1/16/19

"THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS" The Basis For Spiritual Security (6:9-20) by Mark Copeland


"THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS"

The Basis For Spiritual Security (6:9-20)

INTRODUCTION

1. We have seen the author of "The Epistle To The Hebrews" express his
   concern for the initial recipients of this epistle...
   a. He makes mention of their spiritual immaturity - He 5:11-14
   b. He warns them of the peril of not progressing - He 6:1-8

2. While he writes in this way, he has great confidence for their 
   ultimate salvation...
   a. Though others had indeed fallen to the point where it was 
      "impossible...to renew them again to repentance..." - He 6:4-6
   b. Yet he could say of them, "we are confident of better things
      concerning you, yes, things which accompany salvation..." - He 6:9

3. What was it that gave the author confidence regarding his readers' salvation?
   a. I.e., what was the basis for their spiritual security, when the 
      danger of apostasy had just been described in vivid detail?
   b. What can we glean from this passage that may help us understand
      the basis for our own spiritual security?

[There are three things mentioned in this section of scripture (He 6:
9-20), that gave the author his confidence.  The first of which is the fact...]

I. GOD DOES NOT FORGET OUR WORK AND LABOR OF LOVE (9-10)

   A. GOD IS A JUST GOD, ONE WHO DOES NOT FORGET...
      1. He is very much aware of our service in the PAST ("in that you
         have ministered")
         a. Service that has been shown toward Him ("toward His name")
         b. Service that has been shown toward His servants ("to the saints")
      2. He is very much aware of our service in the PRESENT ("and do minister")

   B. KNOWING THIS CAN BE A SOURCE OF GREAT COMFORT...
      1. In contrast to every sin which is "blotted out" and 
         "remembered no more" (cf. He 8:12), service rendered in love
         to God is not forgotten!
      2. We need not fear that God will not see or remember our efforts
         to be pleasing to Him
         a. God seeks to show Himself strong to those who are loyal to Him - cf. 2Ch 16:9
         b. If He took note of Cornelius' desire to please Him in his 
            unsaved state, how much more will He take note of His 
            children's effort to serve Him! - cf. Ac 10:1-6
      -- Thus when we stumble, but repent of our sins, our labor of 
         love is remembered and our sins forgotten!

[Knowing that God sees and does not forget our service of love, both 
past and present, should help us feel spiritually secure. But note that
what He does not forget is our "work and labor of love", which implies
the need for...]

II. DILIGENCE, FAITH, AND PATIENCE ON OUR PART (11-12)

   A. NOTE THE AUTHOR'S DESIRE...
      1. That his readers' show the same diligence (earnestness) they
         had shown in the past
         a. Diligent regarding their assurance of hope
         b. Diligent until the end - cf. He 3:6,14
      2. That they do not become sluggish
         a. The word "sluggish" is from a Greek word meaning "dull"
         b. The same word as used in "dull of hearing" - cf. He 5:11
         -- They were already dull of hearing; his desire is they not
            become dull in conduct!
      3. That they have faith and patience
         a. Imitating "those who through faith and patience inherit the promises"
         b. Such as Abraham, who is given as an example later - He 6:15

   B. THESE QUALITIES ARE NECESSARY FOR SPIRITUAL SECURITY...
      1. Peter describes the need for diligence to "make your calling
         and election sure" - 2Pe 1:5,10-11
      2. Jesus called upon His disciples to remain faithful if they 
         wished to "receive the crown of life" - Re 2:10
      3. Paul wrote that eternal life is for those "who by patient 
         continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor and 
         immortality" - Ro 2:7; cf. also He 10:36

[Only by developing such virtues as diligence, faith, and patience can
we rightfully have an assurance that we will one day "inherit the
promises". Without them, we become sluggish, and as such expose 
ourselves to the danger of apostasy.

To encourage us further, we note that another reason we can have
spiritual security is because...]

III. GOD KEEPS HIS PROMISES (13-20)

   A. THE EXAMPLE OF GOD'S PROMISE TO ABRAHAM...
      1. God made a promise to Abraham - He 6:13-15
         a. In which He swore by Himself (because He could not swear by anyone higher)
         b. A promise which Abraham obtained after patient endurance 
            - cf. v.15 with v.12
      2. God confirmed His promise with an oath - He 6:16-18a
         a. For men, an oath confirms what they say, ending all dispute
         b. To assure us of the unchangeableness of His promise, God 
            also swore an oath
         c. This provided a double assurance that He would keep His promise:
            1) One, because it impossible for God to lie anyway - cf. Tit 1:2
            2) Two, because of the oath by which He confirmed it
      -- How does this relate to our spiritual security?  Read on...

   B. GOD'S FAITHFULNESS IS OUR ASSURANCE!
      1. It gives us "strong consolation" - He 6:18b-19b
         a. We who are seeking refuge
         b. We who need "an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast"
      2. This is especially true regarding our "hope", which is Jesus!
         - He 6:19b-20
         a. I understand Jesus to be the "hope" in this passage...
            1) For He is "our hope", to whom we can flee as a refuge 
               - cf. 1Ti 1:1
            2) As such, He is our "anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast"
         b. As a forerunner, He has entered "the Presence behind the
            veil" (i.e., heaven)
         c. He has become "High Priest forever according to the order
            of Melchizedek"
            1) Even as God swore He would do - cf. Ps 110:4
            2) God not only promised, but He swore an oath, just like 
               He did for Abraham
         -- So He has kept His promise, providing us a superior High Priest!
      3. Upon such an example of God's faithfulness, we can have an 
         assurance of our salvation as long as we continue to lay hold
         of the "hope" (Jesus) set before us

CONCLUSION

1. With a finely crafted argument, the author has returned his readers
   back to his original subject, which is Jesus as "a priest forever 
   according to the order of Melchizedek"
   a. Our spiritual security is first based upon the character of God...
      1) Who is not unjust to forget our work and labor of love
      2) Who keeps His promises
   b. God has promised and swore with an oath concerning the priesthood
      of the Messiah
   c. This priesthood Jesus now has in heaven, and as such is the basis
      of our "hope"
   -- For which reason we should seek to learn what we can about the 
      priesthood of Jesus

2. Yet as wonderful are the character and promises of God, we are not 
   to take them for granted...
   a. We must be careful not to become sluggish
   b. We must be careful to be diligent, imitating the faith and
      patience of those like Abraham who obtained God's promise for them
   -- Together with God's character and promises, this is "The Basis
      For Spiritual Security"

Have you fled to Jesus for refuge?  Is He your "hope", your "anchor of
the soul, both sure and steadfast"?  Is He your "High Priest"?  If so,
then let these words sink deep into your heart:

   "And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence to 
   the full assurance of hope until the end, that you do not become
   sluggish, but imitate those who through faith and patience inherit
   the promises." (He 6:11-12)

If you have not yet fled to Jesus for refuge, then please consider His
tender invitation:

   "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will 
   give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am
   gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
   For My yoke is easy and My burden is light." (Mt 11:28-30)

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 

Will Those Who Have Never Heard the Gospel Be Lost? by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. Jim Estabrook

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=423


Will Those Who Have Never Heard the Gospel Be Lost?

by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.
Jim Estabrook


We live on a planet populated by approximately six billion people. Six billion! And most of those, it probably would be safe to say, never have been afforded the opportunity of hearing the gospel message about the salvation that comes through Jesus Christ. Therefore, obviously, they cannot respond in obedience to that saving message—even though they might be willing to do so if presented with the prospect. What will happen to these people? Will they be lost eternally? Or will God make some kind of “special allowance” so that they can be saved and thereby enjoy eternity in heaven with Him and His Son?
As we examine these kinds of questions, it is vitally important that we remember two points. First, “the Judge of all the Earth” will “do right” (Genesis 18:25). God is every bit as infinite in His mercy and His grace (Hosea 6:6; Matthew 9:13) as He is in His justice and His severity (Hebrews 10:31). Second, since it is the Word of God that instructs us regarding man’s eternal destiny, and since all men eventually will be judged by that Word (John 12:48), it is to God’s Word that we must go to find answers to inquiries concerning mankind’s ultimate destiny. Fortunately, in His wisdom, God has not left us to our own devices concerning matters that relate to our salvation. As Jeremiah wisely observed: “It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps” (10:23).

WILL A “LOVING GOD” CONDEMN PEOPLE
WHO HAVE NEVER HEARD THE GOSPEL?

There are those who suggest that surely God would not banish from His presence for eternity those who never had an opportunity to hear and obey the gospel message in the first place. Consider the following examples. In his 1909 volume, Systematic Theology, A.H. Strong wrote:

Since Christ is the Word of God and the Truth of God, he may be received even by those who have not heard of his manifestation in the flesh.... We have, therefore, the hope that even among the heathen there may be some...who under the guidance of the Holy Spirit working through the truth of nature and conscience, have found the way to life and salvation (p. 843, emp. added).

Approximately fifty years later, popular evangelical theologian Karl Barth defended such a concept via what he called his “biblical universalism.” He wrote: “We have no theological right to set any sort of limits to the lovingkindness of God” (as quoted in Dyrness, 1983, p. 105). In commenting on Barth’s viewpoint, apologist Cornelius Van Til wrote:

For Barth, man, as sinner, is, to be sure, under the wrath of God, but this wrath is, itself, a form of the all-overreaching grace of God. There is no eternal punishment for those who are in Christ [because] there are no men who are not in Christ (1965, p. 38, emp. added).

Another modern-day evangelical, Neil Punt, invoked Barthian ideas in his book, Unconditional Good News, wherein he rejected the idea that sinners actually must believe and obey the gospel in order to be saved because “It is an error to think that there is anything that must be done to inherit eternal life” (1980, p. 135, emp. added). In What the Bible Says about Salvation, Virgil Warren wrote:

Even some two thousand years after the Great Commission, more people in the world have not heard the gospel than have heard it. The secret things do belong to God, but Christians and non-Christians alike cannot help wondering about the justice as well as the compassion of a God who assigns to eternal torment people who, for reasons beyond their control, never heard about fellowship with him through Jesus Christ.... Our opinion is that scripture does not automatically assign the unevangelized to endless hell (1982, pp. 104-105, first emp. in orig., last emp. added).

In their book, Answers to Tough Questions, Josh McDowell and Don Stewart stated:

Although the Scriptures never explicitly teach that someone who has never heard of Jesus can be saved, we do not believe that it infers [sic] this. We do believe that every person will have an opportunity to repent, and that God will not exclude anyone because he happened to be born at the wrong place and at the wrong time (1993, p. 137).

Statements such as these certainly could cause some to conclude that God simply will not judge the lost, but instead will deem them worthy of eternal salvation merely (or solely!) because they never had an opportunity in their lifetimes to hear the “good news” made available to humankind through the gospel of Christ. While at first glance such a notion may appear comforting, and may appease our human sensitivities, the truth of the matter is that it has monstrous theological and spiritual implications. Consider these facts.

CHRIST’S GREAT COMMISSION AND MAN’S
ALIENATION FROM GOD BECAUSE OF HIS SIN

First—in light of the commands inherent in the Great Commission given by the Lord Himself prior to His ascension back into heaven—how can we entertain any suggestion that the “unevangelized” will be saved? Christ’s instructions were crystal clear: “Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you...” (Matthew 28:19-20). If the view is correct that the unevangelized peoples of the world will be redeemed without ever having been exposed to (and obeying) the gospel, then potentially we could be doing them great harm if we carry out the Lord’s command and teach them the truth. By introducing them to the gospel, we might well be condemning those who otherwise would have been saved. When R.C. Sproul wrote his book, Reason to Believe, he expended considerable effort in explaining why such a position is unscriptural. He prefaced his discussion with the following statements:

The unspoken assumption at this point is that the only damnable offense against God is the rejection of Christ. Since the native is not guilty of this, we ought to let him alone. In fact, letting him alone would be the most helpful thing we could do for him. If we go to the native and inform him of Christ, we place his soul in eternal jeopardy. For now he knows of Christ, and if he refuses to respond to Him, he can no longer claim ignorance as an excuse. Hence, the best service we can render is silence (1981, p. 50).

Ponder the situation of a person who never has the opportunity to hear the gospel. If the ideas expressed in some of the above quotations are correct, then that person will be saved necessarily. But what about the person to whom we present the gospel message, and who then, of his or her own personal volition, chooses (for whatever reason) to reject it? Having spurned God’s offer of salvation through His Son, can such a one then be saved? Not according to God’s Word!

The writer of the book of Hebrews noted: “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more a sacrifice for sins” (10:26). In Luke 13:34-35, Christ Himself lamented the rejection of the gospel message by His own Jewish brethren (who had been presented with the gospel message, but had rebuffed it repeatedly).

Oh Jerusalem, Jerusalem,...how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her own brood under her wings, and ye would notBehold, your house is left unto you desolate: and I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until ye shall say, “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Luke 13:34-35, emp. added).

