh, verse Isaiah 66:20, And they shall bring all your brethren from all the nations as an offering to the Lord, to my holy mountain in Jerusalem, says the Lord.

Verse 22, 'For as the new heavens and the new earth which I am- I will make shall remain before me,' says the Lord, 'So shall your descendants and your name remain.

So this, all the nations shall come to Jerusalem to learn of God, to be blessed of God, and there, the Lord remains, making forever this new heaven and the new earth.

So for a thousand years, the divine purpose for Jerusalem was for this to become, in effect, the curriculum center for Christian education, for all the nations to learn the ways of God, the wisdom of Solomon and the law of Israel, which show the nations how to live before the face of God.

That was the plan for Jerusalem for a thousand years.

But what happened to the plan?

Well, let's read on.

Verse three, He threw him into the pit, and shut it, and sealed it over him, that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were ended.

So the purpose of the Davidic covenant in Jerusalem on earth for a thousand years was to restrain the devil from deceiving the nations.

After that, he must be loosed for a little while.

Corsini argues that this refers to Satan being released in Jesus' own apostate generation so that he could perform the ultimate apostasy, the ultimate iniquity, crucifying the Lord of Lords, and thus ushering in the new Jerusalem.

Of course, that's not, that's not what Satan intends.

But then look at verse four.

All of a sudden there's a dramatic shift: Then I saw thrones and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed.

Also, I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God and who would not worship the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands.

They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.

This is the first resurrection.

Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection.

Over such, the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ and they shall reign with Him a thousand years.

What is this referring to?

Well, I believe that verse four through six is given to us to answer an anticipated objection.

Verses one, two and three says this: old Jerusalem on earth was established as God's earthly kingdom to teach all the nations and to bind Satan so that they won't, the nations won't be deceived by Satan anymore.

Through David, through his key- the Key of David, through the wisdom of Solomon, through this covenant, all the nations might be illuminated like Isaiah envisioned in chapter two of his- the book of Isaiah.

But what happened?

The Davidic monarchy corrupted itself.

What happened is that it became necessary for God to destroy Jerusalem and the temple and to overthrow the monarchy, but only provisionally because ultimately, God had sworn an oath that the kingdom of David would last forever.

But He didn't mean forever on Earth.

He meant forever in the heavenly Jerusalem.

He didn't mean of the fleshly seed of David exclusively.

Sure, Jesus of the fleshly line of David, but He meant a divine kingdom in heaven through the divine God man who comes from God and comes from David both.

I shall be his father.

He shall be my son.

That's fulfilled in Christ eternally, not just symbolically as it was with Solomon.

So when the Davidic dynasty on Earth grew corrupt, God chastened it, destroyed it.

In 586, Babylon swept through Jerusalem, burned the city down, and destroyed the, the temple, and for almost 70 years, just as Jeremiah had warned, for 70 years, Jerusalem was captive and laid waste.

What then is happening?

Well, I would argue this, that the thousand year period of the Davidic Covenant should be divided up into two parts, the first 500 years and the second 500 years.

It works out pretty neatly, because in the first 500 years, what you find is a period of monarchy, a period of kings, a period of political power, a period of kingship, where through the kings and the prophets, the nations were to learn of the Lord.

But they didn't because of the king's corruption.

So then all of a sudden you move to the second half of this thousand year period, a period of priesthood, not kingship, a period of spiritual authority, not political power, a, a period of martyrdom, not a period of political conquest.

Because Daniel describes for us what it was like for Jewish people at the time when the Babylonians came and captured Jerusalem.

That's when Daniel himself was captured.

He was taken a prisoner by Nebuchadnezzar in Jerusalem and carried off into Babylon, along with several of his friends.

And in Daniel we discover the beginning of a new age in this thousand year period, a time of great suffering, but actually a time when God's word gets out to the nations more effectively than in the first 500 years.

After 70 years of Babylonian captivity, the Persian ruler who conquered Babylon allowed the Jews to go back to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple, but not to restore the kingship, not to restore the monarchy.

This is the birth of Judaism, where the inhabitants of Judah returned to Jerusalem around 500 BC, and under Ezra and Nehemiah, they rebuilt the city and the walls and eventually the temple itself.

What did the temp- what, what did the second temple look like compared to Solomon's Temple?

It paled in comparison.

There was no comparison physically, materially.

But from God's perspective, what did the temp- how did the second temple compare to the first temple?

Turn to the Book of Haggai .

Zephaniah, Haggai.

In Haggai 2, verse ni- uh, verse 6 and following, especially verse 9, Haggai is encouraging all these discouraged people.

