This article presents some interesting challenges to Premillennialism (and Postmillennialism, but I don't think there are too many of them here) regarding the relationship between Rev. 19 and 20. The standard Premillennial position is that they are purely sequential. White presents some powerful arguments that Rev. 20 is a recapitulation of Rev. 19.
http://www.apuritansmind.com/the-christ ... ler-white/
R. F. White on recapitulation in Rev. 19 and 20
-
robbyyoung
- Posts: 811
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am
Re: R. F. White on recapitulation in Rev. 19 and 20
Hi Doug,
This was a very good article.
God Bless.
This was a very good article.
God Bless.
Re: R. F. White on recapitulation in Rev. 19 and 20
Some of my thoughts on this issue. This is taken from my book The Antichrist and the Second Coming, vol. 2, 314-19
ARE REVELATION 19:11-21 AND 20:7-10 SHOWING THE SAME BATTLE?
The call to the birds to feast on those who set themselves against the Lord in Revelation 19:17-18 is similar to the call to scavenging birds in Ezekiel 39:17-20 at the end of the battle of Gog and Magog. Because of this, some connect the confrontation between Christ and Antichrist in Revelation 19:11-21 with the war of Gog and Magog that happens at the end of the millennium in Revelation 20:7-10 (which also alludes to Ezekiel 38-39). This question has important ramifications for the sequence of Revelation 19-20. If Revelation 19 is showing the Second Advent (something almost everyone can agree on except for partial preterists, who say it is a metaphorical judgment coming of Jesus)26 and if the events of Revelation 20 chronologically follow the events of chapter 19, then the millennium begins after the Second Coming and a premillennial sequence is shown. If Revelation 20 is a recapitulation, however (a backing up of the narrative to AD 30), then an amillennial or postmillennial position is supported. I shall discuss the millennium in the next chapter but will digress a little on this issue here.
One of the evidences given for the “recapitulation theory” is that the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 (as well as the battle prophesied in Rev. 16:14-16) are all referred to as “the war” (Rev. 16:14; 19:19; 20:8).27 While it is true that all three of these battles are designated as the war (and that Revelation 16:14 and 19:19 are referencing the same battle which happens at the parousia), there are significant differences between the wars in Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10. These differences indicate that they are not the same conflict. For example, the battle of Revelation 19 happens at the time of the parousia; in contrast, there is no coming of God shown in the battle of Revelation 20:7-10.
Osborne, in contrasting the battles of Revelation 19:17-21 and 20:7-10, writes the following:
"The battle of 16:14-16 and 19:17-21 was led by the beast, this one [Rev. 20:7-10] by Satan. The army of the first [in Rev. 19:17-21] was destroyed by the sword from the mouth of the Lord, this army by fire coming down from heaven [in Rev. 20:9]. At the end of that battle, the beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire; after this one, Satan himself is cast into the lake of fire [Rev. 20:10]. In other words, the details are sufficiently different to warrant the view of a second battle rather than a recapitulation of the first."28
In evaluating the proposal that the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 are the same, one has to be careful of a theory that relies too heavily on the nuances of John’s grammar (as the recapitulation theory tends to do). The Greek of Revelation is far from perfect (whether or not this is intentional is debated).29 Ladd describes John’s Greek as “rough and harsh, with many grammatical and syntactical irregularities.”30 As an example of this, in Revelation 13:10b John’s grammar is so irregular that Aune calls it “impossible Greek.”31 Thus, the fact that Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:8-10 both use the term the war does not in and of itself mean they are referring to the same conflict; other factors must be taken into account.
ONE BATTLE HAPPENS RIGHT BEFORE THE MILLENNIUM;
THE OTHER BATTLE HAPPENS RIGHT AFTER THE MILLENNIUM
Because of the differences between the two wars, I see the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 as referring to different conflicts. Note that the battle of Gog and Magog is explicitly said to happen at the end of the millennium
Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is like the sand of the sea.
