5 But the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished. Thisisthe first resurrection.5.But the rest of the dead.In contradistinction from the beheaded martyrs, and from those who had kept themselves pure in the times of great temptation. The phrase “rest of the dead” here would most naturally refer to thesame general classwhich was before mentioned—the pious dead. The meaning is, that the martyrs would be honoured as if they were raised up and the others not—that is, that special respect would be shown to their principles, their memory, and their character. In other words,specialhonour would be shownto a spirit of eminent pietyduring that period above thecommonandordinarypiety which has been manifested in the church. The “rest of the dead”—the pious dead—would indeed be raised up and rewarded, but they would occupy comparatively humble places,as ifthey did not partake in the exalted triumphs when the world should be subdued to the Saviour. Their places in honour, in rank, and in reward would bebeneaththat of those who in fiery times had maintained unshaken fidelity to the cause of truth. ¶Lived not.On the wordlivedsee Notes onver.4. That is, they lived not during that period in the peculiar sense in which it is said (ver.4) that the eminent saints and martyrs lived. They did not come into remembrance; their principles were not what then characterized the church; they did not see, as the martyrs did,theirprinciples and mode of life in the ascendency, and consequently they had not the augmented happiness and honour which the more eminent saints and martyrs had. ¶Until the thousand years were finished.Then all who were truly the children of God, though some might be less eminent than others had been, would come into remembrance, and would have their proper place in the rewards of heaven. Thelanguagehere is not necessarily to be interpreted as meaning that theywouldbe raised up then, or would live then, whatever may be true on that point. It is merely an emphatic mode of affirming thatup to that period they would not livein the sense in which it is affirmed that the others would. But it is not affirmed that they would even then “live” immediately. A long intervalmightelapse before that would occur in the general resurrection of the dead. See the Analysis of the chapter. ¶This is the first resurrection.The resurrection of the saints and martyrs, as specified inver.4. It is called thefirstresurrection in contradistinction from the second and last—the general resurrection—when all the dead will beliterallyraised up from their graves and assembled for the judgment,ver.12. It is not necessary to suppose that what is called here the “first resurrection” will resemble the real and literal resurrection in every respect. All that is meant is, that there will be such a resemblance as to make it proper to call itaresurrection—a coming to life again. This will be, as explained in the Notes onver.4, in the honour done to the martyrs, in the restoration of their principles as the great actuating principles of the church, and perhaps in the increased happiness conferred on them in heaven, and in their being employed in promoting the cause of truth in the world.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished. Thisisthe first resurrection.
5.But the rest of the dead.In contradistinction from the beheaded martyrs, and from those who had kept themselves pure in the times of great temptation. The phrase “rest of the dead” here would most naturally refer to thesame general classwhich was before mentioned—the pious dead. The meaning is, that the martyrs would be honoured as if they were raised up and the others not—that is, that special respect would be shown to their principles, their memory, and their character. In other words,specialhonour would be shownto a spirit of eminent pietyduring that period above thecommonandordinarypiety which has been manifested in the church. The “rest of the dead”—the pious dead—would indeed be raised up and rewarded, but they would occupy comparatively humble places,as ifthey did not partake in the exalted triumphs when the world should be subdued to the Saviour. Their places in honour, in rank, and in reward would bebeneaththat of those who in fiery times had maintained unshaken fidelity to the cause of truth. ¶Lived not.On the wordlivedsee Notes onver.4. That is, they lived not during that period in the peculiar sense in which it is said (ver.4) that the eminent saints and martyrs lived. They did not come into remembrance; their principles were not what then characterized the church; they did not see, as the martyrs did,theirprinciples and mode of life in the ascendency, and consequently they had not the augmented happiness and honour which the more eminent saints and martyrs had. ¶Until the thousand years were finished.Then all who were truly the children of God, though some might be less eminent than others had been, would come into remembrance, and would have their proper place in the rewards of heaven. Thelanguagehere is not necessarily to be interpreted as meaning that theywouldbe raised up then, or would live then, whatever may be true on that point. It is merely an emphatic mode of affirming thatup to that period they would not livein the sense in which it is affirmed that the others would. But it is not affirmed that they would even then “live” immediately. A long intervalmightelapse before that would occur in the general resurrection of the dead. See the Analysis of the chapter. ¶This is the first resurrection.The resurrection of the saints and martyrs, as specified inver.4. It is called thefirstresurrection in contradistinction from the second and last—the general resurrection—when all the dead will beliterallyraised up from their graves and assembled for the judgment,ver.12. It is not necessary to suppose that what is called here the “first resurrection” will resemble the real and literal resurrection in every respect. All that is meant is, that there will be such a resemblance as to make it proper to call itaresurrection—a coming to life again. This will be, as explained in the Notes onver.4, in the honour done to the martyrs, in the restoration of their principles as the great actuating principles of the church, and perhaps in the increased happiness conferred on them in heaven, and in their being employed in promoting the cause of truth in the world.
6 Blessed and holyishe that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the619second death hath no power, but they shall be620priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.6.Blessed.That is, his condition is to be regarded as a happy or afavoured one. This is designed apparently to support and encourage those who, in the time of John, suffered persecution, or who might suffer persecution afterwards. ¶And holy.That is, no one will be thus honoured who has not an established character for holiness. Holy principles will then reign, and none will be exalted to that honour who have not a character for eminent sanctity. ¶That hath part in the first resurrection.That participated in it; that is, who is associated with those who are thus raised up. ¶On such the second death hath no power.The “second death” is properly the death which the wicked will experience in the world of woe. Seever.14. The meaning here is, that all who are here referred to as having part in the first resurrection will be secure against that. It will be one of the blessed privileges of heaven that there will be absolute security againstDEATHin any and every form; and when we think of what deathishere, and still more when we think of “the bitter pains of the second death,” we may well call that state “blessed” in which there will be eternal exemption from either. ¶But they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him.Notesch. i.6;v.10.§b.—Condition of the world in the period referred to inver.4–6.I.It is well known that this passage is the principal one which is relied on by those who advocate the doctrine of the literal reign of Christ on the earth for a thousand years, or who hold what are called the doctrines of the “second advent.” The points which are maintained by those who advocate these views are substantially, (a) that at that period Christ will descend from heaven to reign personally upon the earth; (b) that he will have a central place of power and authority, probably Jerusalem; (c) that the righteous dead will then be raised, in such bodies as are to be immortal; (d) that they will be his attendants, and will participate with him in the government of the world; (e) that this will continue during the period of a thousand years; (f) that the world will be subdued and converted during this period, not by moral means, but by “a new dispensation”—by the power of the Son of God; and (g) that at the close of this period all the remaining dead will be raised, the judgment will take place, and the affairs of the earth will be consummated.The opinion here adverted to was held substantially by Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, and others among the Christian Fathers, and, it need not be said, is held by many modern expositors of the Bible, and by large numbers of Christian ministers of high standing, and other Christians. See theLiteralist,passim. The opinion of the Christian Fathers, with which the modern “literalists,” as they are called, substantially coincide, is thus stated byMr.Elliott: “This resurrection is to be literally that of departed saints and martyrs, then at length resuscitated in the body from death and the grave; itstimeto synchronize with, or follow instantly after, the destruction of the beast Antichrist, on Christ’s personal second advent; thebindingof Satan to be an absolute restriction of the power of hell from tempting, deceiving, or injuring mankind, throughout a literal period of a thousand years, thence calculated; thegovernment of the earth, during its continuance to be administered by Christ and the risen saints—the latter being nowἰσάγγελοι—in nature like angels; and under it, all false religion having been put down, the Jews and saved remnant of the Gentiles been converted to Christ, the earth renovated by the fire of Antichrist’s destruction, and Jerusalem made the universal capital, there will be a realization on earth of the blessedness depicted in the Old Testament prophecies, as well as perhaps of that too which is associated with the New Jerusalem in the visions of the Apocalypse—until at length this millennium having ended, and Satan gone forth to deceive the nations, the final consummation will follow; the new-raised enemies of the saints, Gog and Magog, be destroyed by fire from heaven: and then the general resurrection and judgment take place, the devil and his servants be cast into the lake of fire, and the millennial reign of the saints extend itself into one of eternal duration” (Elliott on the Apocalypse,iv.177, 178).Mr.Elliott’s own opinion, representing, it is supposed, that of the great body of the “literalists,” is thus expressed:“It would seem, therefore, that in this state of things and of feeling in professing Christendom [a feeling of carnal security], all suddenly, and unexpectedly, and conspicuous over the world as the lightning