Consider, too, the important spiritual principle set forth in Hebrews 6:4-6, which, although admittedly speaking about people who once had accepted Christ as their Savior and then had abandoned their faith in Him, nevertheless mentions those who at one time were “enlightened” about Who He was and the salvation He offered—only to reject both Him and that salvation. Would it not, then (if the views discussed above are correct), be better simply to keep the Word of God “a secret” from the heathen and the unevangelized so that they—as a result of their ignorance—can be saved and not be put in the position of knowing the gospel message and possibly rejecting it? In their book, I’m Glad You Asked, authors Kenneth Boa and Larry Moody correctly observed:

Those who have heard the Gospel and rejected it are doubly guilty—they have rejected not only the Father but also the Son. And the Scriptures are clear about the judgment which awaits those who have refused God’s offer of salvation. The wrath of God abides on them (John 3:36; cf. Heb. 2:3; 10:26-31) [1982, p. 160].

Second, those who suggest that the heathen and unevangelized will be saved “as a result of their ignorance” of God’s law have failed to realize that such people are lost, not because they are ignorant of God’s law, but because they have sinned against Him. Almost all humans recognize (albeit begrudgingly, at times) that ignorance of the law does not excuse us from the law’s penalties and/or punishments. [“But officer, I didn’t know the speed limit was 15 miles per hour in the school zone.” “Yes, sir. The courthouse is open 8 to 5, Monday through Friday. You may pay the $150 speeding citation at any time during those hours. Have a nice day.”] One must distinguish between knowledge of a law and the existence of a law. If one must know the law before he can transgressthe law, then there would be no such thing as a “sin of ignorance.” Yet the Bible speaks plainly of that very thing (Leviticus 4:2,22, 27; Acts 3:17; 17:30-31). Ignorance of the law is neither a legitimate excuse nor an effective guarantee of salvation.

Paul wrote in Romans 2:12: “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law.” In his commentary on the book of Romans, R.C.H. Lenski discussed Paul’s statement about those who “perish without the law” when he wrote:

The only difference will be that those without the law will merely perish without the law, while those with law will be judged by means of law—two routes that lead to the same goalJustice will be prominent in both instances; for the Judge will not apply law to those who ended as nothing but sinners without using anything like real law—that would be unfair. Nor will he need law in the case of these—they merely perish as the sinners that they are. The only fair thing in the case of others who made law their boast will be that the Judge uses this means when he pronounces judgment on them; and the fact that this judgment will be one of condemnation is plain: “they did sin” exactly as those “did sin” of whom Paul just said “they will perish” (1961, p. 158, emp. added).

When people are lost, it is due to their having sinned against God. Isaiah wrote:

Behold, Jehovah’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: but your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, so that he will not hear (59:1-2).

Boa and Moody commented:

Sin is a universal human condition (1 Kings 8:46; Ps. 51:5, Romans 3:9,23; 1 John 1:8), and it causes a breach between man and God (Isa. 59:2). Sin leads to death (Romans 6:23), and the wrath of God abides on all who are separate from Christ (John 3:18,36). All have sinned, and those who have not been “justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Romans 3:24) are under divine condemnation (Romans 3:10-20; 5:16-19) and must stand before God in judgment, because apart from Christ we are enemies of God (Romans 5:10).... People are not lost because they have not heardThey are lost because they are sinners. We die because of disease, not because of ignorance of the proper cure (1982, p. 147, emp. added).

Man is lost as a result of being afflicted with the horrible “disease” of sin—a condition that, unless treated, always is fatal (Romans 6:23). Because God is depicted within Scripture not only as loving (2 Corinthians 13:11; 1 John 4:7-16) and merciful (James 5:11), but also as holy (Psalm 22:3) and just (Psalm 89:14; Isaiah 45:19; Revelation 16:7), He cannot (and will not!) overlook sinIt must be (and will be!) punished. But is there a remedy for this terminal disease known as “sin”? And if so, what is it?

Yes, fortunately there is a remedy for mankind’s otherwise lethal condition. He can have his sins forgiven. The great Old Testament prophet Isaiah wrote: “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool, if ye be willing and obedient” (Isaiah 1:18-19). The key phrase, of course, is “willing and obedient.” But willing to do what? And obedient to what command? To be washed in the cleansing blood of Jesus Christ as God has decreed! The blood of bulls and goats never was able to take away man’s sins, no matter how unblemished the sacrificial animal(s) may have been. But the blood of Christ can (Hebrews 10:4-18).And it is the only thing that will! The Scriptures speak clearly to this fact when they state that Christ shed His blood on the cross for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3; Romans 5:8-9), and that He is the “lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world” (John 1:29). Furthermore, it is only through Christ that a person can be saved from the wrath of God (cf. Romans 5:1, 8:1, and Hebrews 10:31).

The inspired writers of the New Testament placed great emphasis upon the necessity of being “in Christ.” In the American Standard Version of the Bible, the phrase “in Christ” appears 89 times in 88 verses. The New Testament makes it clear that it is only when a person is “in Christ” that he has “redemption” (Romans 3:24), “eternal life” (Romans 6:23), “every spiritual blessing” (Ephesians 1:3), “forgiveness” (Colossians 1:14), and “salvation” (2 Timothy 2:10). Those who have been baptized “into Christ” (which is how the Bible tells us we get into Christ—Galatians 3:27; Romans 6:3-4) will not be condemned (Romans 8:1). What is the logical implication? Those outside of Christ will not have forgiveness, salvation, or eternal life, but will be condemned for their sins. Whether a person has never heard of Christ or whether he simply has heard of Him but not obeyed Him, that person is outside of Christ. According to the apostle Paul, any person who fits into either category will be lost eternally. He said that Jesus will render “vengeance to them that know not God” and to those who “obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thessalonians 1:8). He further described these unbelievers as those “who shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thessalonians 1:9).

While it is true that knowledge of both God’s existence and His “everlasting power and divinity” may be gleaned from the general revelation He has provided of Himself in nature (cf. Romans 1:19-20, Psalm 19:1, Acts 14:17, and Hebrews 3:4), that revelation is limited, and cannot explain to man what to do to be saved. As impressive, as powerful, and as pervasive as general revelation is, it nevertheless is deficient in and of itself. For many, nature has ceased to be a perspicuous revelation of God. It may have been so before sin entered the world, but even if it were, man’s nature now has become so polluted that he steadfastly refuses to read the divine script around him. General revelation simply is not enough. It never was intended to be. It does not afford man the reliable knowledge of the nature of God, of his sin against God, of his need for Jesus Christ as his Savior, and other important spiritual information that he absolutely must know in order to be saved. It therefore is inadequate (by itself) as the sole foundation of a person’s faith. From nature alone, man never would be able to infer the need for a personal Savior.

