Michael Heiser's REVELATION Interpretation is MINDBLOWING (Breaking Eschatological Systems)

But what if we ditch the millennial

language?

What if we focus instead on the Messiah

literally ruling and reigning on earth

without depending or even caring about

the 1,000-year language. See, then the

literal kingdom idea is alive and well,

but it doesn't conform to our

theological systems.

>> Debates about the end times have been

ongoing for centuries. And out of those

debates have spawned a plethora of

esqueological systems. But of the many

schools of thought regarding the

apocalypse described in the books of

Revelation, Daniel, and other sources in

the Bible, we're going to hyperfocus on

two, premillennialism and

amillennialism.

and more specifically how these two

esqueological systems read and interpret

the end time scenario and what they

believe about the thousand-year reign of

Christ detailed in Revelation 20 1-6.

First, we'll start with

premillennialism.

Historically, the system of

premillennialism originated in the first

and 2 centuries AD with early church

fathers such as Tertullian, Justin

Martyr, and even Pepius, a bishop who

reportedly heard the Apostle John teach.

Premillennialism derives from a

chronological reading of Revelation and

holds the belief that Christ will return

to establish a literal earthly kingdom

for 1,000 years characterized by global

peace, righteousness, and Christ ruling

from Jerusalem leading up to the final

judgment.

Interesting side note, the early church

fathers beliefs about the thousand-year

reign is now called historic

premillennialism, which differs from the

modern dispensational premillennialism

in the fact that historic premill

doesn't teach a pre-tribulation rapture.

But premillennialism was a widespread

esqueological view in the early church,

and many influential Orthodox leaders

from the first three centuries held this

perspective.

However, views regarding the millennium

began to shift drastically by the 3rd

and fourth centuries with scholars in

Alexandria such as Clement and origin

heavily spiritualizing biblical passages

which laid the groundwork for what would

become amillennialism.

By the fifth century, figures like

Augustine of Hippo fully developed the

amalennial view, which later became the

dominant esquetology for centuries to

follow. The amillennial view is that the

1,000-year millennium described in

Revelation 20 is symbolic and not to be

read literally. All millennialists

believe Christ's reign is a spiritual

reality occurring right now in the

present church age rather than a future

1,000-year political kingdom on Earth

and that the millennium is a figurative

representation of the entire period

between Christ's ascension and his

eventual second coming. Amillennialists

hold that Christ is actively reigning as

king from heaven at the right hand of

the father.

Amillennialism was the dominant view

held by the church from the middle ages

to the reformation. And it wasn't until

the mid-9th century that

premillennialism reemerged, primarily in

Britain and America when British teacher

John Nelson Darby developed a specific

framework that became what we know today

as dispensational premillennialism and

popularized the concept of a

pre-tribulation rapture. Another

interesting side note about John Nelson

Darby is that in October 1827, he fell

off of a horse and was seriously

injured. And it was during that time of

recovery that he began to believe that

the kingdom described throughout the

scriptures was entirely different from

the church and that this was the period

of time that he started developing the

idea of the pre-trib rapture. Do with

that what you will. But looking at these

two esqueological systems from an

overhead view, you can basically

summarize that the two defer from one

another over a literal chronological

reading of Revelation and specifically

the millennial reign or a figurative

spiritual view of it. Now, I want you to

hear this clip of Dr. Michael Heiser

breaking down these two systems and

actually pinpointing where each of them

falls short when held up to the use of

the Old Testament passages in the book

of Revelation where he reads from two

incredible scholarly works. One from

Meredith Klene, an amalennialist, and

one from GK Beal and David Campbell

titled Revelation, a shorter commentary.

And before we hop in here, I just want

to preface this by saying that he really

gets into the weeds in this discussion,

but I'm confident you'll be able to

follow along. Let's check it out.

>> We'll start with the obvious that all of

the esqueological systems agree on. When

we read Revelation 16, we get all this

Antichrist stuff. We know it relates to

Daniel 2. We know it relates to Daniel

7. We know it relates to the little

horn. We know it relates to Daniel

11:36, the figure that makes himself

God. And we know that Paul picks up on

that that very idea in 2 Thessalonians

2:4 to describe the Antichrist.

Everybody knows all those elements.

Everybody agrees.

So what client says what what remains

what what what people just don't do

including scholars is they don't look

back at Ezekiel 38 and39 and see how

that passage

is used by John in Revelation 16 to

reinforce

to articulate his antichrist armageddon

story his prophecy

that's what they don't see and so what

client says client says Come along with

me. Let's look where Ezekiel 38 and39

and you know maybe Psalm 48 a little bit

some of these other passages where

they're used in Revelation 16. So this

is where he starts. So here's his first

line of evidence. Where does Gog hail

from? Where does he come from? Well,

Klein says let's first of all let's

think about the heights of the north.

Psalm 48 relates the marshalling of

enemy forces against Zion in that

passage. So, let me read you Psalm 48.

And if you've read Unseen Realm, this

should be familiar. Great is the Lord

and greatly to be praised in the city of

our God,

obviously Jerusalem, his holy mountain,

beautiful in elevation, is the joy of

all the earth. Mount Zion in the Yaret

Safon in the far north, the city of the

great king. Even though even though

Jerusalem Zion is in the south, we're

going to say it's in the far north

because we're doing theology.

The psalmist is doing theology and

cosmic geography. He's not doing literal

geography. He's doing cosmic geography

to do theology. Here's verse three.

Within her Jerusalem citadels, God has

made himself known as a fortress. For

behold, the kings assembled. As they

came on together, as soon as they saw

it, they were astounded. They were in

panic. They took to flight. Trembling

took hold of them there. Anguishes of a

woman in labor. Okay. By the east wind,

you shattered the ships of Tarsish.

I love the reference to Tarsish there.