that shineth from the east even unto the west, the second advent and appearing of Christ will take place; that at the accompanying voice of the archangel and trump of God, the departed saints of either dispensation will rise from their graves to meet him—alike patriarchs, and prophets, and apostles, and martyrs, and confessors—all at once and in the twinkling of an eye; and then instantly the saints living at the time will be also caught up to meet him in the air; these latter being separated out of the ungodly nations, as when a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats, and all, both dead and living saints, changed at the moment from corruption to incorruption, from dishonour to glory, though with very different degrees of glory; and so in a new angelic nature, to take part in the judging and ruling in this world. Meanwhile, with a tremendous earthquake accompanying, of violence unknown since the revolutions of primeval chaos, an earthquake under which the Roman world at least is to rock to and fro like a drunken man, the solid crust of this earth shall be broken, and fountains burst forth from its inner deep, not as once of water, but of liquid fire; and that the flames shall consume the Antichrist and his confederate kings, while the sword also does its work of slaughter; the risen saints being perhaps the attendants of the Lord’s glory in this destruction of Antichrist, and assessors in his judgment on a guilty world. And then immediately the renovation of this our earth is to take place, its soil being purified by the very action of the fire, and the Spirit poured out from on high, to renew, in a yet better sense, the moral face of nature; the Shekinah, or personal glory of Christ amidst his saints, being manifested chiefly in the Holy Land and at Jerusalem, but the whole earth partaking of the blessedness;and thus the regeneration of all things, and the world’s redemption from the curse, having their accomplishment, according to the promise, at the manifestation of the sons of God,”iv.224–231.621To this account of the prevailing opinion of the “literalists” in interpreting the passage before us, there should be added that of Professor Stuart, who, in general, is as far as possible from sympathizing with this class of writers. He says, in his explanation of the expression “they lived,” inver.4, “There would seem to remain, therefore, only one meaning which can be consistently given toἔζησαν[they lived];viz., that they (the martyrs who renounced the beast) are nowrestored to life,viz., such life as implies the vivification of the body. Not to a union of the soul with a gross material body indeed, but with such an one as the saints in general will have at the final resurrection—a spiritual body,1 Co.xv.44. In no other way can this resurrection be ranked ascorrelatewith the second resurrection named in the sequel,”vol. ii.p.360. So again, Excursusvi.(vol. ii.p.476), he says, “I do not see how we can, on the ground of exegesis, fairly avoid the conclusion that John has taught in the passage before us, thatthere will be a resurrection of the martyr-saints, at the commencement of the period after Satan shall have been shut up in the dungeon of the great abyss.” This opinion he defends at length,pp.476–490. Professor Stuart, indeed, maintains that the martyrs thus raised up will be taken to heaven and reign with Christthere, and opposes the whole doctrine of the literal reign on the earth,vol. ii.p.480. The risen saints and martyrs are to be “enthronedwith Christ; that is, they are to be where he dwells, and where he will continue to dwell, until he shall make his descent at the final judgment day.”II.In regard to these views, as expressive of the meaning of the passage under consideration, I would make the following remarks:—(1) There is strongpresumptiveevidence against this interpretation, and especially against the main point in the doctrine, that there will be aliteral resurrectionof the bodies of the saints at the beginning of that millennial period, to live and reign with Christ on earth, from the following circumstances:—(a) It is admitted, on all hands, that this doctrine, if contained in the Scriptures at all, is found in this one passage only. It is not pretended that there is, in any other place, a direct affirmation that this will literally occur, nor would the advocates for that opinion undertaketo show that it is fairly implied in any other part of the Bible. But it is strange, not to say improbable, that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the righteous, a thousand years before the wicked, should be announced in one passage only. If it were so announced in plain and unambiguous language, I admit that the believer in the divine origin of the Scriptures would be bound to receive it; but this is so contrary to the usual method of the Scriptures on all great and important doctrines, that this circumstance should lead us at least to doubt whether the passage is correctly interpreted. The resurrection of the dead is a subject on which the Saviour often dwelt in his instructions; it is a subject which the apostles discussed very frequently and at great length in their preaching, and in their writings; it is presented by them in a great variety of forms, for the consolation of Christians in time of trouble, and with reference to the condition of the world at the winding up of human affairs; and it is strange that, in respect to so important a doctrine as this, if it be true, there is not elsewhere, in the New Testament, a hint, an intimation, an allusion, that would lead us to suppose that the righteous are to be raised in this manner. (b) If this is a true doctrine, it would be reasonable to expect that a clear and unambiguous statement of it would be made. Certainly, if there is butonestatement on the subject, that might be expected to be a perfectly clear one, it would be a statement about which there could be no diversity of opinion, concerning which those who embraced it might be expected to hold the same views. But it cannot be pretended that this is so in regard to this passage. It occurs in the book which, of all the books in the Bible, is most distinguished for figures and symbols; it cannot be maintained that it isdirectlyandclearlyaffirmed; and it isnotso taught that there is any uniformity of view among those who profess to hold it. In nothing has there been greater diversity among men than in the opinions of those who profess to hold the “literal” views respecting the personal reign of Christ on the earth. But this fact assuredly affordspresumptiveevidence that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the saints a thousand years before the rest of the dead, is not intended to be taught. (c) It is presumptive proof against this, that nothing is said of the employment of those who are raised up; of the reason why they are raised; of the new circumstances of their being; and of their condition when the thousand years shall have ended. In so important a matter as this, we can hardly suppose that the whole subject would be left to a single hint in a symbolical representation, depending on the doubtful meaning of a single word, and with nothing to enable us to determine, with absolute certainty, that thismustbe the meaning. (d) If it be meant that this is a description of the resurrection of therighteousas such—embracingallthe righteous—then it is wholly unlike all the other descriptions of the resurrection of the righteous that we have in the Bible. Here the account is confined to “those that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” and to “those who had not worshipped the beast.” If the righteous, as such, are here referred to, why are these particular classes specified? Why are not the usual general terms employed? Why is the account of the resurrection confined to these? Elsewhere in the Scriptures, the account of the resurrection is given in the mostgeneralterms (comp.Mat.xxv.41;Jn.iv.54;v.28, 29;Ro.ii.7;1 Co.xv.23;Phi.iii.20, 21;2 Th.i.10;He.ix.28;1 Jn.ii.28, 29;iii.2); and if this had been the designed reference here, it is inconceivable why the statement should be limited to the martyrs, and to those who have evinced great fidelity in the midst of temptations and allurements to apostasy. These circumstances furnish strongpresumptiveproofs, at least, against the doctrine that there is to be a literal resurrection ofallthe saints at the beginning of the millennial period.Comp.Christ’s Second Coming, byRev.David Brown,p.219,seq.(2) In reference to many of the views necessarily implied in the doctrine of the “second advent,” and avowed by those who hold that doctrine, it cannot be pretended that they receive any countenance or support from this passage. In the language of Professor Stuart (Com.vol. ii.p.479), there is “not a word of Christ’s descent to the earth at the beginning of the millennium. Nothing of the literal assembling of the Jews in Palestine; nothing of the Messiah’s temporal reign onearth; nothing of the overflowing abundanceof worldly peace and plenty.” Indeed, in all this passage, there is not the remotest hint of the grandeur and magnificence of the reign of Christ as a literal king upon the earth; nothing of his having a splendid capital at Jerusalem, or anywhere else; nothing of a new dispensation of a miraculous kind; nothing of the renovation of the earth to fit it for the abode of the risen saints. All this is the mere work of fancy, and no man can pretend that it is to be found in this passage.(3) Nor is there anything here of a literal resurrection of thebodiesof the dead, as Professor Stuart himself supposes. It is not a little remarkable that a scholar so accurate as Professor Stuart is, and one, too, who has so little sympathy with the doctrines connected with a literal reign of Christ on the earth, should have lent the sanction of his name to perhaps the most objectionable of all the dogmas connected with that view—the opinion that thebodiesof the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period. Of this there is not one word, one intimation, one hint, in the passage before us. John says expressly,and as if to guard the point from all possible danger of this construction, that he “saw theSOULSof them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus;” he saw them “living” and “reigning” with Christ—raised to the exalted honour during that period, as if they had been raised from the dead; but he nowhere mentions or intimates that they were raised up from their graves; that they were clothed with bodies; that they had their residence now literally on the earth; or that they were, in any way, otherwise than disembodied spirits. There is not even one word of their having “a spiritual body.”