That fact—that from nature alone man never would be able to infer the need for a personal Savior—is critically important in the present discussion. As J.I. Packer noted: “The Bible says that God’s general revelation, even when correctly grasped, yields knowledge of creation, providence, and judgment only, not of grace that restores sinners to fellowship with God” (1973, p. 115, emp. added). This assessment is correct. If a person does not know that he stands in need of a personal Savior; if he does not know Who that Savior is; if he does not know how to be “willingly obedient” to that Savior; and if he does not know how to appropriate the salvation that comes only through that Savior, then how can he possibly know how to get rid of his sins in order to stand sanctified before God? Jesus Himself said in John 14:6: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me” (emp. added). In a discussion of this verse, Gene Burgett noted:

The phrase “no one cometh unto the Father, but by me” is clearly a universal negative which states in positive terms, “all men who come to the Father, come by me.” If the only ones who come to the Father are those who come by way of Jesus Christ, then it is apparent that all who do not know Jesus will be lost. There can be no salvation in Buddha, Mohammed, Hari Krishna, or any other name other than the name of Jesus (Acts 4:12) [1993, p. 176, emp. in orig.].

If people could be saved in times past—and can be saved today—without the sacrifice of God’s Son (and they cannot—cf. Hebrews 10:4-10 and Acts 4:12), then why would God have sent Him to Earth in the first place?!

The fact of the matter is, God promised salvation only to those who hear the gospel message (Romans 10:17), believe on His Son (John 3:16), confess Christ’s name (Matthew 10:32-33), repent of their sins (Luke 13:3), have those sins remitted through baptism (Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21), and remain faithful (Revelation 2:10). Subsequent to the Day of Pentecost, Peter called upon his listeners to: “Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out” (Acts 3:19). The word for “blotted out” derives from a Greek word meaning to “wipe out, erase, or obliterate.” The New Testament uses the word to refer to “blotting out” the old law (Colossians 2:14) and to “blotting out” a person’s name from the Book of Life (Revelation 3:5). One of the great prophetical utterances of the Old Testament was that “their sin will I remember no more” (Jeremiah 31:34).

There was no happy solution to the justice/mercy dilemma. There was no way that God could remain just (since justice demands that the wages of sin be paid) and yet save His Son from death. Christ was abandoned to the cross so that mercy could be extended to sinners who stood condemned (Romans 3:23; 6:23). God could not save sinners by fiat—upon the ground of mere authority alone—without violating His own attribute of divine justice. Paul discussed God’s response to this problem in Romans 3:24-26 when he stated that those who are saved are

...justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, in his blood...for the showing of his righteousness...that he might himself be just and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus.

Mankind’s salvation was no arbitrary arrangement. God did not decide merely to consider men sinners, and then determine to save them via a principle of mercy and grace. Sin had placed men in a state of antagonism toward God that was so severe, men were referred to by inspiration as God’s “enemies” (Romans 5:10). Mankind’s sin could be forgiven, and men once again could become God’s friends, only as a result of the vicarious death of God’s Son.

CONCLUSION

Some have suggested that Christians are narrow-minded when they suggest that mankind’s salvation can be found only in Jesus Christ. Truth, however, is narrow! In addressing this point, Kurt DeHaan wrote:

Would you call a nutritionist narrow-minded if he said that a human can’t survive very long without food or water? Is an aerospace engineer pigheaded to propose that the only way to fly to the moon is by spacecraft, not by hang glider? Is it scientific bigotry to say that gasoline can burn but water cannot? Is it mathematical prejudice to claim that two plus two equals four, not three, five, or twenty-two? The issue is a matter of truth, not a matter of bigotry or prejudice (1988, p. 4).

Truth is a precious and priceless commodity—which no doubt explains why the Proverbs writer admonished: “Buy the truth, and sell it not” (23:23). Jesus Himself said: “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32, emp. added).

But what about sincerity? Does it count for nothing? While sincerity certainly is important in a relationship with God, the fact of the matter is that God does not want just sincerity; He wants obedience. Saul (who later would be called Paul) was “sincere” in his persecution of Christ’s church, and even did what he did to oppose it “in all good conscience” (Acts 23:1; 22:19-20; Galatians 1:13; 1 Corinthians 15:9), yet God struck him blind (Acts 9:3-9). Paul later would admit in his own writings that he was sincere, but sincerely wrong. DeHaan observed:

Isn’t it enough to be sincere? No, it’s not. Sincerity is important, but it’s not an adequate substitute for knowing the truth. Sincerity doesn’t pass a college entrance exam. Sincerity doesn’t win an automobile race. Sincerity doesn’t repair a broken washing machine. Sincerity won’t bake the perfect cake. And sincerity won’t pay your rent or mortgage. Sincerity will not fill the gap when there is a lack of skill or knowledge, nor will all the sincerity in the world transform error into truth (1988, p. 8, emp. added).

While the Lord certainly wants us to be sincere, He also requires something else, which is why He instructed: “If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments” (John 14:15).

The truth of the Lord is narrow, as Jesus made clear in His beautiful Sermon on the Mount (read specifically Matthew 7:13-14). In fact, Christ observed: “Not everyone that saith unto me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21). Jesus later commented on the attitude of the people of His day when He said: “This people honoreth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men” (Matthew 15:8-9).

Consider, for example, the account related in 2 Samuel 6 about Uzzah. God had given the Israelites explicit instructions about the construction of the Ark of the Covenant (see Exodus 25:10-22). It was to be made of acacia wood and covered with gold. It was to have two gold-covered, acacia-wood rings on each side, through which two gold-covered, acacia-wood staves could be placed in the event that it had to be moved (Exodus 37:1-5). But He also had given the Israelites explicit instructions about the transportation of the Ark. It was to be carried only by those from the priestly tribe of Levi, specifically the Kohathites (Numbers 7:9). [The Kohathites descended from Kohath, the second son of Levi; the other two groups were the Gershonites and Merarites (cf. Numbers 3:17ff.). The members of the tribe of Levi also were charged with carrying other items of religious significance, including the altars, lampstand, sanctuary vessels, etc., associated with the Tabernacle (see Numbers 3:31).] The Ark was to be moved only after it had been appropriately covered by a blue cloth. And the Israelites (even the Kohathites) were commanded—upon penalty of death—never to touch the Ark (Numbers 4:15,19-20).

King David had ignored each of God’s commands in regard to the transportation of the Ark. God had not commanded that the Ark be moved, and it certainly was not being moved in the manner prescribed by His law. The Ark had been placed on an ox cart being tended by two brothers—Uzzah and Ahio (the latter of whom, apparently, was driving the cart). The text says simply: “the oxen stumbled.” Uzzah—no doubt believing that the precious cargo was about to tumble from the cart and be dashed to bits—reached up to steady the Ark. And the moment Uzzah touched the Ark, God struck him dead!