Basically, everybody's gathered against

Zion. We're not going to forget about

little Tarses. You know, Spain, they get

in on the act, too. As we have heard, so

we have seen in the city of the Lord of

Hosts, in the city of our God, which God

will establish forever. So, we're

preparing for battle. It's all the

nations against Zion in the heights of

the north. Cosmic geography. Okay, so

Klein says, you know, okay, let's notice

that you get get the heights in the

north, Zion's in the far north. Then he

says, Gog, lo and behold, who would have

thought Gog is also from the Yetade

Safon.

Okay, the language, the phrase is used

in Ezekiel 38:6,

Ezekiel 38:15,

Ezekiel 392.

Klein writes, "It is from the heights of

Zafon that God brings Gog with all his

enemies

to overthrow them on the mountains of

Israel and specifically at Zion." So

there's one connection. Okay, so first

line of evidence is where does Gog come

from? Lo and behold, again, it sounds a

lot like what's going on, the gathering

of the nations, you know, from the

north.

Gog's characterization number two as a

usurper of the harogade the place of

counsel

and we know this from Isaiah 14 the

cosmic rebel seeks to ascend the heights

of Safon and be the most high thus the

great esqueological enemy in Revelation

16:16

marches on the heights of the north Zion

again we're seeing Isaiah 14 repeated at

Armageddon

Interestingly enough, Isaiah 14 is

directed against, drum roll please,

not the Chinese,

not the Russians,

but the king of Babylon,

whereby the prophet uses the cosmic

rebellion story to portray this king. In

Revelation, the enemy is Babylon and the

beast. Klein writes, "Gog is

characterized by the antichrist

syndrome." I love that phrase. He is a

pretender to the throne of heaven. The

correspondence of his experience to the

king of Babylon typology in Isaiah 14 is

seen in the ironic motif of the polar

contrast between his pretentions and his

actual fate like 180° different. Klein

writes, "Challenging Yahweh's

sovereignty on Zion, Gog would take

possession of the mountain heights of

Israel. But he ends up with his vast

military array in the depths of a

valley. He lunged for a heavenly throne

but plunged into a netherworld grave.

Remember Isaiah 14, I'll be like the

most high but he's brought into shol.

Now on this point about can we really

call the the valley where where Gog and

Magog and we read Ezekiel 3839 where

where Gog's armies end up in this

valley. Is that really a netherworld

grave? Is that really a the underworld?

You know, like is that really cosmic?

Oh, yeah. Klein writes, "The valley

where his armies were buried is called

the valley of the ovarim in Ezekiel 39

to11." Literally those passing through

or passing across. That is a term used

for the dead, those who cross over from

this world to the next. It appears in

Job 34:20,

Psalm 144:4.

Another name given to the burial valley

in Ezekiel 39:11 is gay kamongog,

valley of the multitude of Gog. Now,

this netherworld grave description is

legit if if only from Ezekiel 39:11. But

the word translated

travelers in in you know in that passage

in ESV those who who pass through or

pass across the word overim is

significant. I'm going to read from DDD

the dictionary of deities and demons.

Okay, here's what they their entry on on

on this term. The travelers, the ovarim

says in part, the participle cal plural

ovarim of the verb avar to pass from one

side to the other seems to have a

special meaning in the context of the

cult of the dead denoting the spirits of

the dead crossing the border between the

land of the living and the world of the

dead. It can be interpreted as a divine

name in Ezekiel 38 or 39:11 and 39:14

which may have also have been preserved

in the geographical named of Adoreim.

This is numbers 21:10-11, 27:12, 33:44,

33:47-48,

Deuteronomy 32:49,

and Jeremiah 22:20.

In Ezekiel 319 39:14, the word indicates

the dead, just dead bodies. Okay. A

possible solution to this crux interpret

is to relate ovarim here and in verse 11

to the ovarim

mentioned in the ugaric text denoting

the spirits of the dead. So it's not

just dead bodies. It's also a term that

is used in wider Canaanite literature

for the spirits of the dead. The valley

of the ovarim is located quote east of

the sea. That's Ezekiel 39:11 which is

very likely the dead sea. So it was part

of the trans Jordan. This is a region

which shows many traces of ancient cults

of the dead such as the megalithic

monuments called dolmans and place names

referring to the dead and the

netherworld

such as oote which is means the spirits

of the dead por as in bale of peor and

avar that's the end of the entry if you

have read my demons book or I think even

I do this in the angel's book that the

passage in Jude about Michael contending

with the devil for the body of Moses.

This is the key to understanding that

because where Moses dies and is buried,

remember he never gets into the promised

land is buried in a place associated

with the netherworld,

the realm of the dead, the spirits of

the dead. And so there was a strong um

you know tradition growing out of the

burial place and and the Old Testament

terminology.

You know, it was a dark place. There

there developed this this tradition

about is Moses okay?

what what happened to Moses' body? Like

what is and so Michael who is the prince

of Israel is the one who quote unquote

rescues or protects Moses from the Lord

of the Dead. This is the place where Gog

is defeated and his troops wind up. Does

it sound like Isaiah 14?

The answer is yes.

Okay, so that's thread number two.

Thread number three, client says, "Well,

what about the destination of Gog?"

We've talked about where Gog hails from.

You know, where does he come from? We've

talked about the him having the

Antichrist complex that I'm going to go

conquer, you know, the cosmic mountain.

I'm going to go defeat Yahweh. That that

doesn't turn out so well for him. What

about the destination of Gog? Ezekiel 38

and39 make this quite clear. Where is

Gog headed? Klein writes, "Gog advances

against the mountains of Israel." 392

39:17

Ezekiel. It is God's chosen Mount Zion

in the heart of the those mountains that

is his central point of attack. As in

the case of the mustering of the

beastial armies in Revelation 16, the

destination and intended target for Gog

and his hosts is Harmageddon, where the

Lord's anointed is enthroned at his

right hand. The indications for this are

clear. Even though Zion is not mentioned

by name in Ezekiel 38 and39, God does

speak of the mountains of Israel as my

mountains. 38:21

and of the land of Israel as my land.

38:16.

Implicit in that is the royal mountain

city where Yahweh dwells and rules over

the mountainous domains he claims as his

own. Also, such a capital city on the

cosmic mountain was regarded as the

center of the earth. And we've talked

about this. Let me just interrupt Klein

here. We've talked about this before

about cosmic mountain terminology.