(4) There arepositivearguments, which are perfectly decisive, against the interpretation which supposes that the bodies of the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period, to reign with Christ on the earth for a thousand years. Among these are the following:—(a) If the “first resurrection” means rising from the grave in immortal and glorified bodies, we do not need the assurance (ver.6), that “on such the second death hath no power;” that is, that they would not perish for ever. That would be a matter of course, and there was no necessity for such a statement. But if it be supposed that the main idea is that theprinciplesof the martyrs and of the most eminent saints would be revived and would live,as ifthe dead were raised up, and would be manifested by those who were inmortalbodies—men living on the earth—then there would be a propriety in saying that all such were exempt from the danger of theseconddeath.Once, indeed, they would die; but theseconddeath could not reach them.Comp.Re.ii.10, 11.(b) In the whole passage there are but two classes of men referred to. There are those “who have part in the first resurrection;” that is, according to the supposition,allthe saints; and there are those over whom “the second death”haspower. Into which of these classes are we to put the myriads of men having flesh and blood who are to people the world during the millennium? They have no part in “the first resurrection,” if it be a bodily one. Are they then given over to the power of the “second death?” But if the “first resurrection” be regarded as figurative and spiritual, then the statement that those who are actuated by the spirit of the martyrs and of the eminent saints, shall not experience the “second death,” is seen to have meaning and pertinency.(c) The mention of thetimeduring which they are to reign, if it be literally understood, is contrary to the whole statement of the Bible in other places. They are to “live and reign with Christ”a thousand years. What, then? Are they to live no longer? Are they to reign no longer with him? This supposition is entirely contrary to the current statement in the Scriptures, which is, that they are to live and reign with himfor ever:1 Th.iv.17, “And so shall we ever be with the Lord.” According to the views of the “literalists,” the declaration that they “should live and reign with Christ,” considered as the characteristic features of the millennial state, is to terminate with the thousand years—for this is the promise, according to that view, that they should thus live and reign. But it need not be said that this is wholly contrary to the current doctrine of the Bible, that they are to live and reign with him for ever.(d) A further objection to this view is, that the wicked part of the world—“the rest of the dead who lived notagainuntilthe thousand years were finished”—must of course be expected to “live again” in the same bodily sensewhenthose thousand years were finished. But, so far from this, there is no mention of their living then. When the thousand years are finished, Satan is loosed for a season; then the nations are roused to opposition against God; then there is a conflict, and the hostile forces are overthrown; and then comes the final judgment. During all this time we read of no resurrection at all. The period after this is to be filled up with something besides the resurrection of the “rest of the dead.” There is no intimation, as theliteralconstruction, as it is claimed, would demand, that immediately after the “thousand years are finished” the “rest of the dead”—the wicked dead—would be raised up; nor is there any intimation of such a resurrection untilallthe dead are raised up for the final trial,ver.12. But every consideration demands, if the interpretation of the “literalists” be correct, that the “rest of the dead”—the unconverted dead—should be raised up immediately after the close of the millennial period, and be raised up as a distinct and separate class.(e) There is no intimation in the passage itself that therighteouswill be raised upas suchin this period, and the proper interpretation of the passage is contrary to that supposition. There are but two classes mentioned as having part in the first resurrection. They are those who were “beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” and those who “had not worshipped the beast”—that is, the martyrs, and those who had been eminent for their fidelity to the Saviour in times of great temptation and trial. There is no mention of the resurrection of the righteousas such—of the resurrection of the great body of the redeemed; and if it could be shown that this refers to aliteralresurrection, it would be impossible to apply it, according to any just rules of interpretation, to any more than the two classes that are specified. By what rules of interpretation is it made to to teach thatallthe righteous will be raised up on that occasion, and will live on the earth during that long period? In this view of the matter, the passagedoes notexpress the doctrine that the whole church of God will be raised bodily from the grave. And supposing it had been the design of the Spirit of God to teach this, is it credible, when there are so many clear expressions in regard to the resurrection of the dead, that so important a doctrine should have been reserved for one single passage so obscure, and where the great mass of the readers of the Bible in all ages have failed to perceive it? That is not the way in which, in the Scriptures, great and momentous doctrines are communicated to mankind.(f) The fair statement inver.11–15 is, thatallthe dead will then be raised up and be judged. This is implied in the general expressions there used—“the dead, small and great;” the “book of life was opened”—as ifnotopened before; “the dead”—allthe dead—“were judged out of those things which were written in the books;” “the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and hell (hades) delivered up the dead which were in them.” This is entirely inconsistent with the supposition that a large part of the race—to wit, all the righteous—had been before raised up; had passed the solemn judgment; had been clothed with their immortal bodies, and had been admitted to a joint reign with the Saviour on his throne. In the last judgment what place aretheyto occupy? In what sense aretheyto be raised up and judged?Wouldsuch a representation have been made as is found inver.11–15, if it had been designed to teach that a large part of the race had been already raised up, and had received the approval of their judge?(g) This representation is wholly inconsistent, not only withver.11–15, but with the uniform language of the Scriptures,that all the righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. On no point are the statements of the Bible more uniform and explicit than on this, and it would seem that the declarations had been of design so made that there should be no possibility of mistake. I refer for full proof on this point to the following passages of the New Testament:—Mat.x.32, 33, compared withMat.vii.21–23;xiii.30, 38–43;xvi.24–27;xxv.10, 31–46;Mar.viii.38;Jn.v.28, 29;Ac.xvii.31:Ro.ii.5–16;xiv.10, 12;1 Co.iii.12–15;iv.5;2 Co.v.9–11;2 Th.i.6–10;1 Ti.v.24, 25;2 Pe.iii.7, 10, 12;1 Jn.ii.28;iv.17;Re.iii.5;xx.11–15;xxii.12–15. It is utterlyimpossibleto explain these passages on any other supposition than that they are intended to teach thatthe righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. And if this is so, it is of course impossible to explain them consistently with the view that all the righteous will have been already raised up at the beginning of the millennium in their immortal and glorified bodies, and that they have been solemnly approved by the Saviour, and admitted to a participation in his glory. Nothing could be more irreconcilable than these two views; and it seems to me, therefore, that the objections to the literal resurrection of the saints at the beginning of the millennial period are insuperable.III.The following points, then, according to the interpretation proposed, are implied in this statement respecting the “first resurrection,” and these will clearly compriseallthat is stated on the subject.(1) There will be a reviving, and a prevalence of the spirit which actuated the saints in the best days, and a restoration of their principles as the grand principles which will control and govern the church,as ifthe most eminent saints were raised again from the dead, and lived and acted upon the earth.(2) Their memory will then be sacredly cherished, and they will be honoured on the earth with the honour which is due to their names, and which they should have received when in the land of the living. They will be no longer cast out and reproached; no longer held up to obloquy and scorn; no longer despised and forgotten; but there will be a reviving of sacred regard for their principles,as ifthey lived on the earth, and had the honour which was due to them.(3) There will be a state of things upon the earth as if they thus lived and were thus honoured. Religion will no longer be trampled under foot, but will triumph. In all parts of the earth it will have the ascendency, as if the most eminent saints of past ages lived and reigned with the Son of God in his kingdom. A spiritual kingdom will be set up with the Son of God at the head of it, which will be a kingdom of eminent holiness, as if the saints of the best days of the church should come back to the earth and dwell upon it. The ruling influence in the world will be the religion of the Son of God, and the principles which have governed the most holy of his people.(4) It may be implied that the saints and martyrs of other times will be employed by the Saviour in embassies of mercy; in visitations of grace to our world to carry forward the great work of salvation on earth. Nothing forbids the idea that the saints in heaven may be thus employed, and in this long period of a thousand years, it may be that they will be occupied in such messages and agencies of mercy to our world as they have never been before—as ifthey were raised from the dead, and were employed by the Redeemer to carry forward his purposes of mercy to mankind.(5) In connection with these things, and in consequence of these things, they may be, during that period, exalted to higher happiness and honour in heaven. The restoration of their principles to the earth; the Christian remembrance of their virtues; the prevalence of those truths to establish which they laid down their lives, would in itself exalt them, and would increase their joy in heaven. All this would be well represented, in vision, by a resurrection of the dead; and admitting that this was all that was intended, the representation of John here would be in the highest degree appropriate. What could better symbolize it—and we must remember that this is a symbol—than to say that at the commencement of this period there was, as it were, a solemn preparation for a judgment, and that the departed dead seemed to stand there, and that a sentence was pronounced in their favour, and that they became associated with the Son of God in the honours of his kingdom, and that their principles were now to reign and triumph in the earth, and that the kingdom which they laboured to establish would be set up for a thousand years, and that, in high purposes of mercy and benevolence during that period, they would be employed in maintaining and extending the principles of religion in the world? Admitting that the Holy Spirit intended to represent these things, and these only, no more appropriate symbolical language could have been used; none that would more accord with the general style of the book of Revelation.