All these Jews are, are, are depressed because the second temple, which isn't even finished, can't compare to the first temple.

Verse four: Yet now take courage, O says the Lord.

Take courage, O Joshua, high priest, take courage, O you people of the land, says the Lord, for I am with you, says the Lord of hosts, according to the promise that I made you.

Keep building the temple, keep working on the walls, keep building the city.

Why?

Verse nine: The latter splendor of this house shall be greater than the former, says the Lord of hosts.

The Lord promises that the second temple will be more splendid and glorious than the first.

And other prophets repeat the same theme.

But was it in fact true?

Yes, spiritually, not physically.

The second temple couldn't compare to the first temple in terms of physical splendor.

But Solomon built the first temple out of the abundance of his riches.

The second temple was built by very poor people out of the abundance of their faith, their hope, and their charity.

And in God's eyes, the second temple was far more radiant than the first.

The first temple was built by a king.

The second temple was built by priests.

The second period of 500 years begins with the restoration of Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the second temple, and it goes to around 20 BC when all of a sudden, the temple is rebuilt a third time.

By who?

In 20 BC, Herod began to lay claim to Jerusalem, and he began to rebuild the temple and making it, making his own temple, even though he was not a Jew, but an Edomite, accursed from the covenant line.

So from 20 BC on, we have the temple in Jerusalem being linked to the Herodian dynasty.

I would argue that around this time, the little season when Satan is loosed begins.

Now let's take a look at Revelation 20, verse four and following.

What do we see?

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed.

If you look in the cross-reference, you see, interestingly enough, a cross-reference to what?

To Daniel.

Daniel 7, the famous Son of Man vision.

In Daniel 7, Daniel sees a vision of how the Gentile beasts will be overcome by the Son of Man and the saints of the Most High, who only overcome the beasts through their suffering.

So Revelation 20, verse four is actually an allusion to Daniel 7 verse nine, verse 22, and verse 27.

Verse nine: As I looked, thrones were placed, and one that was Ancient of Days took his seat; his raiment was white as snow, and the hair of his head was like pure wool.

This is just what we saw in Revelation 1.

And look at verse 22: As I looked, this horn made war with the saints and prevailed to get over them until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was given for the saints of the Most High, and the time came when the saints received the kingdom.

And then also in verse 27: And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High; their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom.

So here we have the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, being enthroned, and enthroning along with Himself those suffering saints who endured a period of great hardship.

What period of hardship is this?

Daniel's own experience.

In Daniel's lifetime, Daniel the prophet was out in Babylon teaching the nations.

In the first 500 years, the nations should have come to Jerusalem to learn the way of the Lord.

Jerusalem corrupted its ways in the Davidic monarchy.

So God says, Look, if you're not gonna teach the nations by having them come to you and learn of me, then I will send you to them.

Instead of teaching the nations, Jerusalem became like the nations, and so God said, I'll punish you by sending you to the nations so that through captivity and through suffering you'll learn righteousness.

So what does Daniel do?

In Daniel 1, you recall he refuses to eat the, the food of Nebuchadnezzar.

And then in Daniel 2, he interprets Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

At the end of Da- Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar says that Daniel's God is the God of gods.

And then in Daniel 3, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refuse to worship the image that Nebuchadnezzar erects.

And what happened to them?

Like Daniel, they have to suffer for the truth.

They're thrown into a fiery furnace where a fourth person stands like a Son of Man, like a son of God, and then Nebuchadnezzar sees it and issues an imperial decree saying the God of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, the God of Israel is the God of gods.

He alone is the greatest of the gods.

What the kings should have been teaching the nations in the first 500 years, they didn't teach.

So the prophets like Daniel, through their suffering, and the saints of the Most High, through their affliction, teach the nations and teach the rulers like Nebuchadnezzar.

And let's go back to, to Revelation 20, verse 4: Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom d- judgment was committed.

I s- also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus Who is that reference to?

In the New Testament, the verb to behead is only used with reference to John the Baptist, the last and the greatest of the prophets.

So I saw souls of those who, like John the Baptist, the greatest of the prophets, who had been beheaded for their martyria, their testimony to Jesus, and for the word of God.

And get this, he also saw the souls of those who had not worshipped the beast or its image.

Who does that refer to?

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, back in Daniel 3.So, Daniel Revelation 20 is saying, look, the thousand-year period works like this.

The first 500 years, the Davidic dynasty was supposed to release God's truth to the nations.

They didn't, and so the nations destroyed the Davidic monarchy.

But in that fif- that thousand, the second half of that thousand-year period, God's people taught the nations from Jerusalem, in effect, in two ways.

Through their suffering, like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, the Son of Man himself who overcomes the beasts, and these are the specific people referred to by these verses.