Eden, tabernacle, temple, Sinai. These

places were viewed as as the place where

heaven and earth intersect. They are the

center of the earth. Not not in terms of

actual physical geography, but they are

the center of the earth. And that this

is the place from which God runs things.

Okay. So back to Klein, he says in

38:12, Gog is described as scheming to

assault the people of God dwelling at

quote the center, literally the navl of

the earth, unquote. In that concept,

Gog's real objective is exposed,

Yahweh's mount of assembly, rival to

Gog's pseudo safhone.

In the Revelation 20 version of Ezekiel

38 and39, Gog's armies are explicitly

said to compass quote the beloved city

unquote. Okay, which is Jerusalem and

Zion.

Trajectory number four, what about Gog

in Revelation 20? Klein summarizes this

point as follows. He says in Revelation

20 7-10, the Gog Magog assault on Zion

marks the end of the millennium. Within

Ezekiel 38 and39, indications also

abound of the esqueological finality of

the Gog crisis. As in Revelation 20, it

comes after a long age of secure

preservation for God's people. Ezekiel

38:8. In New Testament terms, after the

age in which the church, though sorely

persecuted, is preserved by the Lord to

complete the great commission task.

Revelation 11:7.

And as the judgment of on Gogg in

Revelation 20 merges with the

resurrection of the dead for final

judgment, that's Revelation 20 11-15.

So God's judicial deliverance of his

people from Gog in Ezekiel 38-39

institutes for them the eternal state of

unending never again disturbed felicity

described in Ezekiel 39:21-29.

So Klein has laid out four trajectories

that align Revelation 16 J Armageddon

with Ezekiel 38 and39.

They're all clear. They all make sense.

Again, if you're reading the passage in

light of John's use of the Old

Testament, you know, if you're not doing

that, then you're I don't know, you're

you're making something up. Um, you

know, again, you're talking about Russia

and China or something like that. Well,

go ahead. I I can't stop you. But, you

know, John isn't quoting from mouth

tongue, okay? Or, you know, something

that Lenin wrote or Marks. He's quoting

from the Old Testament. He's quoting

from Ezekiel 38 and39

and Psalm 48. Little bit of, you know,

Zechariah 14, some Daniel. Okay.

John's use of the Old Testament tells us

how to read chapters 16 through 19. So,

you might ask, well, how does this

connect to Revelation 19 specifically?

Because that's where we are here in this

episode. As all interpreters of the book

agree, Revelation 191 11-21, which we

read at the beginning, is the outcome of

the great war against the beast. It's

the outcome of Armageddon. It describes

the climactic battle won by the

returning Christ, the messianic warrior

and judge. Revelation 19 repurposes

descriptive content from the Gog and

Magog battle in Ezekiel 38 and39.

Revelation 19 does it, too. It's not

just Revelation 16. So Klein writes,

"Instruments of judgment mentioned by

both Ezekiel and John include

earthquakes, Ezekiel 38:19 and 20." Can

align that with not only Revelation

16:18-20, but earlier in the book,

sword, Ezekiel 38:21, see Revelation

19:15 and 21. and destructive hail and

fiery brimstone. Ezekiel 38:22, Ezekiel

39:6.

Align that with Revelation 16:21, and

Revelation 19:20.

Most striking, Klein says, is the

distinctive motif of God's summoning the

birds and beasts to feed on the

carcasses of the defeated enemies Gog

had gathered. the banquet theme

elaborated in Ezekiel 39:4

and Ezekiel 39:17-20

and John incorporates that that passage

Ezekiel 39:4 and 17-20 he specifically

incorporates that into the account of

Christ's victory over the beast and his

assembled armies in Revelation 19:17-18

you will you will look in vain okay you

will look in vain to find some other

passage in the Old Testament where we

have the birds and the beasts summoned

to feed on the carcasses of of the the

dead at the cosmic mountain. There is

only one passage that does that in the

Old Testament and it's Ezekiel 39. It's

Gog and Magog.

So that is how Revelation 19 connects.

So we've seen Revelation 16

17, you know, 17 and 18 are really about

the beast. Specifically, Revelation 16

and 19 repeat, repurpose, recapitulate

content from Ezekiel 38-39, the Gog and

Magog event, before we even get to

Revelation 20, where Gog and Magog are

mentioned by name. So, we've got a

repetition cycle between chapter 16,

chapter 19, and chapter 20. They're

describing the same series of events. It

is not a linear chronology of three

separate events. It is a recycling of

three of one event three times. And if

you do that, what it means before you

get to Gog and Magog in in Revelation,

Revelation 20, before you hit there, you

get all these references of the thousand

years. If they're describing the same

thing, then those thousand years must

represent the believers of chapter 16

and the believers the the believing age

in chapter 16, the believing age in

chapter 19. It's the current present

age.

Now, to put it lightly, all of this

cannot be coincidence.

Now, Klein uses the very clear recycling

again in his mind to devastate

premillennial esquetology. And this is

what I was raised on, you know, preacher

rapture, premillennial, you know, return

of Jesus, literal 1,000-year kingdom, so

on and so forth. and Klein by virtue of

of his skilled fariting out of how John

uses Ezekiel 38 and39 in more than one

place in these chapters destroys that

system.

Doesn't really destroy a rapture

question. I mean that that's that's a

little bit, you know, different of a

question, but it it destroys the system,

the general premillennial system. And

and he's happy to do so because he's a

nomillennialist. Now, I would say, well,

Professor Klein, as much as I love you

and and and your article, that's kind of

a yes and no. What does this all mean?

Well, the Old Testament use of John by

Ezekiel 38 and 39 in chapters that

precede the second coming. Notice that

it preceded the return of the Lord

because the return of the Lord, you

know, marks the the climax of

Armageddon.

and the chapter and it's also done

Ezekiel 38 and 39 are also in the

chapters that follow the second coming

revelation 20. This forces the

conclusion that the kingdom language up

through revelation 20 is basically the

present church age. Now you can't really

argue out of that because you'd have to

have two battles of Armageddon, not one.