6 Blessed and holyishe that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the619second death hath no power, but they shall be620priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
6.Blessed.That is, his condition is to be regarded as a happy or afavoured one. This is designed apparently to support and encourage those who, in the time of John, suffered persecution, or who might suffer persecution afterwards. ¶And holy.That is, no one will be thus honoured who has not an established character for holiness. Holy principles will then reign, and none will be exalted to that honour who have not a character for eminent sanctity. ¶That hath part in the first resurrection.That participated in it; that is, who is associated with those who are thus raised up. ¶On such the second death hath no power.The “second death” is properly the death which the wicked will experience in the world of woe. Seever.14. The meaning here is, that all who are here referred to as having part in the first resurrection will be secure against that. It will be one of the blessed privileges of heaven that there will be absolute security againstDEATHin any and every form; and when we think of what deathishere, and still more when we think of “the bitter pains of the second death,” we may well call that state “blessed” in which there will be eternal exemption from either. ¶But they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him.Notesch. i.6;v.10.
§b.—Condition of the world in the period referred to inver.4–6.
I.It is well known that this passage is the principal one which is relied on by those who advocate the doctrine of the literal reign of Christ on the earth for a thousand years, or who hold what are called the doctrines of the “second advent.” The points which are maintained by those who advocate these views are substantially, (a) that at that period Christ will descend from heaven to reign personally upon the earth; (b) that he will have a central place of power and authority, probably Jerusalem; (c) that the righteous dead will then be raised, in such bodies as are to be immortal; (d) that they will be his attendants, and will participate with him in the government of the world; (e) that this will continue during the period of a thousand years; (f) that the world will be subdued and converted during this period, not by moral means, but by “a new dispensation”—by the power of the Son of God; and (g) that at the close of this period all the remaining dead will be raised, the judgment will take place, and the affairs of the earth will be consummated.
The opinion here adverted to was held substantially by Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, and others among the Christian Fathers, and, it need not be said, is held by many modern expositors of the Bible, and by large numbers of Christian ministers of high standing, and other Christians. See theLiteralist,passim. The opinion of the Christian Fathers, with which the modern “literalists,” as they are called, substantially coincide, is thus stated byMr.Elliott: “This resurrection is to be literally that of departed saints and martyrs, then at length resuscitated in the body from death and the grave; itstimeto synchronize with, or follow instantly after, the destruction of the beast Antichrist, on Christ’s personal second advent; thebindingof Satan to be an absolute restriction of the power of hell from tempting, deceiving, or injuring mankind, throughout a literal period of a thousand years, thence calculated; thegovernment of the earth, during its continuance to be administered by Christ and the risen saints—the latter being nowἰσάγγελοι—in nature like angels; and under it, all false religion having been put down, the Jews and saved remnant of the Gentiles been converted to Christ, the earth renovated by the fire of Antichrist’s destruction, and Jerusalem made the universal capital, there will be a realization on earth of the blessedness depicted in the Old Testament prophecies, as well as perhaps of that too which is associated with the New Jerusalem in the visions of the Apocalypse—until at length this millennium having ended, and Satan gone forth to deceive the nations, the final consummation will follow; the new-raised enemies of the saints, Gog and Magog, be destroyed by fire from heaven: and then the general resurrection and judgment take place, the devil and his servants be cast into the lake of fire, and the millennial reign of the saints extend itself into one of eternal duration” (Elliott on the Apocalypse,iv.177, 178).
Mr.Elliott’s own opinion, representing, it is supposed, that of the great body of the “literalists,” is thus expressed:“It would seem, therefore, that in this state of things and of feeling in professing Christendom [a feeling of carnal security], all suddenly, and unexpectedly, and conspicuous over the world as the lightning that shineth from the east even unto the west, the second advent and appearing of Christ will take place; that at the accompanying voice of the archangel and trump of God, the departed saints of either dispensation will rise from their graves to meet him—alike patriarchs, and prophets, and apostles, and martyrs, and confessors—all at once and in the twinkling of an eye; and then instantly the saints living at the time will be also caught up to meet him in the air; these latter being separated out of the ungodly nations, as when a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats, and all, both dead and living saints, changed at the moment from corruption to incorruption, from dishonour to glory, though with very different degrees of glory; and so in a new angelic nature, to take part in the judging and ruling in this world. Meanwhile, with a tremendous earthquake accompanying, of violence unknown since the revolutions of primeval chaos, an earthquake under which the Roman world at least is to rock to and fro like a drunken man, the solid crust of this earth shall be broken, and fountains burst forth from its inner deep, not as once of water, but of liquid fire; and that the flames shall consume the Antichrist and his confederate kings, while the sword also does its work of slaughter; the risen saints being perhaps the attendants of the Lord’s glory in this destruction of Antichrist, and assessors in his judgment on a guilty world. And then immediately the renovation of this our earth is to take place, its soil being purified by the very action of the fire, and the Spirit poured out from on high, to renew, in a yet better sense, the moral face of nature; the Shekinah, or personal glory of Christ amidst his saints, being manifested chiefly in the Holy Land and at Jerusalem, but the whole earth partaking of the blessedness;and thus the regeneration of all things, and the world’s redemption from the curse, having their accomplishment, according to the promise, at the manifestation of the sons of God,”iv.224–231.621
To this account of the prevailing opinion of the “literalists” in interpreting the passage before us, there should be added that of Professor Stuart, who, in general, is as far as possible from sympathizing with this class of writers. He says, in his explanation of the expression “they lived,” inver.4, “There would seem to remain, therefore, only one meaning which can be consistently given toἔζησαν[they lived];viz., that they (the martyrs who renounced the beast) are nowrestored to life,viz., such life as implies the vivification of the body. Not to a union of the soul with a gross material body indeed, but with such an one as the saints in general will have at the final resurrection—a spiritual body,1 Co.xv.44. In no other way can this resurrection be ranked ascorrelatewith the second resurrection named in the sequel,”vol. ii.p.360. So again, Excursusvi.(vol. ii.p.476), he says, “I do not see how we can, on the ground of exegesis, fairly avoid the conclusion that John has taught in the passage before us, thatthere will be a resurrection of the martyr-saints, at the commencement of the period after Satan shall have been shut up in the dungeon of the great abyss.” This opinion he defends at length,pp.476–490. Professor Stuart, indeed, maintains that the martyrs thus raised up will be taken to heaven and reign with Christthere, and opposes the whole doctrine of the literal reign on the earth,vol. ii.p.480. The risen saints and martyrs are to be “enthronedwith Christ; that is, they are to be where he dwells, and where he will continue to dwell, until he shall make his descent at the final judgment day.”
II.In regard to these views, as expressive of the meaning of the passage under consideration, I would make the following remarks:—
(1) There is strongpresumptiveevidence against this interpretation, and especially against the main point in the doctrine, that there will be aliteral resurrectionof the bodies of the saints at the beginning of that millennial period, to live and reign with Christ on earth, from the following circumstances:—(a) It is admitted, on all hands, that this doctrine, if contained in the Scriptures at all, is found in this one passage only. It is not pretended that there is, in any other place, a direct affirmation that this will literally occur, nor would the advocates for that opinion undertaketo show that it is fairly implied in any other part of the Bible. But it is strange, not to say improbable, that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the righteous, a thousand years before the wicked, should be announced in one passage only. If it were so announced in plain and unambiguous language, I admit that the believer in the divine origin of the Scriptures would be bound to receive it; but this is so contrary to the usual method of the Scriptures on all great and important doctrines, that this circumstance should lead us at least to doubt whether the passage is correctly interpreted. The resurrection of the dead is a subject on which the Saviour often dwelt in his instructions; it is a subject which the apostles discussed very frequently and at great length in their preaching, and in their writings; it is presented by them in a great variety of forms, for the consolation of Christians in time of trouble, and with reference to the condition of the world at the winding up of human affairs; and it is strange that, in respect to so important a doctrine as this, if it be true, there is not elsewhere, in the New Testament, a hint, an intimation, an allusion, that would lead us to suppose that the righteous are to be raised in this manner. (b) If this is a true doctrine, it would be reasonable to expect that a clear and unambiguous statement of it would be made. Certainly, if there is butonestatement on the subject, that might be expected to be a perfectly clear one, it would be a statement about which there could be no diversity of opinion, concerning which those who embraced it might be expected to hold the same views. But it cannot be pretended that this is so in regard to this passage. It occurs in the book which, of all the books in the Bible, is most distinguished for figures and symbols; it cannot be maintained that it isdirectlyandclearlyaffirmed; and it isnotso taught that there is any uniformity of view among those who profess to hold it. In nothing has there been greater diversity among men than in the opinions of those who profess to hold the “literal” views respecting the personal reign of Christ on the earth. But this fact assuredly affordspresumptiveevidence that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the saints a thousand years before the rest of the dead, is not intended to be taught. (c) It is presumptive proof against this, that nothing is said of the employment of those who are raised up; of the reason why they are raised; of the new circumstances of their being; and of their condition when the thousand years shall have ended. In so important a matter as this, we can hardly suppose that the whole subject would be left to a single hint in a symbolical representation, depending on the doubtful meaning of a single word, and with nothing to enable us to determine, with absolute certainty, that thismustbe the meaning. (d) If it be meant that this is a description of the resurrection of therighteousas such—embracingallthe righteous—then it is wholly unlike all the other descriptions of the resurrection of the righteous that we have in the Bible. Here the account is confined to “those that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” and to “those who had not worshipped the beast.” If the righteous, as such, are here referred to, why are these particular classes specified? Why are not the usual general terms employed? Why is the account of the resurrection confined to these? Elsewhere in the Scriptures, the account of the resurrection is given in the mostgeneralterms (comp.Mat.xxv.41;Jn.iv.54;v.28, 29;Ro.ii.7;1 Co.xv.23;Phi.iii.20, 21;2 Th.i.10;He.ix.28;1 Jn.ii.28, 29;iii.2); and if this had been the designed reference here, it is inconceivable why the statement should be limited to the martyrs, and to those who have evinced great fidelity in the midst of temptations and allurements to apostasy. These circumstances furnish strongpresumptiveproofs, at least, against the doctrine that there is to be a literal resurrection ofallthe saints at the beginning of the millennial period.Comp.Christ’s Second Coming, byRev.David Brown,p.219,seq.
