Unanswered Questions in Amillennialism

The following essay delves into how Amillennial a priori assumptions about the book of Revelation, and particularly what role the twentieth chapter plays as a lens to understand the big picture, hinders Bible students from seeing the underlying narrative, harmony, and sequential logic of what John wrote. In this piece I point out inconsistencies, irregularities, and impossibilities that come out from the Amillennial strategy of making claims that go directly against what John attests in the final book of the New Testament.

First, Amillennialists believe Revelation 20 should be the controlling factor in any biblical timeline describing the Christian age. However, the New Testament places Revelation 20 as the third to last chapter, suggesting it plays a different (subordinate) role and does not define the entirety of New Testament eschatology.

It comes after the persecution of the seven churches in Asia Minor by the “synagogue of Satan” - Revelation 2:9 and 3:9.  It comes after the Tribunal of Revelation chapters 4 and 5 where the Lamb was declared worthy to open the book to release the seals of judgment.  It comes after the six seals described in Revelation chapter 6.  It comes after the sealing of the one hundred and forty-four thousand remnant from all the tribes of Israel–Judah and Reuben; Gad and Asher; Nephtali and Manasseh; Simeon and Levi; Issachar and Zabulon; Joseph and Benjamin–these were sealed before God allowed the seventh seal to be dispensed; which seal also contained the seven trumpets which we will describe in some detail next.

The Seven Trumpets Contained in the Sixth Seal

The seventh seal (Rev. 8:1) is interesting because instead of being an instance of judgment, it was, instead the presentation of seven angels who each stood before God “and to them were given seven trumpets” (Rev. 8:2). After some preparations (Rev. 8:3-5) the seven angels prepared themselves to sound (Rev. 8:6). It is clear from what is described in Revelation chapter eight that the seven trumpets do not repeat actions that have already been taken before the one the seventh seal was opened and before the one hundred and forty four thousand were sealed. Had the case been otherwise then the statements in Revelation 7:1-3 would not make sense:-

“And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea. Saying,

“Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.”

It was only after the remnant of Israel were sealed that the seventh seal was allowed to be opened (again, Rev. 8:1). And five of the seven trumpets are sounded in Revelation 8:7, 8:8, 8:10, 8:12 and 9:1. After the fifth trumpet was sounded John makes the following comments concerning the remaining two trumpets,

“One woe is past; and, behold, there come two more woes more hereafter.”

Only after this announcement was the sixth angel allowed to go forth (Rev. 9:13-14). And the judgment of the sixth angels was very different from any seal or trumpet that had gone before, being the unleashing of four angels who were bound in the Euphrates River (Rev. 9:14). The number of the army of horsemen under these four angels was said to be two hundred million in all (Rev.9:16) and are described as horrific cryptids who sole purpose was to torment their victims for five months by fire, smoke, and brimstone which issued out of their mouth (Rev. 9:18). Their power is in their mouth and in their tails “for their tails were like serpents, and had heads, and with them they do hurt” (Rev. 9:19).

Amillennialists do not account for what takes place in Revelation chapter 10 where the seven thunders are sealed and instead of being written, they absolutely are sealed and do not take place (Rev. 10:1-4).

The Invasion of the Second Temple in A.D.66

The next major event to happen is the invasion of the Second Temple by the “Gentiles” for forty-two months (Rev. 11:1-2). But this invasion happens before the seventh trumpet is blown (Rev. 11:15). But when the seventh trumpet is blown it is represented as the declaration of the arrival of the long awaited kingdom of God,

“And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever” (Rev. 11:15).

After this declaration happens a series of events happens in Revelation chapters 12, 13, and 14 which prepare the way for the seven plagues in Revelation chapter 15,

“And after that I looked , and, behold, the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was opened: and the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles. And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who lives forever and ever. And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, tell the seven plagues of the seven angels was fulfilled.” (Rev. 15:5-8)

It is clear from what happens in Revelation chapter 15 that the seven plagues are not a rerun of the six seals, the sixth seal, the seven trumpets, the sealed seven thunders which were not written down, or anything that has happened prior to what will be described in Revelation chapter 16. So what does this mean so far? It means that the Amillennial argument that the seals, trumpets, thunders, and plagues are all “different ways of describing the same thing” is baseless and has no support in the book of Revelation narrative itself. It also means that if accepted such a claim set the stage for immediate implementation of study practices that promise to bring disorientation, confusion, and frustration.  The Amillennial theory of recapitulation ensures that any and all attempts to make sense of the direction of progress and the actual epitome of the story reach inconclusive and bewildering results.