Okay? You'd have to have two Gog and

Magog events, not one. Doesn't make any

sense. There's only one Armageddon.

There's one battle for Zion. There's one

return of there's one second coming and

you know there's one Gog and Magog

battle. So that's that's point that's

point number one. This is that's what it

means. It's this is where you're driven

by the text. Now that in turn produces

an esquetology. Here's point number two

that has the present age the church age

headed toward Armageddon. Well there's

no surprise there. I mean pretty much

everybody would track with that. But a

millers like Klene will use the

abstraction of 1,000 years. I see and we

told you a thousand years doesn't mean a

literal thousand years. It just means a

long time because the church has been

around for more than a thousand years.

So, so it's an abstract idea. So, I'm

millennialists like Klein will use that

abstraction in Revelation 20 to abstract

everything else out of existence

like a real antichrist. Does does Klein

believe that there will be a real

personal antichrist? I'm not sure. A lot

of our millennialists don't. How about a

real concerted chaos system driven by

real supernatural beings? Well, we

already know a lot of people in the

evangelical world and unfortunately

mostly in the reformed context where

you'll find amillennialism, they don't

believe that. That's too that's too

weird. It's too supernatural.

You know, give us give us our our core

doctrines of the faith and that's the

supernaturalism we have. We don't want

anymore. So, we know that that that

happens. Third, how about the real

release of demonic supernatural forces

in Revelation 9? Well, most

amillennialists would not say that's the

release of the Watchers. Again, that's

too weird. Cuz if we said that, then

we'd have to affirm Genesis 6. God

forbid.

How about the real reinheritance of the

nations and the real fulfillment of the

Psalm 82 judgment of the real rebel

gods? Well, we know they don't want to

touch Psalm 82.

How about the real literal

transformation of the earth back to a

real edenic state in real time? A lot of

millennials don't want to go there

either. They're the church is the

present age and then the Lord comes and

then then we have the eternal state

somewhere. It's this ethereal existence.

And all this talk about the new earth

and the new Eden. Well, that that's just

flowery allegorical language for

something for heaven somewhere. I don't

know. In other words, Klein and others

will will use the the abstraction here

to create a safe esqueological system

for people who don't want to affirm

these other quote unquote bizarre

supernatural elements.

I don't. Okay. If you're wondering what

their justification of such a dual

hermeneutic might be, ask one of them,

you know, not me because I'm not, you

know, I'm I'm not the traditional

amillennialist.

Now, third observation about what all

this means. Again, Klein targets

premillennialism with this, but all he

really destroys is the traditional

definition

of premillennialism. That's all he

actually destroys. If pre pay attention

carefully here to what I'm saying here,

this is important. I mean, the rest of

it's important, but this is important

especially if premillennialism means

quote the system that takes Revelation

as a linear chronology and bases its

idea of a literal reign of Christ on

earth only on the language of Revelation

20:es 1-6. Well, yeah, then Klein has

destroyed that. But what if we ditch the

millennial language?

What if we focus instead on the Messiah

literally ruling and reigning on earth

without depending or even caring about

the 1,000-year language? See, then the

literal kingdom idea is alive and well,

but it doesn't conform to our

theological systems. Now, you already

know this is where I'm at. Okay. My view

of the literal earthly kingdom is the

one that follows

Armageddon and the final judgments,

final resurrection, final judgments. It

is the New Eden. And it is not a

thousand years. It is forever.

A thousand years doesn't cut it. A

thousand years is a blink of an eye for

the reign of Christ on earth. But we're

we are so bound to this language

and bound to a word in Revelation 20

that when somebody like Klein comes

along and shows us that we can't read

Revelation 20 as a linear sequential

chronology and he destroys the system.

We think I can't believe in a literal

kingdom anymore. We must we might as

well all just you know suck up decline

and be a millennialist. No. No, no, no,

no, no, no. The church age is the

kingdom inaugurated

when Eden returns to earth really in

real time. That is the consummation of

the kingdom. And it is not a thousand

years. It is forever.

Klein has not touched that idea. He

destroys a system. He does not destroy a

point of biblical theology.

Now, I would also add to this as a

footnote. Klein actually doesn't undo

even the traditional premillennial

system talk entirely because there's one

reference to a thousand-year reign for

which his use of the data does not

account and that's in Revelation 20:6

and I'll get there in a moment. But the

larger point here is that we ought to

just ditch the traditional language.

Folks, there is no cosmic rule that says

you have to articulate your theology

using a glossery from a theology book or

a theological system. There's no penalty

flag that's going to come out if you say

things like, "Well, I don't really care

if the thousand years in Revelation 20

are the church age. I still believe that

there's going to be a literal kingdom

reign of Christ on earth. There's no

penalty flag for that. Now, you're going

to have people try to throw one because

they can't think outside their box.

What I'm saying is don't care about

their boxes.

Again, some scholars just can't do this.

And on a personal note here, they can't

imagine living outside the boxes that

traditional Christian theological

schemes have made for us to play in.

This is why even scholars again who you

know they can't think outside the box

their seminary training gives them will

call me Mike yours truly an

amalillennialist

like the recent reviewer of my demons

book in the master's seminary journal

and the guy calls me an amalillennialist

I'm not an amalennialist because I'm

using traditional terms now

amillennialists deny that there will be

a literal messianic kingdom on earth I

don't for amillennialists the kingdom is

the church out and then an ethereal

eternal state forever somewhere in some

form. They take the New Eden imagery as

figurative, not literal. Again, I don't.

So, what if we ditch the language and

tear apart the sandbox, knock it down?

My position is that when all this plays

out on Earth, that Christ will literally

return, literally defeat the beast. In

my view, that probably speaks more of a

chaos system than a man, but I do think

it includes a man. I think there will be

a real antichrist

and then Christ will literally reign

forever on earth in a new global Eden.