(2) In reference to many of the views necessarily implied in the doctrine of the “second advent,” and avowed by those who hold that doctrine, it cannot be pretended that they receive any countenance or support from this passage. In the language of Professor Stuart (Com.vol. ii.p.479), there is “not a word of Christ’s descent to the earth at the beginning of the millennium. Nothing of the literal assembling of the Jews in Palestine; nothing of the Messiah’s temporal reign onearth; nothing of the overflowing abundanceof worldly peace and plenty.” Indeed, in all this passage, there is not the remotest hint of the grandeur and magnificence of the reign of Christ as a literal king upon the earth; nothing of his having a splendid capital at Jerusalem, or anywhere else; nothing of a new dispensation of a miraculous kind; nothing of the renovation of the earth to fit it for the abode of the risen saints. All this is the mere work of fancy, and no man can pretend that it is to be found in this passage.
(3) Nor is there anything here of a literal resurrection of thebodiesof the dead, as Professor Stuart himself supposes. It is not a little remarkable that a scholar so accurate as Professor Stuart is, and one, too, who has so little sympathy with the doctrines connected with a literal reign of Christ on the earth, should have lent the sanction of his name to perhaps the most objectionable of all the dogmas connected with that view—the opinion that thebodiesof the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period. Of this there is not one word, one intimation, one hint, in the passage before us. John says expressly,and as if to guard the point from all possible danger of this construction, that he “saw theSOULSof them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus;” he saw them “living” and “reigning” with Christ—raised to the exalted honour during that period, as if they had been raised from the dead; but he nowhere mentions or intimates that they were raised up from their graves; that they were clothed with bodies; that they had their residence now literally on the earth; or that they were, in any way, otherwise than disembodied spirits. There is not even one word of their having “a spiritual body.”
(4) There arepositivearguments, which are perfectly decisive, against the interpretation which supposes that the bodies of the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period, to reign with Christ on the earth for a thousand years. Among these are the following:—
(a) If the “first resurrection” means rising from the grave in immortal and glorified bodies, we do not need the assurance (ver.6), that “on such the second death hath no power;” that is, that they would not perish for ever. That would be a matter of course, and there was no necessity for such a statement. But if it be supposed that the main idea is that theprinciplesof the martyrs and of the most eminent saints would be revived and would live,as ifthe dead were raised up, and would be manifested by those who were inmortalbodies—men living on the earth—then there would be a propriety in saying that all such were exempt from the danger of theseconddeath.Once, indeed, they would die; but theseconddeath could not reach them.Comp.Re.ii.10, 11.
(b) In the whole passage there are but two classes of men referred to. There are those “who have part in the first resurrection;” that is, according to the supposition,allthe saints; and there are those over whom “the second death”haspower. Into which of these classes are we to put the myriads of men having flesh and blood who are to people the world during the millennium? They have no part in “the first resurrection,” if it be a bodily one. Are they then given over to the power of the “second death?” But if the “first resurrection” be regarded as figurative and spiritual, then the statement that those who are actuated by the spirit of the martyrs and of the eminent saints, shall not experience the “second death,” is seen to have meaning and pertinency.
(c) The mention of thetimeduring which they are to reign, if it be literally understood, is contrary to the whole statement of the Bible in other places. They are to “live and reign with Christ”a thousand years. What, then? Are they to live no longer? Are they to reign no longer with him? This supposition is entirely contrary to the current statement in the Scriptures, which is, that they are to live and reign with himfor ever:1 Th.iv.17, “And so shall we ever be with the Lord.” According to the views of the “literalists,” the declaration that they “should live and reign with Christ,” considered as the characteristic features of the millennial state, is to terminate with the thousand years—for this is the promise, according to that view, that they should thus live and reign. But it need not be said that this is wholly contrary to the current doctrine of the Bible, that they are to live and reign with him for ever.
(d) A further objection to this view is, that the wicked part of the world—“the rest of the dead who lived notagainuntilthe thousand years were finished”—must of course be expected to “live again” in the same bodily sensewhenthose thousand years were finished. But, so far from this, there is no mention of their living then. When the thousand years are finished, Satan is loosed for a season; then the nations are roused to opposition against God; then there is a conflict, and the hostile forces are overthrown; and then comes the final judgment. During all this time we read of no resurrection at all. The period after this is to be filled up with something besides the resurrection of the “rest of the dead.” There is no intimation, as theliteralconstruction, as it is claimed, would demand, that immediately after the “thousand years are finished” the “rest of the dead”—the wicked dead—would be raised up; nor is there any intimation of such a resurrection untilallthe dead are raised up for the final trial,ver.12. But every consideration demands, if the interpretation of the “literalists” be correct, that the “rest of the dead”—the unconverted dead—should be raised up immediately after the close of the millennial period, and be raised up as a distinct and separate class.
(e) There is no intimation in the passage itself that therighteouswill be raised upas suchin this period, and the proper interpretation of the passage is contrary to that supposition. There are but two classes mentioned as having part in the first resurrection. They are those who were “beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” and those who “had not worshipped the beast”—that is, the martyrs, and those who had been eminent for their fidelity to the Saviour in times of great temptation and trial. There is no mention of the resurrection of the righteousas such—of the resurrection of the great body of the redeemed; and if it could be shown that this refers to aliteralresurrection, it would be impossible to apply it, according to any just rules of interpretation, to any more than the two classes that are specified. By what rules of interpretation is it made to to teach thatallthe righteous will be raised up on that occasion, and will live on the earth during that long period? In this view of the matter, the passagedoes notexpress the doctrine that the whole church of God will be raised bodily from the grave. And supposing it had been the design of the Spirit of God to teach this, is it credible, when there are so many clear expressions in regard to the resurrection of the dead, that so important a doctrine should have been reserved for one single passage so obscure, and where the great mass of the readers of the Bible in all ages have failed to perceive it? That is not the way in which, in the Scriptures, great and momentous doctrines are communicated to mankind.
(f) The fair statement inver.11–15 is, thatallthe dead will then be raised up and be judged. This is implied in the general expressions there used—“the dead, small and great;” the “book of life was opened”—as ifnotopened before; “the dead”—allthe dead—“were judged out of those things which were written in the books;” “the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and hell (hades) delivered up the dead which were in them.” This is entirely inconsistent with the supposition that a large part of the race—to wit, all the righteous—had been before raised up; had passed the solemn judgment; had been clothed with their immortal bodies, and had been admitted to a joint reign with the Saviour on his throne. In the last judgment what place aretheyto occupy? In what sense aretheyto be raised up and judged?Wouldsuch a representation have been made as is found inver.11–15, if it had been designed to teach that a large part of the race had been already raised up, and had received the approval of their judge?