The Seven Plagues Lead to the
Destruction of the Great City

Revelation chapters 16, 17, 18, and 19 are dependent upon all the events that happened before it from Revelation chapter one all the way to Revelation chapter fifteen and equals approximately seven years of catastrophic and tumultuous events (three years and six months leading up to a Jewish sedition in the year AD 66, and three years and six months leading from the start of that war to the ultimate downfall of a city and a metropolis that had stood since the Second Temple was completed in 516 BC, almost six centuries–but was this city Rome or Jerusalem? According to Amillennialists, the great city was obviously and certainly Rome, not Jerusalem, but this, too, is another answered question in Amillennialism:

Why does this ideology pick and choose objects, topics, and themes that run contrary to the narrative of the Bible on purpose? For what purpose and for what reason does Rome get to be the great harlot when there is no place in the entire Bible where Rome was obliged to honor and serve God in any conjugal arrangement? Where is that commitment? Where is that covenant between God and the Roman Empire? Where does God complain about Rome’s unfaithfulness? According to Amillennial thinking the book of Revelation is precisely the place where God lodges his complaints about Rome’s unfaithfulness to him, and they believe Revelation is where God reveals his intention to destroy Rome for all her detestable crimes against Christians.

In key texts, stretching from Revelation 11:8; 14:8, 14:20; 16:19-21; 17:1-6; 17:16-18; 18:1-24, and 19:1-4 Bible students of every persuasion are given an opportunity to consider and reconsider who this Babylon is. But although conventional wisdom invariably decides that Babylon must be Rome a deeper investigation reveals that the great city, the holy city, the city with the Temple of God within it; the great city where our Lord was crucified, who sat on seven mountains; who killed the prophets, apostles, and saints; who denied her impending end, and who forsook her marital obligations to God–could be none other than first century Jerusalem who, as history reports, was destroyed, first of all, Sicarii, and by Zealots, and by an army of over twenty thousand Idumeans. What is more, these things happened in the lifetime of John and not very far away in a distant century of time like either 476 AD or 1453 AD. In fact, 70 AD would be a date that would entirely justify the prophecies of Revelation, while any fifth or fifteenth century date would categorically falsify the claims of the book of Revelation.

Finally, Revelation chapter 19 presents the dismissal of the great city in flames as that august occasion where the Lamb of God marries his bride, the Church. This last step comes just before the events that take place in the controversial chapter which is Revelation 20–but bearing in mind all that we have read, all that we have analyzed and surveyed immediately throws a different light on what Revelation 20 represents as a part of the whole. For example, Satan’s efforts in the Revelation narrative up to this point have been to orchestrate efforts to destroy the church from the shadow of his throne in Pergamum in Revelation chapter 2 and 3. He has also sought to devour the promised Son of man as soon as he was born in Revelation chapter 12; failing that he pursued the Jerusalem church but was prevented from harming her in her place of rest in the wilderness.

Next, he empowered the sea beast and the false prophet who created a living statue and caused fire to come down from heaven in the sight of men in order to change times and laws in Second Temple worship (Rev. 13:15-18). But the plague's judgments descend and penetrate every effort the beast takes to triumph and, instead, leads to his reigning for one pitiful hour before going into judgment (Rev. 17:10).

After the great city is destroyed (Rev. 19:1-4) and after the marriage of Christ to the church takes place (Rev. 19:5-8), then the Lord destroys the beast and the false prophet (Rev. 19:9-21).  And it is only after these steps and measures were taken that Satan himself was bound in the bottomless pit (Rev. 20:1-3). What happens next? The saints who were slain by the beast in Revelation 13:18 cf. 15:1-2 receive thrones and reign with Christ for a thousand years. Note how this sequence of developments is very different from saying that Revelation chapter 20 commences at Calvary or the resurrection of our Lord from Joseph’s new tomb: the Amillennial claim is not corroborated by anything in the book of Revelation or by any statement or implication in all the New Testament. Instead, the incarceration of Satan in Revelation 20:3 leads to a new and final incident that, if viewed from the standpoint of a “fall of Rome” could only mean Satan’s reprieve and parole and a renaissance of the Roman Empire at some later date. On the other hand, if the information we have reviewed really points to the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem, then the information in Revelation 20 indicates, with red flashing lights, that a renaissance of the Hebrew state was on the horizon–but that it would be both violent and temporary.

This last scenario matches Bible and Jewish salvation history like a hand in a glove in the surprising rise and immediate downfall of the second century Bar Kokhba revolt. And what is more amazing is how the entire general narrative of the New Testament and specific narrative of the book of Revelation is about the Second Coming of Jesus to confront, rebuke, and judge all Jewish attempts to offer the world some other Messiah besides Jesus of Nazareth. And it was the goal of the Jewish wars, from the first century to the second century, to bring all such lies to fruition and national and institutionalized stability. The logic therefore, of the book of Revelation, is an outline of the fatal courses of action and sinister strategies the enemies of the cross would take to overcome all obstacles in their way to implement what they believed the prophecies of the Old Testament intended to promise themselves–which interpretation of theirs was daring, dangerous, and completely misleading and false.