This is why I say a thousand-year

kingdom is too short. Christ's kingdom

on earth doesn't end after a thousand

years. We don't transition from the

church age here now to some sort of

undefinable nonliteral reign somewhere

in the clouds that the New Testament

writers mistakenly described as earthly.

It's too bad that I believe that

defining an idea like the messianic

kingdom by one word, the word thousand

in Revelation 20, is a flawed approach.

It's a system word and is no replacement

to a biblical theological idea. So,

sorry, I'm not playing the word game.

Theology should not derive from words

that theologians coin or systems

theologians create using words they find

in the Bible. It should derive from

biblical theological data and the data

pool here is a lot wider than Revelation

20. My actual view is far from

traditional amillennialism.

Maybe as far as you can get without

being an atheist. And I'm sorry if you

can't think outside your box. That's too

bad. I might shed a tear for you, but

probably not.

Now, there's an obvious question to all

this that Klein has to answer. Klein is

is deceased. I mean, he can't, you know,

respond to it obviously now. But all of

the systems have to, especially if

you're a traditional amillennialist.

Everybody has, you know, anyone who's

not in the traditional premillennial

camp has to account for this question.

Now, if the kingdom language from

Revelation 16-20 is basically about the

present church age headed toward

Armageddon and toward the return of

Jesus, then what is said about Satan in

Revelation 20 1-7 becomes an issue. Now,

listen to this. I'm going to read

Revelation 20, first seven verses. Then

I saw, and I'm going to I'm going to add

a few, you know, thoughts in here just

to make the point clear. Then I saw an

angel coming down from heaven holding in

his hand the key to the bottomless pit

and a great chain. And he seized the

dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the

devil and Satan, and bound him for a

thousand years. In other words, he bound

him for the length of the church age,

and threw him into the pit and shut it

and sealed it over him so that he might

not deceive the nations any longer until

the thousand years were ended. In other

words, until the length of the church

age had ended. After that, he must be

released for a little while. Okay,

that's part of the Armageddon event.

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them

were those to whom the authority to

judge was committed. Also, I saw the

souls of those who had been beheaded for

the testimony of Jesus and for the word

of God. And those who had not worshiped

the beast or its image and had not

received its mark on their foreheads, on

their hands, or or their hands. They

came to life and reigned with Christ for

a thousand years. In other words, the

dead in Christ during the length of the

church age get resurrected and they

reign with Christ.

Well, they can't reign with Christ in a

literal king because we're all

millennial. Maybe Oh, I get it. I get

it. those who who you know were were

martyed, they are alive in heaven. And

and so during the the length of the

church age, they're ruling in heaven.

That's actually what most millennials

believe, by the way. Verse five, the

rest of the dead did not come to life

until the thousand years were ended. In

other words, until the end of the of the

church age. Okay. Well, all right. This

is the first resurrection.

So, I guess that's when they get new

bodies and now they're ruling and

reigning something that isn't literal,

but it's not the church age because the

church age is over. Verse six, blessed

and holy is the one who shares in the

first resurrection

over such the second death has no power,

but they will be priests of God and of

Christ, and they, i.e. The ones raised

after the church age ends will reign

with him for a thousand years.

Oops.

You see this thousand years cannot refer

to the church age because the church age

has ended according to the preceding

verses. So here we have a reference to a

thousand years that can't be the church

age. So Klein's approach doesn't account

for this one reference in verse six,

does it? And when the thousand years are

ended, Satan will be released from his

prison. That's verse 7. Well, which

thousand years? The first thousand year,

the f the church age or the age that

comes after the church age?

So, what I'm getting at is is Klein's

approach is devastating to traditional

premillennial thinking, but it's not as

clear as he'd like to think. Verse six

muddies it, but the larger point is you

don't need it anyway.

The concept of a literal messianic reign

on earth is built from a data pool that

is much wider than Revelation 20 6. But

here's the bigger question. What about

Satan? What could it possibly mean to

have Satan being bound during the church

age if that's what the thousand years

means?

How is Satan bound during during the

present age? So that quote he might not

deceive the nations unquote. Looks to me

like there's plenty of deception going

on. Earlier in the book of Revelation,

John has Satan alive and well

persecuting believers. Revelation 2:10,

Revelation 21:13, and trying to kill off

the Messiah child. That's Revelation 12.

The rest of the New Testament has a

number of passages that presume Satan is

active in tempting, persecution, in

blinding the eyes of the unbelievers.

So, how are those ideas true in light of

what Klein and others are saying about

Revelation 20? And how could Revelation

20 be true in regard to Satan with all

this other stuff in the New Testament?

How how can this make sense? How do we

get a sensible portrayal of Satan out of

Revelation 20 if if we're supposed to be

reading this? And and again, I I'm I'm

sold by Klein's presentation here, but

he has to answer this question. He does

he doesn't do it in the article. And

frankly, the amillennialist answer to

this is weak. I think there's a better

answer to it. But if we're going to

regard the thousand years years here as

the church age, Satan is limited in some

respect so that he might not deceive the

nations, we have to figure out what that

means because whatever it means, it

can't run and fly in the face of all

this other stuff Satan is doing now in

the present age. So how do we do that?

In verse 7, it says when the thousand

years are ended, Satan will be released

from his prison. And then we get the

whole Armageddon scene rehearsed again.