(g) This representation is wholly inconsistent, not only withver.11–15, but with the uniform language of the Scriptures,that all the righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. On no point are the statements of the Bible more uniform and explicit than on this, and it would seem that the declarations had been of design so made that there should be no possibility of mistake. I refer for full proof on this point to the following passages of the New Testament:—Mat.x.32, 33, compared withMat.vii.21–23;xiii.30, 38–43;xvi.24–27;xxv.10, 31–46;Mar.viii.38;Jn.v.28, 29;Ac.xvii.31:Ro.ii.5–16;xiv.10, 12;1 Co.iii.12–15;iv.5;2 Co.v.9–11;2 Th.i.6–10;1 Ti.v.24, 25;2 Pe.iii.7, 10, 12;1 Jn.ii.28;iv.17;Re.iii.5;xx.11–15;xxii.12–15. It is utterlyimpossibleto explain these passages on any other supposition than that they are intended to teach thatthe righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. And if this is so, it is of course impossible to explain them consistently with the view that all the righteous will have been already raised up at the beginning of the millennium in their immortal and glorified bodies, and that they have been solemnly approved by the Saviour, and admitted to a participation in his glory. Nothing could be more irreconcilable than these two views; and it seems to me, therefore, that the objections to the literal resurrection of the saints at the beginning of the millennial period are insuperable.
III.The following points, then, according to the interpretation proposed, are implied in this statement respecting the “first resurrection,” and these will clearly compriseallthat is stated on the subject.
(1) There will be a reviving, and a prevalence of the spirit which actuated the saints in the best days, and a restoration of their principles as the grand principles which will control and govern the church,as ifthe most eminent saints were raised again from the dead, and lived and acted upon the earth.
(2) Their memory will then be sacredly cherished, and they will be honoured on the earth with the honour which is due to their names, and which they should have received when in the land of the living. They will be no longer cast out and reproached; no longer held up to obloquy and scorn; no longer despised and forgotten; but there will be a reviving of sacred regard for their principles,as ifthey lived on the earth, and had the honour which was due to them.
(3) There will be a state of things upon the earth as if they thus lived and were thus honoured. Religion will no longer be trampled under foot, but will triumph. In all parts of the earth it will have the ascendency, as if the most eminent saints of past ages lived and reigned with the Son of God in his kingdom. A spiritual kingdom will be set up with the Son of God at the head of it, which will be a kingdom of eminent holiness, as if the saints of the best days of the church should come back to the earth and dwell upon it. The ruling influence in the world will be the religion of the Son of God, and the principles which have governed the most holy of his people.
(4) It may be implied that the saints and martyrs of other times will be employed by the Saviour in embassies of mercy; in visitations of grace to our world to carry forward the great work of salvation on earth. Nothing forbids the idea that the saints in heaven may be thus employed, and in this long period of a thousand years, it may be that they will be occupied in such messages and agencies of mercy to our world as they have never been before—as ifthey were raised from the dead, and were employed by the Redeemer to carry forward his purposes of mercy to mankind.
(5) In connection with these things, and in consequence of these things, they may be, during that period, exalted to higher happiness and honour in heaven. The restoration of their principles to the earth; the Christian remembrance of their virtues; the prevalence of those truths to establish which they laid down their lives, would in itself exalt them, and would increase their joy in heaven. All this would be well represented, in vision, by a resurrection of the dead; and admitting that this was all that was intended, the representation of John here would be in the highest degree appropriate. What could better symbolize it—and we must remember that this is a symbol—than to say that at the commencement of this period there was, as it were, a solemn preparation for a judgment, and that the departed dead seemed to stand there, and that a sentence was pronounced in their favour, and that they became associated with the Son of God in the honours of his kingdom, and that their principles were now to reign and triumph in the earth, and that the kingdom which they laboured to establish would be set up for a thousand years, and that, in high purposes of mercy and benevolence during that period, they would be employed in maintaining and extending the principles of religion in the world? Admitting that the Holy Spirit intended to represent these things, and these only, no more appropriate symbolical language could have been used; none that would more accord with the general style of the book of Revelation.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,7.And when the thousand years areexpired. Seever.2. ¶Satan shall be loosed out of his prison.Seever.3. That is, a state of things will then occur as if Satan should be for a time let loose again, and should be permitted to go as formerly over the world. No intimation is givenwhyorhowhe would be thus released from his prison. We are not, however, to infer that it would be a mere arbitrary act on the part of God. All that is necessary to be supposed is, that there would be, in certain parts of the world, a temporary outbreak of wickedness,as ifSatan were for a time released from his chains.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
7.And when the thousand years areexpired. Seever.2. ¶Satan shall be loosed out of his prison.Seever.3. That is, a state of things will then occur as if Satan should be for a time let loose again, and should be permitted to go as formerly over the world. No intimation is givenwhyorhowhe would be thus released from his prison. We are not, however, to infer that it would be a mere arbitrary act on the part of God. All that is necessary to be supposed is, that there would be, in certain parts of the world, a temporary outbreak of wickedness,as ifSatan were for a time released from his chains.
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth,622Gog and Magog, to623gather them together to battle: the number of whomisas the sand of the sea.8.And shall go out to deceive the nations.See Notes onch. xii.9. The meaning here is, that he would again, for a time, act in his true character, and in some way delude the nations once more. In what way this would be done is not stated. It would be, however, clearly an appeal to the wicked passions of mankind, exciting a hope that they might yet overthrow the kingdom of God on the earth. ¶Which are in the four quarters of the earth.Literally,cornersof the earth, as if the earth were one extended square plain. The earth is usually spoken of as divided into four parts or quarters—the eastern, the western, the northern, and the southern. It is implied here that the deception or apostasy referred to would not be confined to one spot or portion of the world, but would extend afar. The idea seems to be, that during that period, though there would be ageneralprevalence of the gospel, and ageneraldiffusion of its blessings, yet that the earth would not be entirely under its influence, and especially that the native character of the human heart would not be changed. Man, under powerful temptations, would be liable to be deluded by the great master spirit that has so often corrupted the race. Once more he would be permitted to make the trial, and then his power would for ever come to an end. ¶Gog and Magog.The nameGogoccurs as the name of a prince inEze.xxxviii.2, 3, 16, 18;xxxix.1, 11. “He is an invader of the land of Israel, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,”Eze.xxxviii.2.Magogis also mentioned inEze.xxxviii.2, “the land of Magog;” and inEze.xxxix.6, “I will send a fire on Magog.” As the terms are used in the Old Testament, the representation would seem to be thatGogwas the king of a people calledMagog. The signification of the names is unknown, and consequently nothing can be determined about the meaning of this passage from that source. Nor is there much known about thepeoplewho are referred to by Ezekiel. His representation would seem to be, that a great and powerful people, dwelling in the extreme recesses of the north (ch. xxxviii.15;xxxix.2), would invade the Holy Land after the return from the exile,ch. xxxviii.8–12. It is commonly supposed that they wereScythians, residing between the Caspian and Euxine Seas, or in the region of Mount Caucasus. Thus Josephus (Ant.i.6, 3) has dropped the Hebrew wordMagog, and rendered it byΣκύθαι—Scythians; and so does Jerome. Suidas renders itΠέρσαι—Persians; but this does not materially vary the view, since the wordScythians, among the ancient writers, is a collective word, to denote all the north-eastern, unknown, barbarous tribes. Among the Hebrews, the nameMagogalso would seem to denote all the unknown barbarous tribes about the Caucasian mountains. The fact that the names Gog and Magog are, in Ezekiel, associated with Meshech and Tubal, seems to determine the locality of these people, for those two countries lie between the Euxine and Caspian Seas, or at the south-east extremity of the Euxine Sea (Rosenmüller,Bib. Geog.vol. i.p.240). The people of that region were, it seems, a terror to Middle Asia, in the same manner as the Scythians were to the Greeks and Romans. Intercourse with such distant and savage nations was scarcely possible in ancient times; and hence, from their numbers and strength, they were regarded with great