The prophetic period, a priestly suffering, like John the Baptist, and those who would not worship the beast or its image and did not receive its mark on their foreheads or their hands, they came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

I'm arguing, then, that these verses refer to martyrs of the Old Testament.

Now, you might say, Well, martyrs in the Old Testament, there were a lot of martyrs apart from the thousand years before Christ, right?

Wrong.

Here's an interesting fact I never knew before until studying for this.

After Abel is martyred by Cain, there is not another faithful Israelite martyred until the span of time from 1000 BC until the coming of Christ.

I believe somewhere in 2 Kings, I forget the reference, a prophet is martyred, a, a prophet is executed, but the period of martyrdom begins for the Jews at the time of their deportation into Babylon.

The Babylonian captivity initiates a brand new phase of religious observance that the Jews had never known before, where they have to suffer the loss of their freedom, their land, their power, their wealth.

What do you find in Maccabees, 2 Maccabees 7, one of my favorite passages in 2 Maccabees?

That famous Israelite mother, who witnesses the martyrdom of her seven sons.

Nothing like this in Israel's history had ever happened before the period beginning in 500 BC.

What would I mean, before this, we all The Jews always thought, well, God blesses us for obedience by giving us earthly mat- earthly blessing, material power.

But God is teaching His people more and more about the real kingdom and the heavenly glory and the other worldly treasure that we should be really yearning for, by initiating them into suffering and martyrdom, because that will train them to recognize that only heavenly Jerusalem is the ultimate reward.

And so, they learned God's, uh, God's blessing.

They learned the nature of the covenant through the hard school of martyrdom.

That represents the second half of this Davidic millennium, a period of priestly suffering and prophetic suffering.

And was it effective?

I would contend that it was more effective than the first half of the Davidic millennium.

The first 500 years did not teach the nations nearly as much as the second 500 years.

Just as the Church back in the medi- uh, in, in medieval Uh, the Church might have had lots of earthly pomp and military might.

I would argue it's not as glorious as the Church is today when all the Church has is the Gospel to proclaim and the mass to sacrifice.

Now we're seeing the true nature of the Church's power, its heavenly authority.

The Word of God was never translated into any language except Hebrew until the second 500-year period.

In Alexandria, 70 rabbis translated the Septuagint, the Old Testament into Greek so that all people could read God's Word in the lingua franca, the Greek language.

And all of this, again, is what you find happening in this second period, the second 500 years.

The nations are becoming less and less deceived as the people in Go- uh, the people of God suffer more and more.

That's the millennium of the earthly Jerusalem, preparing us, I would argue, for the ultimate kingdom of God, the heavenly Jerusalem.

Let's go back then.

They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

What does this mean?

I would argue that faithful people in the Old Testament from 1000 BC until the coming of Christ, when they suffered and died for their testimony to the coming Christ, they did not have to go down to Sheol, down to Hades, where Adam was.

For instance, what, what about the archetype?

Besides John the Baptist, who's the other great prophet?

Elijah.

For all of his suffering, God took him straight to heaven on a chariot of fire.

What did he do up there for the next 600, 700 years?

He reigned with Christ who was to come, with the Christ that he was prophesying.

In this thousand-year period, in some manner, he had a priestly ministry of intercession.

Verse six, Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection.

What is the first resurrection?

I'd argue it's the resurrection of the souls of the Old Testament martyrs during the Davidic millennium who went straight to heaven in their souls, as we saw in Revelation 6 and o- and other places, where they are enthroned, ruling and praying as priests over such.

Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection over such, the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ and they shall reign with Him a thousand years.

Turn to Hebrews chapter 11.

Hebrews chapter 11 describes the men of faith in the Old Testament.

The patriarchs perform certain actions that prefigure Christ, but let's look at Hebrews 11, verse 33 and following.

And what more shall I say?

Verse 32.

What more shall I say?

For time would fail to tell me of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthae, David and Samuel and the prophets, who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, received promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty to war, put foreign armies to flight.

All that is physical power.

But now look at verse 35 .

women recei- received their dead by resurrection through Elijah and Elisha.

Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a, literally, the Greek is, A better resurrection.

So, there are two resurrections here, in this, in the Old Testament.

You could get your dead back like Elijah and Elisha, raise the dead, or if you wanted a better resurrection, you could allow yourself to be tortured to death.

Others suffered, suffered mocking and scourging and even chains and imprisonment.

They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with a sword, they went about in skins of sheep and goats.

All of this only describes what happened from 500 BC till the coming of Christ.

Destitute, afflicted, ill-treated, of whom the world wasn't worthy.