Was Uzzah sincere in his attempt to protect one of the Israelites’ most priceless and treasured possessions? Undoubtedly he was. But his sincerity was for nought because he disobeyed. Note specifically the Bible’s statement that “God smote him there for his error” (2 Samuel 6:7). God’s commands were explicit; His truth was narrow. Uzzah ignored that truth—and died for having done so.

Will those who never have heard the gospel be lost—even though they might be “sincere”? Indeed they will be! Their separation from God throughout eternity will have been caused by two factors: (1) they sinned against God; and (2) they had not been taught—and thus were not able to take advantage of—the gospel plan of salvation that was offered to all men as the free gift of God (Romans 5:15-21; 6:23b) to restore them to a covenant relationship with Him.

For those of us who do know the truth regarding what men must do to be saved, the burden to share that truth with those who do not know it presses down with unrelenting fury. When Philip stood in the chariot of the Ethiopian eunuch who had been to Jerusalem to worship, he asked: “Understandest thou what thou readest?” That Ethiopian gentleman’s response still burns in our ears over two thousand years later: “How can I, except some one shall guide me?” (Acts 8:30-31). That is the Christian’s job—to gently guide the lost into “the way of salvation” (Acts 16:17). In 2 Corinthians 4:5-7, Paul wrote:

For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake.... But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power may be of God, and not from ourselves.

A chapter earlier, the apostle had reminded those first-century Christians at Corinth: “Ye are...an epistle of Christ...written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh” (2 Corinthians 3:2-3).

What a blessed opportunity—and onerous responsibility—to be the “earthen vessel,” the “living epistle,” used by the Lord to bring another soul back into His fold. Realizing that “he who converteth a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall cover a multitude of sins” (James 5:20), and knowing the “goodness and severity of God” (Romans 11:22), dare we countenance failure? No! Speaking on God’s behalf, the prophet Ezekiel warned:

I have made thee a watchman.... Therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, “Thou shalt surely die,” and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thy hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul (Ezekiel 3:17-19, emp. added).

Those who never have heard—and thus never have obeyed—the truth of the gospel message will be lost! And if we do not do our utmost to get that message to them—so will we! While the unevangelized may be lost, they do not have to remain lost. And we may be all that stands between them and an eternity of separation from God.

REFERENCES

Boa, Kenneth and Larry Moody (1982), I’m Glad you Asked (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books).
Burgett, Gene (1993), “What About Those Who Have Never Heard?,” Whatever Happened to Heaven and Hell?, ed. Terry M. Hightower (San Antonio, TX: Shenandoah Church of Christ).
DeHaan, Kurt (1988), What About Those Who Have Never Heard? (Grand Rapids, MI: Radio Bible Class), [a tract].
Dyrness, William (1983), Christian Apologetics in a World Community (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press).
Lenski, R.C.H. (1961), The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).
McDowell, Josh and Don Stewart (1993), Answers to Tough Questions (Nashville, TN: Nelson).
Packer, J.I. (1973), “Are Non-Christian Faiths Ways of Salvation?,” [Part IV of a series titled, “The Way of Salvation”], Bibliotheca Sacra, April.
Punt, Neil (1980), Unconditional Good News (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Sproul, R.C. (1981), Reason to Believe (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Strong, A.H. (1909), Systematic Theology (Philadelphia, PA: Judson Press).
Van Til, Cornelius (1965), Karl Barth and Evangelicalism (Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed).
Warren, Virgil (1982), What the Bible Says about Salvation (Joplin, MO: College Press).

Will There be an Armageddon? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=952


Will There be an Armageddon?

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


Many religionists insist that world history will culminate in a cataclysmic global holocaust known as “Armageddon,” followed by the “Millennium”—a 1000-year reign of Christ on Earth. They say that current events in the Middle East are arranging themselves in such a fashion that the Second Coming of Christ is imminent. Of course, this claim has been made repeatedly for many, many years—with no fulfillment forthcoming.

What does the Bible actually say about “Armageddon”? The term “armageddon” occurs only once in the New Testament: Revelation 16:16. In keeping with the literary genre of the book (i.e., apocalyptic), the term is used with figurative connotations. Revelation is literally packed with allusions to the Old Testament. In fact, “no book in the New Testament is so thoroughly steeped in the thought and imagery of the Hebrew Scriptures” (Swete, 1911, p. liii). But the writer does not use direct quotes from the Old Testament. Rather, he adapted, modified, and combined ideas from the Old Testament in order to apply them to the setting to which he addressed himself. He drew freely from Old Testament imagery, but placed a New Testament spin on them with a first century application.

For those who would be familiar with the Old Testament (as Asia Minor Christians would have been), the Holy Spirit capitalized on the meaning that this location possessed. In Hebrew, the term “Harmageddon” means “mountain (or hill) of Megiddo.” Was there a hill of Megiddo? Yes. In fact, Jews and students of Hebrew history were only too familiar with this prominent battlefield and vicinity. Many bloody encounters stained the soil of this region—scenes of military disaster. It was here that Deborah and Barak defeated the Canaanites (Judges 5:19). Gideon was victorious over the Midianites in this region (Judges 7). These positive accomplishments were etched into the Israelite consciousness. But there were other images evoked by Megiddo, for it also served as a place where national tragedy had occurred. Ahaziah died there after being pierced by Jehu’s arrow (2 Kings 9:27). And good King Josiah perished tragically at the hands of Pharaoh Necho (2 Kings 23:29). This last incident was especially poignant to the minds of the Jewish people, who mourned the loss of this great king, enshrining the event in the collective consciousness as an instance of national grief (Zechariah 12:11).

With this long historical background, Megiddo came to occupy a place in the minds of believers similar to places which immediately bring to the American mind definite and strong impressions: the Alamo, Pearl Harbor, etc. This significance was then utilized by the Holy Spirit to convey to struggling, persecuted Christians of Asia Minor near the end of the first century the sure outcome of the conflict then being waged between the forces of evil (Satan and imperial Rome) and the forces of righteousness (God, Christ, and faithful saints who were enduring persecution). These Christians were certainly in no need of assurance that some future global holocaust would occur which Christ would bring to an end 2,000 years removed from their suffering! These Christians were in dire need of assurance that Christ would come to their aid soon (see “shortly”—Revelation 1:1; 22:6). They needed encouragement to hang on, and to remain steadfast in the face of inhuman mistreatment. The symbol of Megiddo fitly symbolized the impending overthrow of an enemy empire, and engendered much needed assurance. Christians were given the solace that soon the outcome of the battle would be realized. The enemies of God and His People would be punished, while suffering saints would be comforted. Thus “armageddon” is purely symbolic, and in no way relates to dispensational dreams of a future world war. There will be no “Armageddon.”

REFERENCES

Swete, Henry (1911), Commentary on Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1977 reprint).

Will There be an "Antichrist"? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1209


Will There be an "Antichrist"?