terror, just as the Scythians were regarded by the ancient Greeks and Romans, and as the Tartars were in the middle ages. In this manner they became an appropriate symbol of rude and savage people; of enemies fierce and warlike; of foes to be dreaded; and as such they were referred to by both Ezekiel and John. It has been madea question whether Ezekiel and John do not refer to the same period, but it is not necessary to consider that question here. All that is needful to be understood is, that John means to say that at the time referred to there would be formidable enemies of the church who might be compared with the dreaded dwellers in the land of Magog; or, that after this long period of millennial tranquillity and peace, there would be a state of things which might be properly compared with the invasion of the Holy Land by the dreaded barbarians of Magog or Scythia. It is not necessary to suppose that any particularcountryis referred to, or that there would be any one portion of the earth which the gospel would not reach, and which would be still barbarous, heathen, and savage; all that is necessary to be supposed is, that though religion would generally prevail, human nature would remain essentially corrupt and unchanged; and that, therefore, from causes which are not stated, there might yet be a fearful apostasy, and a somewhat general prevalence of iniquity. This would be nothing more thanhasoccurred after the most favoured times in the church, and nothing more than human nature would exhibit at any time, if all restraints were withdrawn, and men were suffered to act out their native feelings.Whythis will be permitted; what causes will bring it about; what subordinate agencies will be employed, is not said, and conjecture would be vain. The reader who wishes more information in regard to Gog and Magog may consult Professor Stuart on this book,vol. ii.pp.364–368, and the authorities there referred to.Comp.especially Rosenmüller onEze.xxxviii.2. See also Sale’sKoran,Pre. Dis.§4, and theKoranitself, Suraxviii.94, andxxi.95. ¶To gather them together to battle.As ifto assemble them for war; that is, a state of things would exist in regard to the kingdom of God and the prevalence of the true religionas ifdistant and barbarous nations should be aroused to make war on the church of God. The meaning is, that there would be an awakened hostility against the kingdom of Christ in the earth. See Notes onch. xvi.14. ¶The number of whomisas the sand of the sea.A common comparison in the Scriptures to denote a great multitude,Ge.xxii.17;xxxii.12;xli.49;1 Sa.xiii.5;1 Ki.iv.20,et al.§c.—Condition of things in the period referred to inver.7, 8.(1) This will occurat the closeof the millennial period—the period of the thousand years. It is not said, indeed, that it would beimmediatelyafter that; but the statement is explicit that it will beafterthat, or “when the thousand years are expired.” There may be an interval before it shall be accomplished of an indefinite time; the alienation and corruption may be gradual; a considerable period may elapse before the apostasy shall assume an organized form, or, in the language of John, before the hosts shall “be gathered to battle,” but it is to be thenextmarked and prominent event in the history of the world, and is to precede the final consummation of all things.(2) This will be abrief period. Compared with the long period of prosperity that preceded it, andperhapscompared with the long period that shall follow it before the final judgment, it will be short. Thus, inver.3, it is said that Satan “must be looseda little season.” SeeNoteson that verse. There is no way of determining the time with exactness; but we are assured that it will not be long.(3) What will be the exact state of things then can be only a matter of conjecture. We may say, however, that it willnotbe (a) necessarilywar. The language is figurative and symbolical, and it is not necessary to suppose that an actual and bloody warfare will be literally waged against the church. Nor (b) will there be a literal invasion of the land of Palestine as the residence of the saints and the capital of the Redeemer’s visible empire, for there is not a hint of this—not a word to justify such an interpretation. Nor (c) is it necessary to suppose that there will be literally such nations as will be then called “GogandMagog,” for this language is figurative, and designed to characterize the foes of the church—as being in some respects formidable and terrible as were those ancient nations.We may thus suppose that at that time, from causes which are unexplained, there will be (a) a revived opposition to the truths of religion; (b) the prevalence, to a greater or less extent, of infidelity; (c) a great spiritual declension; (d) a combination of interests opposed to the gospel; (e) possibly some new form of error and delusion that shall extensively prevail.Satan may set up some new form of religion, or he may breathe into those that may already exist a spirit of worldliness and vanity—some new manifestation of the religion of forms—that shall for a limited period produce a general decline and apostasy. As there is, however, no distinct specification of what will characterize the world at that time, it is impossible to determine what is referred to any more than in this general manner.(4) A few remarks may, however, be made on theprobabilityof what is here affirmed, for it seems contrary to what we should suppose would be the characteristics of the closing period of the world. The following remarks, then, may show that this anticipated state of things is not improbable:—(a) We are to remember that human nature will then be essentially the same as now. There is no intimation that man, as born into the world, will be then different from what he is now, or that any of the natural corrupt tendencies of the human heart will be changed. Men will beliableto the same outbreaks of passion, to be influenced by the same forms of temptation, to fall into the same degeneracy and corruption, to feel the same unhappy influences of success and prosperity as now, for all this appertains to a fallen nature, except as it is checked and controlled by grace. We often mistake much in regard to the millennial state by supposing that all the evils of the apostasy will be arrested and that thenatureof man will be as wholly changed as it will be in the heavenly world. (b) The whole history of the church has shown that there is a liability todeclensioneven in the best state and in the condition of the highest spiritual prosperity. To see this we have only to remember the example of the Hebrews, and how readily they apostatized after the most striking manifestation of the divine mercies; the early Christian church, and how soon it declined; the seven churches of Asia Minor, and how soon their spirituality departed; the various revivals of religion that have occurred from time to time, and how soon they have been succeeded by coldness, worldliness, and error; the fact that great religious denominations, which have begun their career with zeal and love, have so soon degenerated in spirit, and fallen into the same formality and worldliness which they have evinced who have gone before them; and the case of the individual Christian, who from the most exalted state of love and joy so soon often declines into a state of conformity to the world. These are sad views of human nature, even under the influence of true religion; but the past history of man has given but too much occasion for such reflections, and too much reason to apprehend that the same things may occur, for a time, even under the best forms in which religion may manifest itself in a fallen world. Man’s nature will be better in heaven, and religion there, in its purest and best form, will be permanent; here we are not to be surprised atanyoutbreak of sin or any form of declension in religion. What has often occurred in the world on a small scale we may suppose may then occur on a larger scale. “Just as on a small scale, in some little community like that of Northampton, as described by President Edwards, after the remarkable sense of God’s presence over the whole town had begun to wax feeble, the still unconverted persons of it, though subdued and seemingly won over to Christ, would by little and little recover themselves, and at length venture forth in their true character; so it will be, in all probability, on a vast scale, at the close of the latter day. The unconverted portion of the world—long constrained by the religious influences everywhere surrounding them to fall in with the spirit of the day, catching apparently its holy impulses, but never coming savingly under its power—this portion of mankind, which we have reason to fear will not be small, will now be freed from these irksome restraints, no longer obliged to breathe an atmosphere uncongenial to their nature” (Brown on theSecond Coming of Christ,p.442). “No oppression is so grievous to an unsanctified heart as that which arises from the purity of Christianity. A desire to shake off this yoke is the true cause of the opposition which Christianity has met with in the world in every period, and will, it is most likely, be the chief motive to influence the followers of Gog in his time” (Frazer’sKey,p.455). (c) The representations of the New Testament elsewhere confirm this view in regard to the latter state of the world—the state when the Lord Jesus shall come to judgment. “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?”Lu.xviii.8. “There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise ofhis coming?”2 Pe.iii.3, 4. “The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape,”1 Th.v.2, 3. See especiallyLu.xvii.26–30: “As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.”
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth,622Gog and Magog, to623gather them together to battle: the number of whomisas the sand of the sea.