Wandering over deserts and mountains and in dens and caves of the earth, and, and all these, though well attested by their faith did not receive what was promised since God has foreseen something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses.

That's the Book of Revelation describing witness, martus, testimony, marturia.

Here are these priestly witnesses in the heavenly cloud, cheering us on.

We're surrounded by a cloud of witnesses, those who have suffered in the Old Testament, who've been martyred, who've been tortured, and then have been, in effect, carried off like Elijah.

Their souls are now in heaven.

Not all the Old Testament faithful, David himself says he had to go to Sheol.

He didn't suffer.

He reigned in comfort and leisure.

But those of the Old Testament saints who experienced a lot of pain and suffering, redemptive suffering, who anticipated the nature of the law of the new covenant, got to share and anticipate the reign of the new covenant and the authority of the new covenant.

That's my interpretation.

It's interesting, we go on, you know, this cloud of witnesses, uh, let's look over at, uh, Hebrews 12, verse 22.

After describing this cloud of witnesses, You have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.

Also, look over at Hebrews 11, verse 13 and following.

Describing the Old Testament saints, These all died in faith, not having received what was promised, but having seen, having seen it and greeted from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.

For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland, but as it were their desire, a better Verse 15-16, But as it were their desire, a better country, that is a heavenly one.

Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared for them a city, a city whose builder and maker is God.

Look at Hebrews 13, verse 14.

For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city which is to come.

It's not the earthly Jerusalem anymore,

Mm-hmm.

that counts, it's the heavenly Jerusalem.

And it's the heavenly Jerusalem that these Old Testament martyrs and saints, who suffered so much, got to share, got to suffer.

Uh, not, not, not got to share and suffer, but got to share and, and they got to enter into it.

You can tell I'm kind of excited.

Sorry about that.

So, some Old Testament faithful go down to Sha- uh, Sheol or Hades.

Others don't pass Go but they collect, you know, they collect the They don't go to Sheol, they don't go to Hades, they go straight to heaven in some sense.

We don't know exactly how.

Spiritually, their souls.

Verse seven, And when the 1,000 years are ended, that is when Christ finally comes, and Herod and all of his demonic opinions have assumed control of Jerusalem, Satan will be loosed from his prison and will come out to deceive the nations, which are at the four corners of the earth.

That is Gog and Magog.

That's a reference to the famous battle described in Ezekiel 38 and 39.

Gog was the prince of the land of Gog or Magog.

Many people think that Gog and Magog refer to two people.

It's probable that Gog refers to the Prince of Magog, which is his land.

That's the way it works in Ezekiel 38, verse 2, and 39, verse 1, at least.

In order to understand this famous battle of Gog and Magog, perhaps it would be good just to turn briefly to Ezekiel 38 and 39.

Because I would argue that it's only if we understand the battle of Gog and Magog in its original setting, will we interpret it properly as it's found in Revelation 20.

Actually, let's just back up and skim through Ezekiel beginning in verse, in chapter, uh, Ezekiel 34.

In Ezekiel 34, we have a whole chapter devoted to how the Lord Himself will come again to shepherd His own people.

Because there are so many false shepherds, the Lord Himself will be shepherd of the flock.

Verse 23, And I will set over, up over them one shepherd, my servant David.

So I, the Lord, will shepherd them, but I will do so through David.

That's, of course, a symbol of Jesus, the son of David, when the Lord shepherds, uh, His people.

In verse, in, in Ezekiel 35, the whole chapter there is a prophecy against Mount Seir or the people of Edom.

Interesting that right after the Messiah comes to shepherd His people, a condemnation is given against Edom because Christ came, and who was his arch opponent?

Herod the Edomite.

In Ezekiel 36, we discover what the Messiah will do, beginning in verse 26.

A new heart I will give you.

A new spirit I will put within you.

I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and will give you a heart of flesh, and I'll put my spirit within you.

So here comes Christ in Ezekiel 34, facing Edom and Herod in Ezekiel 35, giving us new hearts in Ezekiel 36, giving us new spirits as well.

And as a result of the gift of the Spirit, Ezekiel 37 describes how the valley of dry bones will all be raised to new life, showing in effect how all Israel will come into a whole new life.

And it, again, it talked about how my servant, verse 24, My servant David shall be king over them and should, they should all have one shepherd.

So Jesus comes, faces King Herod, wins, pours out the Spirit, gives us a new heart and a new spirit, and enables all of Israel, in effect, to be spiritually raised to new life.

And then after Jesus does all this, that's when the battle of Gog and Magog occurs in Ezekiel 38 and 39.