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


The long history of failed attempts to identify the so-called “Antichrist” would be humorous if it were not so tragic. Candidates for this personage have included Nero, Napoleon, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Kruschev, and Saddam Hussein. The “mark of the beast” that the Antichrist allegedly causes people to receive has been associated with social security numbers, UPC barcodes, WWW—the World Wide Web, and even the IRS (a much more tempting postulation, to be sure). These endless shenanigans could be avoided if the Bible were taken seriously and impure motives were replaced by an honest pursuit of truth.

As a matter of fact, the term “antichrist” occurs only five times in Scripture, only in the writing of John, and only in two of his five books: 1 John 2:18,22; 4:3; 2 John 7. The implications are significant. Dispensationalists do not go to 1 and 2 John when they discuss the Antichrist. They go to Revelation, or 2 Thessalonians, or Daniel. They go to passages that do not even use the word Antichrist!

Contrary to current claims, John applied the term “antichrist” to more than one individual, and to individuals who were living then—in the first century! For example, 1 John 2:18 states that numerous antichrists had arisen in John’s day, and he therefore contended that “it is the last hour” (i.e., the final period of religious history commonly referred to as “the last days,” as in Acts 2:16-17). He then described their behavior as “not of God” (1 John 4:3). “Antichrists” were simply anyone who denied Christ (1 John 2:22). John, therefore, labeled any such deluded soul as “the deceiver” and “the antichrist” (2 John 7). Notice the use of the article. John was saying that people living in his own day who denied the incarnation of Jesus were to be regarded as the antichrist! Not just an antichrist—but the antichrist! The idea that the term “antichrist” is to be applied to some “future fuehrer” (Lindsey, 1970, pp. 87ff.) who will draw the world into a global holocaust is totally out of harmony with John’s inspired use of the term.

The primary passage that is used to support the notion of an antichrist is Revelation 13:1-10. Several points regarding the context of the book of Revelation and its proper interpretation lead to the understanding that the seven-headed sea beast was a symbol for the then monstrous emperor of Rome who was responsible for unleashing horrible atrocities upon Christians of Asia Minor in the latter years of the first century A.D. (Summers, 1951, pp. 174-175; Swete, 1911, pp. 161ff.). The two-horned land beast (Revelation 13:11-18), who enforced worship of the sea beast, referred to the official governmental organization known as the Roman Concilia that was responsible for supporting and regulating all details relative to emperor worship (Summers, pp. 178-179; Swete, pp. 168ff.). This evil legal entity was authorized to instigate economic sanctions against those who refused to appropriate the “mark” of the beast, “mark” being a symbol for the proof of their submission to Caesar worship (vs. 17). With this understanding of Revelation 13, it is unscriptural and unbiblical to identify the sea beast in Revelation 13 with some future revived Roman dictator known as the “Antichrist.”

A second passage that some say predicts an Antichrist is Daniel 9:24-27. Notice carefully the content of this marvelous prophecy. During the prophetic period that Daniel identified in terms of seventy symbolic weeks (vs. 24), transgression, sin, and iniquity would be “finished,” “ended,” and “reconciliation provided for.” This terminology clearly refers to Christ’s sacrifice upon the cross (Hebrews 9:26). The effect of Christ’s atoning work was that “everlasting righteousness” was ushered in. As Paul stated: “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21; cf. Jeremiah 23:5-6). Because of what Jesus did, individuals may now stand before God completely righteous through obedient faith. Likewise, “vision” and “prophecy” would be “sealed up.” This refers to the inevitable termination of Old Testament prophecy and its fulfillment in Christ’s appearance in human history: “Yes, and all the prophets from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days” (Acts 3:24; Hebrews 1:1-2). Finally, the phrase in Daniel 9:24 that speaks of the “anointing” of the “most holy” refers to the public ministry and official crowning of Jesus as He took His place upon His throne to rule in His kingdom. Isaiah said: “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, because the Lord has anointed Me to preach good tidings to the poor” (61:1). On the day of Pentecost, Peter said: “Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God” (Acts 2:33). Notice that Daniel summarized the entire seventy-week period by including all of these six factors in the seventy weeks.

Next, Daniel broke the seventy-week period into three segments: seven weeks, sixty-two weeks, and one week. Verse 25 pertains to the first two sections of the seventy-week period. During these two periods, that is during sixty-nine of the seventy prophetic weeks, a decree would go forth calling for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the reconstruction of the temple that had been destroyed by the Babylonians (cf. Nehemiah 2:7-8; Ezra 1:1-3). Daniel made clear that these sixty-nine weeks of the prophetic period, during which the temple would be rebuilt and national Israel reestablished, would take one up to the appearance of the Messiah.

Verse 26 speaks of the final week of the seventy week prophetic period, for he said “after the sixty-two weeks.” “After” puts one into the final or seventieth week of Daniel’s remarks. Two significant events were to occur during this final week. First, the Messiah would be “cut off.” This definitely refers to Jesus’ death upon the cross: “He was cut off from the land of the living” (Isaiah 53:8). Second, a “prince” and his people would come and destroy the city and the sanctuary—an obvious allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple edifice in A.D. 70 by Titus and his Roman army.

Verse 27 alludes to the activation of the new covenant between the Messiah and “many,” that is, between Christ and those who are responsive to the demands of the new covenant. As the Hebrews writer said: “Behold the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah” (8:8; cf. Acts 3:25). The New Testament teaches that the cutting off of the Messiah, the crucifixion, was the act that confirmed the covenant (Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 9:15-29), and brought an immediate end to the validity of the Old Testament practices of sacrifice and oblation (Colossians 2:14; Luke 23:45; Hebrews 10:18-20). Then Daniel alluded to the ruthless invasion of Jerusalem in the phrase “abomination of desolation.” Jesus quoted this phrase in Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20, and applied it to the Roman desecration and destruction of the Jerusalem temple in A.D. 70.

Thus, the fundamental purpose of Daniel’s seventy-weeks prophecy was to show God’s final and complete decree concerning the Israelite commonwealth. All of the events described in the prophecy were literally fulfilled over 1,900 years ago. As far as God is concerned, the logical end of the Old Testament and Judaism has occurred. Now He deals only with the spiritual children of Abraham, whether Jew or Gentile (Romans 4:11-12,16; 9:8). Daniel 9 gives no credence to the notion of a future Antichrist.

A third passage used to foster belief in an Antichrist is 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12. Whatever interpretation is placed upon this passage, its use to refer to a future personage is doomed to failure since Paul explicitly stated that he was referring to a person who would be the product of the circumstances of his own day, i.e., “already at work” (vs. 7). How could Paul have had in mind a future dictator that still has not arisen, though 2,000 years have transpired? One need go no further to know that 2 Thessalonians 2 does not refer to a future Antichrist.