So we have Satan being bound so that he

quote unquote can't deceive the nations

until he's released right before

Armageddon and then everything's

destroyed. The beast and you know Satan

and the false pro all this you know they

they're destroyed. There's a general

resurrection then we have the eternal

state so on and so forth. We got to deal

with this Satan talk. And how do

traditional ammillennialists, because

that's what Klein is or was, how do they

deal with this? Because a majority of

the church, believe it or not, this this

might come as a shock to a lot of our

listeners, but a majority of the church

is not premillennial, pre-tribulational,

rapture people, okay? Your reformed

traditions are not all your

Presbyterians, your Lutheran, you know,

all this kind of stuff. Um, the major,

you know, denominations, the people who

are, I'm not talking denomination in

name only. the people who are really

believers that are in these

denominations that take scripture

seriously, they're not thinking like Tim

Laay, they're not thinking left behind

and a rapture and all this stuff, that

that's actually a minority view, even

though it it's it's probably the view

that if it comes to like books about

prophecy, that's the view that is most

dominant in in terms of what is sold and

what is read and consumed. But that's

actually not the the majority view

historically in the church. So for those

who who you know look at the at the

kingdom as only the church the present

age and then after the Lord returns we

have some sort of we go to heaven or

some sort of eternal heavenly existence

which more often than not gets

abstracted as I commented in the last

episode that you know we can't have the

kingdom here on earth because then we

look like premillennialists or something

you know you know it it's kind of odd

you So this is why am millennials who

say the kingdom is now and that's the

kingdom period when the lord returns

then we get the eternal state which is

somewhere and the language in the new

testament used to describe it is idyllic

or allegorical

or purely metaphorical or something

again that this is this is how they do

it. They don't they don't expect the

literal release of the watchers in

revelation 9. They don't expect in many

cases a literal antichrist. They don't

they don't literalize any of this

because the thousand years talk they can

make a very good case and Klein does and

we shared that last episode that the

thousand years talk should not be

understood literally but again as the

present church age which is a lot longer

than a thousand years anyway and and

we're we're basing that on Klein's very

deaf handling of how John uses Ezekiel

38 and39 and Psalm 48 Isaiah 14 a little

bit of Zechariah

in Revelation 16 and Revelation 19,

Revelation 20. He uses the same material

in three different places showing that

John is recycling the same set of events

three times. He is not doing a linear

chronology. And if you if you follow

that, you you see it for what it is,

then you can't have an intervening

literal 1,000-year reign in Revelation

20:es 1-6. It doesn't work. So if if

you're going to take this this view, you

still have to answer the Satan problem.

What in the world? What could it

possibly mean that Satan is bound like

in the present age so that he might not

deceive the nations?

That just seems ridiculous because the

rest of the New Testament has a number

of passages that presume Satan is quite

active in tempting, persecuting

believers, blinding the eyes of

unbelievers. I'm going to read you just

some passages about Satan in the rest of

the New Testament here just to make the

point. Recall when I read these that

normative, you know, traditional

amillennialism,

okay, for them, the kingdom was

inaugurated during Christ's first coming

and and we believe that too. I I do, you

know, but I'm not an amalennialist. But

but they're, you know, they they they're

died in the wool there. I mean, this is

when the kingdom begins. The kingdom

begins when Christ shows up the first

time and it and it continues on into the

present age and that is the kingdom.

There is no other kingdom to look

forward to. So with that in mind, just

listen to some of these things that the

New Testament authors have Satan doing

during the present age, which includes

the age of the apostles, okay? When

Jesus was on earth leading up to the

cross. And I'll just listen to some of

these. Matthew 12:26,

"If Satan casts out Satan and he's

divided against himself, how then will

his kingdom stand?" Well, Satan has a

kingdom, too. How does he do how does he

manage that if like he's in jail? Like,

what what's going on there? Matthew

13:39.

This is the the seeds and the sewing.

The enemy who swed, you know, the bad

seeds is the devil. The harvest is the

end of the age and the reapers are

angels. So the devil is sowing bad or

false seed. Okay, how does that work?

Again, in light of this understanding of

Revelation 20, Luke 22:3,

Satan entered into Judas called a

Scariot. Looks like he's active there. I

think Judas was deceived, don't you?

Acts 5:3, Ananas and Safh. Why has Peter

asks Ananas, why has Satan filled your

heart to lie to the Holy Spirit? Plenty

active there. Acts 10:38 G when the the

apostles are talking about how Jesus

went about doing good and healing quote

all who were oppressed by the devil.

Looks like he's active there. Acts 26.

Okay. The gospel is designed to open the

eyes of the unbelievers so that they may

turn from darkness to light and from the

power of Satan to God. Well, that

suggests that the power of Satan is to

keep people from turning to the light.

Might that involve deception? I would

think so. Makes good sense. 1

Corinthians 5:5 where Paul in dealing

with the the unrepentant guy in in

Corinth says, "You are to deliver this

man to Satan for the destruction of the

flesh." Now, we know, you know, you you

know, if you've read Unseen Realm, that

this is a reference to being expelled

from the congregation. You know, it's

it's cosmic geography because the church

is now sacred space and you've removed

sin from sacred space and all that. But

apparently again, Satan has a realm

according to Paul. 1 Corinthians 7:5,

Paul again, he doesn't want the

Corinthians to, you know, to in in this

context withhold um, you know, sexual

activity from each other so that Satan

may not tempt you because of your lack

of self-control.

Satan can tempt according to Paul. 2

Corinthians 2:11, "So that we would not

be outwitted by Satan, for we are not

ignorant of his design." So Paul viewed

Satan as a threat, that he could be

outmaneuvered by Satan. H again, how

does this work? 2 Corinthians 11:14,

Satan disguises himself as an angel of

light. Look, that's deception, folks. So

how does this work with Revelation 20? I

mean, there there just a lot of these.

Ephesians 6, Paul wants believers to be

able to stand against the schemes of the

devil. Like, how do how would that

exclude deception? 1 Thessalonians 2:18,

Paul says that Satan hindered them in

their in their ministry. 2 Thessalonians

2:9, the coming of the lawless one is by

the activity of Satan. Well, the

Antichrist is empowered by Satan. How

does he do that if he's in jail? You

know, I mean, h how does this work?

Honestly, how does it work? 2 Timothy

2:26, he wants Timothy to escape from

the snare of the devil and other

believers than to not be captured by him

to do his will. James 4:7, James says,

"Resist the devil. He'll flee from you."

