Christians seem to love arguing about Eschatology. Teach a series about holiness, and a few will show up. Teach a series about how the latest political world figure may be the antichrist, or a series on how there are Black Hawk Helicopters in Revelation, and the whole town will show up. I think that possibly no topic in Scripture is taken from a man-centered point of view more than Eschatology (Study of end times).
Nothing in Matthew 18 says that a “wrong” view of Eschatology warrants excommunication for a Christian, but try being anything other than a Pre-tribulation, Pre-Millennial, Futurist in your typical Southern Baptist Church and you will be shunned and kicked to the curb quickly!
In most circles today, it is assumed that most of the New Testament is writing about a future that, as of the time of this article, is 2,000 plus years since the events of the New Testament. Anyone who thinks all Scripture was completed before 70 A.D. is considered weird or unworthy of consideration, no matter how much the internal evidence consistently demonstrates. Further, no matter how much one likes to claim that the external evidence only shows a post-70 A.D. date for John’s writings, as Gentry has shown us1, this is far from the case.
When investigating Eschatology and the modern view, it seems that so much of our thinking is defined by three views on the Millennium. They are Premillennialism, Amillennialism, and Postmillennialism. The issue I take with this is that we have built whole systems of thought on a small passage in Revelation 20 and made everything else subservient to it. For Premillennialism, in particular, it is assumed that the 1,000 years found in Revelation 20 is a literal 1,000 trips around the sun for the planet Earth.
But is that the case? Are the 1,000 years a literal timeframe? Are they meant to be taken literally?
Many claim to take the Bible “literally.” Newsflash! Nobody takes the Bible “literally.” Everyone recognizes that Scripture can’t be taken 100% literally. This is a misnomer. We interpret the Bible “normally” based on each type of literature, considering the original author’s intent and the original audience’s understanding. We also consider the vocabulary used and lean heavily on context for a consistent interpretation. So, when Scripture uses metaphorical or apocalyptic language, we interpret it as such.
What does this mean for the 1,000 years in Revelation 20?
The text references 1,000 years twice. It even specifically states that Satan is bound for 1,000 years. However, the question is: Is this 1,000 years literal? To answer this question, we must consider the immediate and larger context of Revelation and how Scripture uses the language of “1,000 years” elsewhere.
Is it used “literally” somewhere else in Scripture?
Since the author was a New Testament writer familiar with Old Testament Scripture, would he have similarly used the terminology?
Is it meant to be taken literally in Revelation 20?
Let’s investigate this by looking at other places where the phrase, “1,000 years” is utilized.
1,000 Years Passages
Deuteronomy 7:9
9 You shall know therefore that Yahweh your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments. (LSB)
Now, if we take 1,000 years as “literal,” does this mean that God only keeps His covenant for 1,000 generations and would stop at the 1,001st? What about those people in the generation after 1,000? I guess God does not have lovingkindness for them. The 1,000 years here is a figure of speech that Old Testament people used to describe an incalculable amount of time, similar to what we would do in modern times with the phrase “a million years.” The 1,000 number is not meant to define numerical limits to God’s love.
Joshua 23:10
10 One of your men will pursue one thousand, for Yahweh your God is He who fights for you, just as He promised you. (LSB)
This is interesting because if you take the 1,000 years literally, you have to say that a single man would pursue exactly 1,000. Not 1,001. Not 999. Or else, Scripture is in error. Once again, the Old Testament uses a figure of speech common to the people of that time to describe how God brings victory in battle. To them, it will be such an overwhelming victory that it will feel as if 1 man is pursuing 1,000!
Psalm 50:10
10 For every beast of the forest is Mine,
The cattle on a thousand hills. (LSB)
This one is self-explanatory. If the 1,000 years is to be taken literally, then I guess God only owns cattle on exactly 1,000 hills. He can’t own cattle on that 1,001st hill. And, if He decided to sell some of His cattle, He would have to ensure it did not leave Him with cattle only on 999 hills.
Psalm 90:4
4 For a thousand years in Your sight
Are like yesterday when it passes by,
Or as a watch in the night. (LSB)
Here we see the 1,000 years used to compare God’s understanding of time to ours. This is something we will see in the New Testament as well. This language demonstrates the immense difference between God and His creation. It is not meant to be taken literally as if God only sees 1,000 years like yesterday and not 1,001 or 999. Time and space are part of the creation of God and therefore He exists outside of them. So, how we understand and experience time is not the same for God.
Ecclesiastes 6:6
6 Even if the other man lives one thousand years twice and does not see good things—do not all go to the same place?” (LSB)
Here is another example of how Scripture uses “1,000 years” to describe an indefinite time period. The writer is not stating that if a man literally lives 2,000 years (not one day more or less) and does not see good things. If we interpret it normally in context, we see that even if a man were to live 2,000 years or some extreme length of time, he would still suffer the same fate as all men. There is nothing different about that man compared to other men in that regard.
2 Peter 3:8
8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.
Now, we move to the New Testament and see another example of “1,000 years” used to make a point. We see the same usage here that we saw in Psalm 90:4. It describes once again the difference in how God sees time and how man experiences time. What may seem like forever to man is nothing to God.
Revelation 20:1-3
1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; 3 and he threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were finished. After these things, he must be released for a short time. (Revelation 20:1-3 LSB)
This brings us back to Revelation chapter 20. Are we meant to take the 1,000 years of Satan being bound as a literal 1,000 years, no more, no less? I don’t think so. The 1,000 years is used the same way as in all the other places in Scripture. It is referring to a long period that Satan will be bound. I think the focus of Revelation 20 has far more to do with the reason for Satan being bound than it does with the length of time he is bound.
Satan is bound so that he can no longer deceive the nations. He is bound so that the power of the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ will go forth into all the world. His being bound does not indicate that he is not active. He is still active but is restricted in some manner. That is clear to me from the text. It also appears that he will be released at some point. I take that as still being in the future for us. Good Christians can disagree on that point.
I see nothing in the immediate context of Revelation 20:1-3, in the larger context of the book of Revelation, or in the context of how “1,000 years” is used in Scripture to demand a literal understanding of 1,000 years in Revelation 20:1-3. I don’t understand why much of our Eschatological systems are built around Revelation 20:1-3. There exist passages dealing with Eschatology that are clearer and can be used to develop one’s view.
- Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating The Book Of Revelation. Written by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. 2010. https://www.amazon.com/Before-Jerusalem-Fell-Dating-Revelation/dp/0982620608 ↩︎