History is replete with a variety of interpretations of this passage, the most prominent one likely being the view that the papacy is under consideration (see Workman, 1988, pp. 428-434; Eadie, 1877, pp. 340ff.). Another possibility is that the “falling away” (vs. 3), or apostasy, referred to the Jewish rejection of the “new and living way” of approach to God (Hebrews 10:20). The Jews were the single most adamant opponents to Christ and the infant church (John 8:37-44; Acts 7:51-53; 13:45-50; Romans 10:20-21; 11:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16). This rebellion, or falling away, would not reach its “full” (Matthew 23:32) climax until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and the resulting dispersal of the Jewish people. Paul had already alluded to this Jewish apostasy in 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16. The pouring out of God’s wrath was the logical consequence of the first century Israelite failure to make the change to Christianity.

The “man of sin” or “son of perdition” (vs. 3) would have referred to the personification of Roman imperialism, and would have been equated with “the abomination of desolation” that Jesus, quoting Daniel 9, alluded to in Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20. Verse 4 would refer to the Roman general who introduced his idolatrous insignia into the Holy of Holies in A.D. 70.

That which was “withholding” (vs. 6), or restraining, this man of sin, at the time Paul was writing 2 Thessalonians in approximately A.D. 53, would have been the presence of the Jewish state. The ingenious design of God was that Christianity would appear to the hostile Roman government to be nothing more than another sect of the Jews. Thus Christianity was shielded for the moment (i.e., A.D. 30-70) from the fury of the persecuting forces of Rome, while it developed, spread, and gave the Jews ample opportunity to be incorporated into the elect remnant—the church of Christ (cf. Romans 11:26). Thus the nation of Israel was rendered totally without excuse in its rejection of Christianity, while at the same time serving as a restraining force by preventing Christianity from being perceived by the Romans as a separate, and therefore illegal, religion (religio illicita). Once the Jewish apostasy was complete, and God’s wrath was poured out upon Jerusalem, Christianity came to be seen as a distinct religion from Judaism. Increasingly, Christians found themselves brought into conflict with the persecution from “the wicked” or “lawless one” (vs. 8). In fact, after A.D. 70 (when the withholding effect of Judaism was removed), Roman opposition to Christianity gradually grew greater, culminating in the fierce and formidable persecution imposed by Caesar Domitian in the final decade of the first century.

Once the shield of Judaism was “taken out of the way” (vs. 7), and Christianity increasingly found itself subject to the indignities of governmental disfavor, the Lord was to come and “consume with the breath of His mouth” (vs. 8) the one who was responsible. This terminology is not an allusion to Christ’s Second Coming. Rather this verse refers to Christ’s coming in judgment on the Roman power. Such a use of the word “coming” to describe the display of God’s wrath upon people in history is not unusual (cf. Isaiah 19:1; Micah 1:3). Paul alluded to the government’s use of counterfeit miracles (vs. 9), and thus deceit (vs. 10)—reminiscent of the Roman Concilia’s employment of trickery and illusion to deceive people into worshipping the emperor in Revelation 13:13-15 during the last decade of the first century A.D. (see Barclay, 1960, 2:127-128; Hailey, 1979, pp. 294-295; Summers, 1951, pp. 178-179). Sufficient textual indicators exist in this passage to exclude the premillennial interpretation of a future “Antichrist.”
When studied in context, the passages that are used to bolster the dispensational scheme provide no such support. Those over the centuries who have applied these passages to papal authority, Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, et al., have been shown to be wrong. Amazingly, the pattern continues among those who have not learned from the sad mistakes of the past.

REFERENCES

Barclay, William (1960), The Revelation of John (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster).
Eadie, John (1877), Commentary on the Epistles to the Thessalonians (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979 reprint).
Hailey, Homer (1979), Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Summers, Ray (1951), Worthy Is the Lamb (Nashville, TN: Broadman).
Swete, Henry (1911), Commentary on Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1977 reprint).
Workman, Gary (1988), Studies in 1 and 2 Thessalonians and Philemon (Denton, TX: Valid Publications).

Will There be a Millennium? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1253


Will There be a Millennium?