As soon as the, the battle of Gog and Magog occurs in Ezekiel 38 and 39, and God's people are victorious So, we have Ezekiel 40 through 47, which describes the new Jerusalem and the new Temple.

Now, how does this apply to Revelation 20?

I would argue that John has taken the same sequence from Ezekiel to explain the Battle of Gog and Magog.

Gog and Magog has the same meaning in Revelation 20 that it had in Ezekiel.

Revelation 20, there's a little season.

When Jesus comes, Herod opposes him.

Jesus conquers, pours out the spirit upon us, giving us new hearts, spiritually resurrecting the valley of dry bones, which was Old Testament Israel, making them into his new covenant people.

All of a sudden there's this incredible war between the new covenant people of God, who have this new spirit and who have this new heart, and the old covenant people, who sided with Herod and opposed Jesus, and now oppose the people who have the new covenant, the new spirit, and the new heart.

And this is now the spiritual battle of Gog and Magog, and they come to make war, let's see here.

And will come out to deceive the nations which are at the four corners of the Earth, that is, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle, their numbers like the sand of the sea.

And they marched up over the broad Earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city.

So though, the battle now is against the camp of the saints, and I would argue that this is what's described This is what occurs between 30 AD and 70 AD.

In that 40-year period, the Romans are deceived by the Jews, so you have this unholy alliance teaming up against the Christians, and they make unholy war against the saints.

Notice that the saints are called the camp of the saints.

That's a re- That, that language, camp of the saints, is drawn from Ezekiel 29 I'm sorry, Exodus 29 and the Book of Leviticus, chapter 26.

The saints of God are called a camp only during the 40-year period of the wandering in the wilderness, after the Exodus but before entering the Promised Land.

That is a type of the 40 years between 30AD and 70 AD, when Jesus accomplishes the new Exodus.

But in 70AD, we have the full inheritance of the full Promised Land.

So the camp of the saints corresponds to the Exodus wilderness generation between 30AD and 70AD when they're ganged up on by the Romans and the Jews.

Then what happens?

Fire came down from heaven and consumed them.

That is, the opponents.

When does fire come down from heaven and oppose the enemies of the people of God?

Only one time that I know of, Genesis 18 and 19, Sodom and Gomorrah.

And the devil, who had deceived them, was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur.

Or literally, fire and brimstone.

Where do you have fire coming down from heaven, fire and brimstone at a lake?

Sodom and Gomorrah.

Where is Sodom and Gomorrah today?

We don't know.

It's at the bottom of the Dead Sea.

And what is the Dead Sea known for?

Salt.

What was Lot's wife turned into?

A pillar of salt.

What came down from heaven along with fire?

Brimstone.

The whole place smelled like sulfur.

And it became this ugly place of death, this sea of fire.

I would argue that Sodom is the image used to describe what happens to Jerusalem for opposing the people of God between 30 and 70 AD.

Why not?

What did we see in Revelation 11?

After the two witnesses were slain, they lie in the street of the great city, which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt where their Lord was crucified.

The devil, who had deceived them, was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they were tormented day and night forever and ever.

Christ has established a new covenant kingdom right now.

The old Jerusalem is a prototype of the new Jerusalem.

Where is the new Jerusalem?

Two places.

Completely in heaven, sacramentally on Earth.

Is the new Jer- Is the millennium then a thousand years?

Yes, in terms of its literal meaning, it was a Davidic Jerusalem back on Earth, back in the Old Testament for a thousand years.

But that symbolized or signifies the church age, which has now lasted almost 2,000 years.

But the ultimate thing, the ultimate reality that symbolizes is heaven itself, when you have the complete reality of the heavenly Jerusalem in heaven, in the, in the new creation, the new heavens and the new Earth.

In effect then, the, the prophecy from Ele- uh, Revelation 20, verse 11 to the end of the chapter, is going to blur images of reality in the new covenant down here with the reality at the end of time.

Then I saw a great white throne.

That refers back to Jesus' throne in Revelation 4, verse 2, and in Revelation 6:14.

And him who sat upon it, from his presence, uh, I saw a great white throne, and him who sat upon it, from his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them.

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and the books were opened.

I would argue here that we have, in effect, the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, but what does that prefigure?

What have I argued all along that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD prefigures?

When the old covenant Temple is destroyed, that points forward to the whole cosmic Temple being destroyed.

So that's why John's vision can have images from both periods, the first century, and the end of history: because the destruction of the Temple foreshadows the end of creation.

We're gonna have to pick up here next week and just spend about five or 10 minutes on the end of Revelation 20, verses 12 through 15, those, the last three verses, and then dive into Revelation 21 and 22.

Let's close in a word of prayer.

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, amen.