Conclusion

It is understandable how, at first glance, one may suppose that Rome is intended in the Revelation narrative, but it is the closer and more careful inspection of each and every detail that should convince the student of the Bible of a more accurate and nuanced conclusion: the “great city” could not be Rome without violating so many clues, innuendos, hints, and plain declarations. And when Amillennialists insistently persist in claiming (without proof) that the book of Revelation is about the downfall of emperors, Rome, Rome’s armies, and Roman imperial civilization, that they necessarily do so without any rational evidence that the seals or the trumpets, the plagues or the thunders have anything directly to do with what God ever did to Rome and are unable to link what happened in the book of Revelation to any Roman demise at any time from AD 70 to the ultimate termination of the empire on that tragic and fateful day of 29 May AD 1453.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Endnotes

First, Amillennialists believe the Revelation 20 millennium began when Jesus achieved victory through the cross and rose from the dead. However, Revelation 20 presents a different scenario: the millennium begins after the saints triumph over the beast, are martyred, and resurrected to reign with Christ.

Second, Amillennialists believe the Revelation 20 millennium ends concurrently with the end of time. However, in Jesus's Parable of the Wicked Spirit, he declared that Satan would leave the house of Judaea and later return to find it "swept and garnished." Satan would then bring seven spirits worse than himself, making Judaea's final state worse than when he left. Jesus implies in his parable that Satan's return and Judaea's ruin must occur within the generation he was preaching to.

Third, Amillennialists believe Revelation 20:4 is a spiritual resurrection but Revelation 20:12-15 is a literal physical resurrection. How can they prove that the martyrs who died at the hands of the sea beast were raised spiritually and not physically?

I. Questionable role of Revelation 20 in defining eschatology

A. Placed near end of book, suggesting subordinate role
B. Other passages define Christian age, not just Rev 20

II. Timing issues with amillennial view

A. Millennium presented after beast's defeat, not at cross
B. Satan's return in Jesus' parable within a generation

III. Inconsistent literal vs spiritual interpretation

A. Martyr's resurrection spiritual but later resurrection literal?
B. Difficult to prove martyrs raised spiritually

DISCUSSION:

The issues raised bring into question some core aspects of the amillennial perspective on eschatology. First, the placement of Revelation 20 near the end of the book calls into doubt it being the controlling passage in defining the entirety of the Christian age. Second, timing discrepancies emerge between the amillennial sequence and descriptions in Revelation 20 and Jesus' own parable. Third is the challenge of interpreting some resurrections as spiritual and others as physical when they seem to refer to the same group. While reasonable counter arguments may exist, these issues could undermine the coherence of the Amillennial system if left unaddressed.

In summary, the points surface some exegetical and logical tensions in the amillennial approach to Revelation 20 and New Testament eschatology as a whole.

Okay, let's break this down:

The core argument is:

1) Amillennialists believe the Seals, Trumpets, and Bowls describe the same judgments in different ways (recapitulation theory).

2) The seventh Seal contains the seven Trumpets.

3) If the Trumpets are contained within the seventh Seal, they cannot just be a different description of the Seals - that would be a contradiction.

4) The seven Bowls are presented as happening after the seven Trumpets.

5) Therefore, the recapitulation theory must be incorrect, since the Trumpets and Bowls cannot be just different descriptions of the Seals.

In simpler terms:

Amillennialists think Seals/Trumpets/Bowls recapitulate each other.  But Trumpets are part of Seal 7, and Bowls come after Trumpets.  So Trumpets and Bowls can’t recapitulate Seals.  Therefore, recapitulation theory must be incorrect.  This argument tries to demonstrate an internal contradiction in the amillennialist position by pointing out that the sequencing of Trumpets and Bowls makes recapitulation impossible. 

Amillennialism and “the Great City”

Amillennialists insist that the “great city” in Revelation has to be Rome, contradicting allusions and direct statements indicating it is first century Jerusalem:

• She was home to the twevle tribes of Israel (Acts 26:7)
• She was the holy city where our Lord was crucified (Luke 9:31)
• She was a spiritual Sodom and Egypt (affirmed in other New Testament texts - Gal. 4:21-31 cf. Ro. 9:29).
• The bloodbath of Revelation 14:20 happens in Jerusalem, not Rome
• As God's covenant wife, only Jerusalem, not Rome, held that title
• Only Jerusalem was guilty of killing prophets, apostles and saints. (Luke 11:45-51 cf. Matt. 23:29-39)
• She sat on seven mountains - Mount Scopus, Mount Olivet, Mount of Corruption, Mount Ophel, Original Mount Zion, New Mount Zion, and the Antonia Fortress hill.
• As the replaced covenant wife, only Jerusalem, not Rome, fits as the city replaced by the Church. (Rev.19:1-7)

In the final analysis, Amillennialism stands as an interpretation of the book of Revelation, but an interpretation of the contents of the book that are made in spite of what the book say instead of what the book says.  The results of these conclusions are not purely academic but could lead to controversey, conflicts, and different estimations of what is truth that have no basis in rational facts or actual history.

Related

[Click on the image]