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


Many within Christendom are preoccupied with dispensational theology, having embraced the premillennial framework that teaches a coming “rapture,” “tribulation,” “antichrist,” “Armageddon,” and “millennium.” The millennium refers to an alleged thousand-year reign of Christ on Earth in which He will establish a literal, physical kingdom, and rule from Jerusalem. Is a thousand-year reign of Christ on Earth taught in the Word of God? The reader is urged to consider the following observations.
In the first place, several contextual indicators within the book of Revelation militate against the application of the book’s contents to a yet-future time. For example, the events of the book of Revelation were to “shortly take place”—an expression that occurs near the beginning as well as near the end of the book (1:1; 22:6). “Shortly” (en tachei) meant quickly, at once, without delay, soon, in a short time (Arndt and Gingrich, 1957, p. 814). Moffatt gave the meaning as “soon” and noted: “The keynote of the Apocalypse is the cheering assurance that upon God’s part there is no reluctance or delay; His people have not long to wait now” (n.d., 5:335).
Other passages where the term is used, confirm that a brief length of time is intended—not merely the rapidity with which the designated events occur. Regarding those disciples who cry out to God night and day for His intervention, Jesus assured: “He will avenge them speedily (en tachei)” (Luke 18:8). What comfort would be afforded if Jesus intended to convey the idea that relief may be long delayed, but when it finally did come, it would come in a quick fashion? When Peter was asleep in prison, bound with two chains between two soldiers, and an angel awoke him by striking him on the side and instructed him to “arise quickly (en tachei)!” (Acts 12:7), would Peter have understood the angel to mean that he could continue resting or sleeping for as long as he chose, just as long as when he did get ready to get up, he came up off the prison floor with a rapid motion? When Festus insisted that Paul be detained in Caesarea rather than transferred to Jerusalem, since “he himself was going there shortly (en tachei)” (Acts 25:4), would anyone have understood him to mean that he may delay his visit to Caesarea by years? Paul even used the term in contradistinction with being “delayed” (1 Timothy 3:14-15; cf. White, n.d., 4:117). Additional occurrences of the expression further underscore the meaning of “soon” (Acts 10:33; 17:15; 22:18; Romans 16:20).
Another contextual indicator within Revelation itself is the occurrence of the phrase: “for the time is near” (1:3; 22:10). Thayer said “near” (eggus) refers to “things imminent and soon to come to pass” (1901, p. 164; cf. Arndt and Gingrich, p. 213). Such a reference would necessarily pertain to the first century—not the twenty-first. Two or three thousand years would be too late for the desperate Christians of Asia Minor (see Summers, 1951, p. 99). Those who get caught up in “millennium mania” seem oblivious to the fact that the book was written to an original, immediate audience. Revelation was, in fact, written to the seven churches of Christ situated in Asia Minor (1:4). All seven are even named (1:11)! If the book was written to them, and if it was their spiritual condition that was the concern of the book, millenarians are incorrect in their contention that the book is devoted primarily, if not exclusively, to predictions of the end times. Though the Old Testament prophets predicted future events on occasion, their primary message was relevant to their immediate audience. Dispensationalists have trouble finding in Revelation a relevant message for a first-century audience. The apostle John recognized their need, and identified himself as their “companion” in the terrible tribulation they were then enduring (1:9). Not only was this tribulation going on at that time, but John further referred to himself and his readers as being in the kingdom at that time (1:9). Thus, Christ’s kingdom was already set up, in existence on Earth, and in full operating mode.
In addition to these contextual indicators, there is the statement of the angel to John: “Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book” (Revelation 22:10). What did the angel mean? What he meant becomes apparent when one reflects upon the fact that Daniel was told to do the exact opposite of what John was told to do. After receiving a remarkable series of detailed prophecies, Daniel was told to “shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end” (Daniel 12:4, emp. added). Furthermore, he was instructed: “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end” (vs. 9, emp. added). The reason Daniel was told to seal the book was because the fulfillment of the prophecies that had been revealed to him were hundreds of years off in the future—far from his own day. The predictions, therefore, would be of no immediate value to the initial recipients of the book. The book could be closed and placed on the shelf until those who would be living at the time of their fulfillment could appreciate the relevance of its predictions. In stark contrast, John was ordered: “Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book” (22:10, emp. added). Why? The text answers—“for the time is at hand”! These words can hold no other meaning than that the bulk of Revelation was fulfilled in close proximity to the time they were written.
Still another significant contextual detail pertains to the use of the impersonal verb “must”: “things which must shortly take place” (1:1). Greek grammarian Ray Summers explained:
The verb translated “it is necessary’ or “must”…indicates that a moral necessity is involved; the nature of the case is such that the things revealed here must come to pass shortly…. The things revealed here must happen shortly, or the cause will be lost…. They were in need of assurance of help in the immediate present—not in some millennium of the distant and uncertain future (p. 99, emp. in orig.).
Indeed, the downtrodden, persecuted Christians of Asia Minor needed assistance right away. The dispensational framework would rob those first-century saints of the very comfort and reassurance they so desperately needed, deserved—and received!
One additional contextual feature is the use of the term “signified”: “And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John” (1:1). This term, as is evident from the English translation, means “to show by signs” (Vincent, 1890, 2:564; Summers, p. 99). The term, along with the Greek word translated “revelation” (apocalupsis), introduces the nature of this book. The book of Revelation reveals or unveils God’s message through signs or symbols. Placing a literal interpretation on the numbers, animals, objects, colors, and locations of Revelation—as dispensationalists routinely try to do—does violence to the true intent of the book. John’s Revelation declares itself to be a book of symbols, filled with figurative language, and not intended to be taken literally. In fact, as Swete observed, “much of the imagery of the Apocalypse is doubtless not symbolism, but merely designed to heighten the colouring of the great picture, and to add vividness and movement to its scenes” (1911, p. cxxxiii). A genuine recognition of this realization of this self-declared feature of the book excludes a literal interpretation of the number one thousand.
In addition to these preliminary contextual details (which are sufficient of themselves to dismiss the dispensationalism scheme from the book), chapter twenty contains specific features that assist the interpreter in pinpointing the meaning of the symbol of a “thousand-year reign.” It is surely noteworthy that in the entire Bible, the only allusion to a so-called thousand-year reign is Revelation 20:4,6—a fact that is conceded even by dispensationalists (e.g., Ladd, 1972, p. 267; Mounce, 1977, pp. 356-357). Yet an entire belief system has been built upon such scanty evidence. An examination of the setting and context yields surprising results. For example, a simple reading of the immediate context reveals that the theme of Revelation 20 is not “the thousand-year reign of Christ.” Rather, it is “victory over Satan.” Each of the symbols presents concepts that, when put together, relieve the fears of oppressed first-century Christians regarding their outcome. The key, abyss, and chain (vs. 1) are apocalyptic symbols for the effective limitation or containment of Satan in his ability to deceive the nations in the specific matter of emperor worship enforced by the government (see Swete, 1911, pp. xxxi, civ-cv). The symbol of one thousand years (vss. 2-7) is a high multiple of ten, representing ultimate completeness (see Summers, p. 23). John’s readers thus could know that the devil was to be completely restrained from deceiving the nations into worshipping the emperor. The thousand years symbolized the extended triumph of God’s kingdom on Earth over the devil, who was then operating through the persecuting powers of Rome. A thousand symbolic years of victory would lesson suffering in the minds of persecuted Christians.
“Loosing for a little season” (vs. 3) would have represented the revival of persecution under later emperors. “Thrones” (vs. 4) represented the victorious power of the oppressed. The persecuted saints were pictured on thrones, judging because of the victory of their cause. “Souls” (vs. 4)—not resurrected bodies, but disembodied spirits—represent those who were martyrs of the persecution. Their refusal to “receive the mark” meant they refused to worship Caesar, or to manifest those marks that would identify them as adherents of the false state religion of emperor worship. The “first resurrection” (vs. 5) referred to the triumphant resurrection of the cause for which the Christians of Revelation 20:4 had lived and died. Gog and Magog were symbolic of the enemies of God and Christ, the imagery drawn from Ezekiel 38 and 39. The “beloved city” (vs. 9) is an unmistakable reference to spiritual Israel, the church (John 4:20-21; Galatians 6:16).
Some allowance may be granted in the interpretation of these highly figurative symbols, without doing damage to other Bible doctrines, or reflecting adversely upon the Gospel system and the broader will of Deity. However, the thousand years must not be perceived as a yet-future period. There is simply no biblical support for doing so. The figure represents an important concept for those to whom it was first directed. It has meaning for people living today only in that context. There will be no one thousand-year reign of Jesus Christ on Earth.

REFERENCES

Arndt, William and F.W. Gingrich (1957), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).
Ladd, George E. (1972), A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Moffatt, James (no date), “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” ed. Nicoll, W. Robertson, The Expositor’s Greek Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Mounce, Robert (1977), The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Summers, Ray (1951), Worthy is the Lamb (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press).
Swete, Henry B. (1911), Commentary on Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1977 reprint).
Thayer, Joseph H. (1901), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1977 reprint).
Vincent, M.R. (1890), Word Studies in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1946 reprint).
White, Newport (no date), “The First and Second Epistles to Timothy,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).