Revelation 20:7-8
In contrast, the aftermath of the defeat of the beast and false prophet in the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 is alluded to in the discussion of the beginning of the millennium. (Keep in mind that it was the land beast/false prophet that made people take the mark of the beast, Rev. 13:11-18.)
And I saw thrones, and they sat on them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
Revelation 20:4
That those who had been killed by the beast come alive at the beginning of the millennium indicates they went through the great tribulation of AD 67-70 (Rev. 13:4-18). The tribulation is ended by the coming of God/Christ at the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 (cf. Dan. 7:21-22). Thus this battle ended just before the beginning of the millennium (Rev. 19:11-20:4). With the defeat of the beast and false prophet in that battle, those killed by them come to life and reign with Christ (cf. Rev. 11:7-18).
In the Revelation 19 battle, the beast and the false prophet are the chief opponents; at the end of the conflict they are thrown into the lake of fire (while Satan is bound and put in the abyss, Rev. 19:19-20:3). In the Gog and Magog war of Revelation 20, Satan is the opponent (having been released from the abyss, Rev. 20:7-8). The beast and the false prophet are nowhere to be seen in the Gog and Magog war. This is because it happens at the end of the millennium and they were put in the lake of fire at the AD 70 beginning of the millennium (Rev. 19:20). This proposed sequence is supported by the fact that at the end of the Gog and Magog war, when Satan is thrown into the lake of fire, the beast and the false prophet are there waiting for him (Rev. 20:10). Bøe has the following comments on this:
"The “Satanic trinity” is reunited after “a thousand years”, but now in the lake of fire. [The] NIV makes this explicit by translating: “. . . where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown.” The Greek does not express this in a verbal clause, but only in a non-verbal clause."32
If the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and the Gog and Magog war of Revelation 20:7-10 were the same conflict one would expect to see Satan, the beast, and the false prophet all thrown into the lake of fire at the same time; this is not what Revelation shows. Gentry relates some of the problems he has with the two wars being the same.
"If John had wanted us to understand recapitulation rather than sequence in this passage [Rev. 19-20], John “did us no favor” by: (a) recasting the beast and false prophet (19:20) as Gog and Magog (20:8); (b) inserting a thousand year period between the two battles (20:2-5); (c) representing the period of Christian history from the first century to the end as “a short time” (12:12) and as “a thousand years” (20:2–6) . . . (d) offering no hint that Satan is bound before Rev 19:11ff while emphasizing his being bound before Rev 20:7ff; and (e) telling us that Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet already are (20:10)."33
It is important to note that there is no coming of God in the Revelation 20:7-10 battle. There is the fire of God’s judgment descending from heaven at this time (at the end of the millennium, v. 9; cf. Ezek. 38:22; 39:6), but no parousia. Looking at Ezekiel 38-39, there is similarly no coming of God shown. This is in contrast to the battle of Revelation 19:11-21, which clearly happens at the parousia. Lastly, the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 happens right after the AD 70 destruction of physical Israel (Rev. 19:1-8). This was the time when she was sent into the nations (Luke 21:34). In contrast, the Gog and Magog war happens after the regathering of physical Israel from the nations. It results in her deliverance, not her destruction (Ezek. 39:21-29).34
A DOUBLE USE OF AN EZEKIELIAN MOTIF
Some say that because the battles of Revelation 19 and 20 both use material from Ezekiel 38-39 they must be referring to the same conflict. Bøe, however, concludes that while both Revelation 19:17-21 and 20:7-10 do contain allusions to the Gog and Magog battle of Ezekiel, “the battle recorded in 20:7-10 [is] a different battle from that recorded in 19:11-21.”35 He answers those who say that the allusions to Ezekiel 38-39 found in Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 must mean they are the same conflict in the following manner:
"It is hard to accept this argumentation, it would not give much meaning to claim that the double use of the theme of measuring the temple [in Rev. 11:1-2 and 21:15-21] implies that the two accounts are actually the same. On the contrary, the measuring of the temple in 11:1-2 is not the same incident as that in 21:15-21, nobody ever claimed it was, even though both allude to Ezekiel’s measuring of the temple, Ezekiel 40-48. Similarly we should not suppose that the very fact of a double use of one Ezekielian motif proves that John spoke of the same event. Other factors must determine that question; the double use of one pre-text or motif is by itself not decisive."36
To summarize, the arguments for the recapitulation hypothesis—that Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 are two descriptions of the same battle—are not convincing. The differences between the two battles outweigh any evidence in favor of recapitulation and indicate that they are two different conflicts. There are certainly recapitulations in Revelation—chapter 20 is just not one of them. Thus, the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 happens at the AD 70 parousia, right before the millennium begins; in contrast, the battle of Revelation 20:7-10 happens at the end of the millennium. This is why the beast and false prophet are nowhere to be found in the Gog and Magog war.