1 Peter 5'8, "Your adversary, the devil,

prowls around like a roaring lion,

seeking someone to devour." I want to

know how in the world Satan can be so

active

in the rest of the New Testament

in light of this idea that the kingdom

language in Revelation 20:es 1-6

is the present age and Satan is bound

quote so that he might not deceive the

nations unquote. How in the world does

this work? Now, I think the answer to

this is not going to be found in your

typical amalennial defense of this. I

think I think their defense is weak. And

I'm going to offer a different view that

again because I've told you I I agree

with Klein. I agree with the

recapitulation here. Even though I

believe in in a literal coming forever

kingdom literally on earth ruled by a

literal messiah, but I I'm, you know,

I'm not your I'm not a nomillennialist.

not your standard premillennialist

leader because I don't I don't base my

theology on the term

which is what I recommended we don't do

in the last episode and if you know

whether people can wrap their minds

around Mike's unwillingness to play in

the sandbox what you know whatever I

can't just is what it is I don't you

those of you who have been long term in

this audience you you you know you know

the drill by now it's no surprise

so I I accept again what you know

Klein's work here admitting that he's

missed some things. But when it comes to

the Satan problem, I think I have a

better answer than what you're going to

get in in standard responses to this

question. So, let me just illustrate

this. Here's how Beal and Campbell, this

is the the shorter version of Beal's

Revelation commentary,

describe Revelation 20:es 1-7.

They say the millennium is inaugurated

during the church age as God limits

Satan's deceptive powers. And again, I

ask, how would we know? You know, look,

looks to me like Christianity is the

minority religion in the world, at least

like real Christians, not maybe a name

only, but gosh,

I don't see how the limitations working

very well. But anyway, the millennium is

inaugurated during the church age as God

limits Satan's deceptive powers and as

deceased Christians are vindicated by

reigning in heaven. The millennium is

concluded by a resurgence of Satan's

deceptive assault against the church and

the final judgment.

So again, I re I listen to them and I I

read what they've written here and it's

like, so in other words, Satan doesn't

have a deceptive assault against the

church. Now

that just seems to make no sense. Ail

and Campbell would further say, quote,

"In light of the close verbal

connections, it is more natural to

suppose that the curtailing of Satan's

deception through his being thrown into

the abyss in Revelation 20:3 refers to

the same events as his being thrown out

of heaven and down to earth in

Revelation 12 8-9."

Again, this audience is very familiar

with Revelation 12, but I'm going to

read this passage anyway, just these

couple verses. Revelation 12 8 and 9.

This is of course the the heavenly

vision of the woman, you know, with the

12 stars and so on and so forth and the

birth of the Messiah child. So in

response to the birth of the Messiah,

war arose in heaven. This is Revelation

12:7. Michael and his angels fighting

back against the dragon. The dragon and

his angels fought back. But he was

defeated. The dragon is defeated. Was no

longer any place for them in heaven. And

the great dragon was thrown down, that

ancient serpent who is called the devil

and Satan, the deceiver of the whole

world. He was thrown down to the earth

and his angels were thrown down with

him. So Bill says, you know, there's a

lot of similarity between that and this

notion of Satan being bound in

Revelation 20. Well, you know, I'd agree

that there's a connection there, but I

would specifically say it's Luke 10,

which be and Campbell don't bring into

the discussion.

Satan's casting out of heaven happens

when the kingdom is inaugurated. The

Christ child is born. Again, that refers

to the absence of legal authority to

claim members of the kingdom of God as

his own. In other words, if you go back

to Luke 10, when Jesus sends out the 70,

the 72,

and he gives them power over demons and

so on and so forth, they come back and

they're thrilled and and Jesus, one of

Jesus' responses is, "I saw Satan fall

like lightning from heaven." Okay. What

the whole point there is and again you

can go back and look at it in unseen

realm is that Jesus is saying look

fellas the kingdom of God has been

launched and by f by virtue of me

sending out 70 or 72 depending on

whether you're using the septuagen or

the traditional Hebrew text to refer to

the to the nations at you know in

Genesis 10. That's what that's what the

reference point is by virtue of me

sending out 70 or 72 the kingdom

includes Gentiles. that includes the

nations. So the the messaging, the

theological messaging is this. If you

are a member of this kingdom, my

kingdom, the kingdom of of Jesus,

Satan has no claim against you. He

cannot bring any claim against you to

the throne of God. He cannot accuse you.

He cannot claim your soul. He is a

prosecutor without a case. He gets he is

kicked out. God doesn't want to hear it

anymore. He's done. His authority is nil

because you know Jesus knows he's going

to die and rise from the dead. And so

you're not going to end up in Satan's

domain in the underworld. He's lord of

the dead. Guess what? He ain't getting

you because the kingdom now has been

launched and it's going to be

irreversible. He's not going to be able

to stop it. So yeah, there's a

connection between that and what happens

in Revelation 12 and Satan's limitation

in in that respect. So, I'll agree that

there's some connection there, but but I

think we need to look Luke chapter 10 in

here to understand it better as the

absence of legal authority to claim

members of the kingdom of God. It makes

little sense to see this casting down as

a prohibition of Satan's deception,

whatever that means. We haven't answered

the question yet because the text of

Revelation 12:9 again connected to the

Messiah's birth actually tells us if we

read Revelation 12:9 clo closely it

actually says it actually describes

Satan as the deceiver of the nations. It

doesn't tell us his deception is

limited. It's not what the text says. It

gives him that credit as opposed to

removing it. Okay. So I I don't I don't

think this is as tight as they think it

is. Now, that's the standard amillennial

view though. I mean, bean is is going to

be well representative of it. So,

somehow or another, he has Satan not

being able to mount a deceptive assault

against the church during the present

age. And I just don't buy it. It doesn't

make any sense. It defies what else is

in the New Testament. So, it must mean

something else. And that again, I'm

going to I think I'm going to propose a

better view here. So I think in the

standard AML view just doesn't work. It

makes zero sense. I would suggest this.

We are better off defining the deception

spoken of in Revelation 20 in light of

what Satan does when allowed later. See,

we're going to let the text interpret

the text. So here's my proposal. the

Greek lema here in question uh about

deceiving here in Revelation 20. Let me

go back specifically to Revelation 20

here in my Bible. The verse three he's

put into the pit so that he might not

deceive the nations. The lema the Greek

lema translated deceive here is plao.