8.And shall go out to deceive the nations.See Notes onch. xii.9. The meaning here is, that he would again, for a time, act in his true character, and in some way delude the nations once more. In what way this would be done is not stated. It would be, however, clearly an appeal to the wicked passions of mankind, exciting a hope that they might yet overthrow the kingdom of God on the earth. ¶Which are in the four quarters of the earth.Literally,cornersof the earth, as if the earth were one extended square plain. The earth is usually spoken of as divided into four parts or quarters—the eastern, the western, the northern, and the southern. It is implied here that the deception or apostasy referred to would not be confined to one spot or portion of the world, but would extend afar. The idea seems to be, that during that period, though there would be ageneralprevalence of the gospel, and ageneraldiffusion of its blessings, yet that the earth would not be entirely under its influence, and especially that the native character of the human heart would not be changed. Man, under powerful temptations, would be liable to be deluded by the great master spirit that has so often corrupted the race. Once more he would be permitted to make the trial, and then his power would for ever come to an end. ¶Gog and Magog.The nameGogoccurs as the name of a prince inEze.xxxviii.2, 3, 16, 18;xxxix.1, 11. “He is an invader of the land of Israel, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,”Eze.xxxviii.2.Magogis also mentioned inEze.xxxviii.2, “the land of Magog;” and inEze.xxxix.6, “I will send a fire on Magog.” As the terms are used in the Old Testament, the representation would seem to be thatGogwas the king of a people calledMagog. The signification of the names is unknown, and consequently nothing can be determined about the meaning of this passage from that source. Nor is there much known about thepeoplewho are referred to by Ezekiel. His representation would seem to be, that a great and powerful people, dwelling in the extreme recesses of the north (ch. xxxviii.15;xxxix.2), would invade the Holy Land after the return from the exile,ch. xxxviii.8–12. It is commonly supposed that they wereScythians, residing between the Caspian and Euxine Seas, or in the region of Mount Caucasus. Thus Josephus (Ant.i.6, 3) has dropped the Hebrew wordMagog, and rendered it byΣκύθαι—Scythians; and so does Jerome. Suidas renders itΠέρσαι—Persians; but this does not materially vary the view, since the wordScythians, among the ancient writers, is a collective word, to denote all the north-eastern, unknown, barbarous tribes. Among the Hebrews, the nameMagogalso would seem to denote all the unknown barbarous tribes about the Caucasian mountains. The fact that the names Gog and Magog are, in Ezekiel, associated with Meshech and Tubal, seems to determine the locality of these people, for those two countries lie between the Euxine and Caspian Seas, or at the south-east extremity of the Euxine Sea (Rosenmüller,Bib. Geog.vol. i.p.240). The people of that region were, it seems, a terror to Middle Asia, in the same manner as the Scythians were to the Greeks and Romans. Intercourse with such distant and savage nations was scarcely possible in ancient times; and hence, from their numbers and strength, they were regarded with great terror, just as the Scythians were regarded by the ancient Greeks and Romans, and as the Tartars were in the middle ages. In this manner they became an appropriate symbol of rude and savage people; of enemies fierce and warlike; of foes to be dreaded; and as such they were referred to by both Ezekiel and John. It has been madea question whether Ezekiel and John do not refer to the same period, but it is not necessary to consider that question here. All that is needful to be understood is, that John means to say that at the time referred to there would be formidable enemies of the church who might be compared with the dreaded dwellers in the land of Magog; or, that after this long period of millennial tranquillity and peace, there would be a state of things which might be properly compared with the invasion of the Holy Land by the dreaded barbarians of Magog or Scythia. It is not necessary to suppose that any particularcountryis referred to, or that there would be any one portion of the earth which the gospel would not reach, and which would be still barbarous, heathen, and savage; all that is necessary to be supposed is, that though religion would generally prevail, human nature would remain essentially corrupt and unchanged; and that, therefore, from causes which are not stated, there might yet be a fearful apostasy, and a somewhat general prevalence of iniquity. This would be nothing more thanhasoccurred after the most favoured times in the church, and nothing more than human nature would exhibit at any time, if all restraints were withdrawn, and men were suffered to act out their native feelings.Whythis will be permitted; what causes will bring it about; what subordinate agencies will be employed, is not said, and conjecture would be vain. The reader who wishes more information in regard to Gog and Magog may consult Professor Stuart on this book,vol. ii.pp.364–368, and the authorities there referred to.Comp.especially Rosenmüller onEze.xxxviii.2. See also Sale’sKoran,Pre. Dis.§4, and theKoranitself, Suraxviii.94, andxxi.95. ¶To gather them together to battle.As ifto assemble them for war; that is, a state of things would exist in regard to the kingdom of God and the prevalence of the true religionas ifdistant and barbarous nations should be aroused to make war on the church of God. The meaning is, that there would be an awakened hostility against the kingdom of Christ in the earth. See Notes onch. xvi.14. ¶The number of whomisas the sand of the sea.A common comparison in the Scriptures to denote a great multitude,Ge.xxii.17;xxxii.12;xli.49;1 Sa.xiii.5;1 Ki.iv.20,et al.
§c.—Condition of things in the period referred to inver.7, 8.
(1) This will occurat the closeof the millennial period—the period of the thousand years. It is not said, indeed, that it would beimmediatelyafter that; but the statement is explicit that it will beafterthat, or “when the thousand years are expired.” There may be an interval before it shall be accomplished of an indefinite time; the alienation and corruption may be gradual; a considerable period may elapse before the apostasy shall assume an organized form, or, in the language of John, before the hosts shall “be gathered to battle,” but it is to be thenextmarked and prominent event in the history of the world, and is to precede the final consummation of all things.
(2) This will be abrief period. Compared with the long period of prosperity that preceded it, andperhapscompared with the long period that shall follow it before the final judgment, it will be short. Thus, inver.3, it is said that Satan “must be looseda little season.” SeeNoteson that verse. There is no way of determining the time with exactness; but we are assured that it will not be long.
(3) What will be the exact state of things then can be only a matter of conjecture. We may say, however, that it willnotbe (a) necessarilywar. The language is figurative and symbolical, and it is not necessary to suppose that an actual and bloody warfare will be literally waged against the church. Nor (b) will there be a literal invasion of the land of Palestine as the residence of the saints and the capital of the Redeemer’s visible empire, for there is not a hint of this—not a word to justify such an interpretation. Nor (c) is it necessary to suppose that there will be literally such nations as will be then called “GogandMagog,” for this language is figurative, and designed to characterize the foes of the church—as being in some respects formidable and terrible as were those ancient nations.
We may thus suppose that at that time, from causes which are unexplained, there will be (a) a revived opposition to the truths of religion; (b) the prevalence, to a greater or less extent, of infidelity; (c) a great spiritual declension; (d) a combination of interests opposed to the gospel; (e) possibly some new form of error and delusion that shall extensively prevail.Satan may set up some new form of religion, or he may breathe into those that may already exist a spirit of worldliness and vanity—some new manifestation of the religion of forms—that shall for a limited period produce a general decline and apostasy. As there is, however, no distinct specification of what will characterize the world at that time, it is impossible to determine what is referred to any more than in this general manner.
(4) A few remarks may, however, be made on theprobabilityof what is here affirmed, for it seems contrary to what we should suppose would be the characteristics of the closing period of the world. The following remarks, then, may show that this anticipated state of things is not improbable:—(a) We are to remember that human nature will then be essentially the same as now. There is no intimation that man, as born into the world, will be then different from what he is now, or that any of the natural corrupt tendencies of the human heart will be changed. Men will beliableto the same outbreaks of passion, to be influenced by the same forms of temptation, to fall into the same degeneracy and corruption, to feel the same unhappy influences of success and prosperity as now, for all this appertains to a fallen nature, except as it is checked and controlled by grace. We often mistake much in regard to the millennial state by supposing that all the evils of the apostasy will be arrested and that thenatureof man will be as wholly changed as it will be in the heavenly world. (b) The whole history of the church has shown that there is a liability todeclensioneven in the best state and in the condition of the highest spiritual prosperity. To see this we have only to remember the example of the Hebrews, and how readily they apostatized after the most striking manifestation of the divine mercies; the early Christian church, and how soon it declined; the seven churches of Asia Minor, and how soon their spirituality departed; the various revivals of religion that have occurred from time to time, and how soon they have been succeeded by coldness, worldliness, and error; the fact that great religious denominations, which have begun their career with zeal and love, have so soon degenerated in spirit, and fallen into the same formality and worldliness which they have evinced who have gone before them; and the case of the individual Christian, who from the most exalted state of love and joy so soon often declines into a state of conformity to the world. These are sad views of human nature, even under the influence of true religion; but the past history of man has given but too much occasion for such reflections, and too much reason to apprehend that the same things may occur, for a time, even under the best forms in which religion may manifest itself in a fallen world. Man’s nature will be better in heaven, and religion there, in its purest and best form, will be permanent; here we are not to be surprised atanyoutbreak of sin or any form of declension in religion. What has often occurred in the world on a small scale we may suppose may then occur on a larger scale. “Just as on a small scale, in some little community like that of Northampton, as described by President Edwards, after the remarkable sense of God’s presence over the whole town had begun to wax feeble, the still unconverted persons of it, though subdued and seemingly won over to Christ, would by little and little recover themselves, and at length venture forth in their true character; so it will be, in all probability, on a vast scale, at the close of the latter day. The unconverted portion of the world—long constrained by the religious influences everywhere surrounding them to fall in with the spirit of the day, catching apparently its holy impulses, but never coming savingly under its power—this portion of mankind, which we have reason to fear will not be small, will now be freed from these irksome restraints, no longer obliged to breathe an atmosphere uncongenial to their nature” (Brown on theSecond Coming of Christ,p.442). “No oppression is so grievous to an unsanctified heart as that which arises from the purity of Christianity. A desire to shake off this yoke is the true cause of the opposition which Christianity has met with in the world in every period, and will, it is most likely, be the chief motive to influence the followers of Gog in his time” (Frazer’sKey,p.455). (c) The representations of the New Testament elsewhere confirm this view in regard to the latter state of the world—the state when the Lord Jesus shall come to judgment. “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?”Lu.xviii.8. “There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise ofhis coming?”2 Pe.iii.3, 4. “The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape,”1 Th.v.2, 3. See especiallyLu.xvii.26–30: “As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.”