Okay. Bedag, which is the standard, you

know, Greek lexicon for New Testament

literature, has the lema's primary

meaning as leading astray in a specific

way. The specifics, in my judgment, are

best defined in terms of what Satan does

when he's permitted to do what he does.

And the text is clear on this point. You

know what he does? He leads the nations

against Zion.

So if that's what he does when he's

permitted, then that is what he was

prevented from doing. Get it? We let one

passage interpret the other. It's not

that Satan can't mount any effective

assault against the church. He does that

every blasted day. What he doesn't do is

lead the nations against Zion. But what

does that mean? It means Satan when he

is permitted by God to do so, he moves

the status quo spiritual conflict to a

new level. He initiates, he launches a

direct assault on God's throne, God's

plan, God's city, and God's people.

Specifically, it's related to

Armageddon. Specifically, it's related

to what you know, marshalling all the

forces of human and cosmic evil against

Mount Zion. That's what what what he

does. He marshals the nations. He leads

the nations,

all the people under the fallen sons of

God and those gods in a final rebellion

in an attempt

to overthrow

the esqueological plan of God and the

judgment of the gods of the nations and

of course his own final destruction.

That's what he's not allowed to do. This

is what he's not permitted to do until

the time of the end. the nations, their

gods and those loyal to them, the whole

supernatural chaos system is thereby

deceived by Satan at the end into trying

to do the impossible,

trying to stop or overturn the judgment

of Psalm 82.

It's a repetition of Isaiah 14.

Satan gets all of the forces marshaled

against Zion because he still thinks and

wants desperately to be the most high.

He thinks he can get there.

Now, here's a logical question. Why

would God choose to prevent Satan from

doing this in the first place? Why

restrict him during the present age from

doing this? If you've read my material,

if you've heard me in interviews, you

know the answer to this already. Here's

the logical answer to that logical

question.

God does it because he wants to

forestall the judgment of the nations in

favor of redeeming people from all those

nations. God forestalls Armageddon

through his decision to give the great

commission time.

He prevents Satan from this desperate

act because the desperate act has to

have a response. And the response, of

course, is going to be the return of the

Lord and the destruction of all these

idiots. Okay? But God doesn't want that

to happen yet. Why? Because he wants to

give the great commission time. After

all, here we are again with the

Deuteronomy 32 worldview again. the

return of Christ and the judgment of the

nations and the gods are linked to the

fullness of the Gentiles.

Now, I would suggest that this approach

is far more coherent than standard

amalennialism.

And if we recall that the thousand-year

language is mentioned after Armageddon

once, you know, at least one time where

it can't refer to the church, that's

Revelation 20:6. And if we take the

perspective that what follows Armageddon

is a literal messianic rule under Jesus

that's forever. We can agree that

Revelation 16, Yep, there's

recapitulation there. 16 through 20. We

got it. Got it. Professor Klein got it.

But we still have Christ ruling on earth

forever. Not just a thousand years. And

we are ruling with him forever. Not just

a thousand years. In real time. The

nations will be reclaimed in real time.

Christ will return in real time. There

will be a consummated kingdom, a new

Eden globally in real time. And God is

limiting Satan in a very specific way.

He will not permit him to instigate

Armageddon

until God is ready. And you know what is

God waiting for? He's waiting for the

great commission.

You know, I I I hate to keep saying

stuff like this because I don't want to

make biblical theology sound simplistic

because it isn't, but this just makes

sense.

You know, I I don't know how else to say

it. You know, again, the Deuteronomy 32

worldview again just helps us reframe

the discussion. The divine council

worldview helps us reframe the

discussion. It makes sense and honestly

because it's supposed to make sense. But

if you lack these elements in your

theological framework, you know, the to

help orient you with with respect to the

data points, you you you know, you're

going to get hits. You're going to be

right a lot, but you're going to you're

going to get some real misses that just

mess it up, make it confusing, don't

make sense. It it is what it is. So, I

don't know that there's a label or a

name for the esquetology I've described

here just now and in in Revelation 19

that I hold to. I don't know there's a

name for it or a label for it. And I

frankly don't care. I'm not going to

bother inventing one either. It's the

one that can make sense of the data.

That's all I care about. So, no. If I

were to address the late professor

Klein, as much as I love your Armageddon

work, you're basically the only

evangelical who sees the Mount Assembly

connection for what it is. But I'm

sorry, you haven't overturn the literal

rule and reign of Christ. You've just

torn down a systems, a system, and

systems are not synonymous with biblical

theology.

>> I'm going to suggest that we call this

new esqueological system that Dr. Mike

presented redemptive edenic millennial

hiserism.

But seriously, this was a rare instance

where Mike let his esqueological guard

down and told us what he really thinks

about the end time scenario. And no

surprise here, it's actually really

logical, but also very spiritual when

you look at it through this lens. All

throughout his career, he sort of

skirted around the topic of esquetology.

But here, as he was nearing the end of

his life, he finally laid it all out on

display for us to see his particular

viewpoint and why he repeatedly said

that he didn't like the escatological

systems because they have fatal flaws

when held in context with the rest of

scripture. And this actually ties in

perfectly with earlier discussions we've

had about the cyclical patterning of

God's behavior and how when we look at

the larger image of history throughout

the Bible, he's inching us closer to the

reinstatement of Eden where we'll all

join him in his glory and majesty. When

you view the scriptures through this

lens, it becomes a giant circle that

ends where it began with smaller

fractalized patterns of disobedience and

judgment embedded within it. But at the

end of the day, it doesn't really matter

what your esqueological views are, as

long as you're working for the Lord here

on earth. Because after all, we are

ambassadors for his kingdom, and we're

called to do his will here on earth as

it is in heaven. But at any rate, I pray

that this video has been a blessing to

you. And if you've made it this far,

please like this video, subscribe to

Dance Like David, and leave a comment

that says working for the kingdom. as

any interaction with this video allows

our content to reach and help more

people. And may God shine his face upon

you and give you peace.