Allow me to make one last point related to the sequence of Revelation 19-20. The sequence of Revelation 19:11-20:4 parallels that of Daniel 7:21-22.
I was watching and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.
Daniel 7:21-22
Daniel 7 clearly shows that it is right after the AD 70 coming of God to defeat the Antichrist (the little horn) that the saints possess the kingdom.37 This parallels Revelation 19:11-20:4. It is right after the AD 70 coming of the Word of God to defeat the Antichrist (the individual beast) that the saints possess the kingdom (as the millennium begins, Rev. 19:11-20:4; cf. Dan. 7:7-11). Notice how Daniel 7 shows God’s people having gone through the great tribulation just prior to possessing the kingdom (i.e., the little horn prevailing against the saints in verse 21; cf. v. 25). It is the same in Revelation 20:4; one of the groups that comes alive at the beginning of the millennium consists of those who had been killed for not taking the mark of the beast (i.e., they had gone through the great tribulation, Rev. 13:7-18). Thus, those killed in the great tribulation (cf. Rev. 7:9-17) are being resurrected at the AD 70 beginning of the millennium.
Endnotes:
26. Partial preterists say Rev. 19:11-21 is not the Second Advent but an AD 70 metaphorical judgment coming of Jesus. They look for the Second Coming to happen at the end of time. If this is true then Revelation does not show the Second Advent. Partial preterists say it is shown in Rev. 20:9, but it is not. Rev. 20:7-10 is based on Ezekiel 38-39—neither shows a coming of God. For the partial preterist to suggest that the mention of God’s judgment of fire in Rev. 20:9 is the Second Coming is grasping at straws. It would mean that the Second Advent is shown in only one verse in all of Revelation, and even that verse barely contains an allusion to it!
27. I am not arguing against the existence of recapitulations in Revelation; I just don’t think Revelation 20 is one of them.
28. Osborne, Revelation, 713.
29. For a discussion of the irregular Greek of Revelation see Beale, Book of Revelation, 100-07. Beale thinks “the overall purpose of these Septuagintalisms, stylistic Semitisms, and awkward OT allusions was probably to create a ‘biblical’ effect on the hearer and hence, to show the solidarity of the writing with that of the OT . . .” (p. 103).
30. Ladd, Commentary on the Revelation of John, 7.
31. Aune, Revelation 6-16, 750.
32. Bøe, Gog and Magog, 341.
33. Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., “Recapitulation v. Progression in Rev. 19 and 20,” unpublished paper (2010). Gentry is responding to the following from R. Fowler White:
If John really expected us to interpret the revolts in Revelation 19–20 as different events, he certainly did us no favor by describing both revolts in language, images and plots that are reminiscent of one and the same event in Ezekiel’s prophecy.
R. Fowler White, “Making Sense of Rev 20:1-10?” JETS 37:4, 1994. 545.
34. It is a mistake to try to spiritualize Israel here. The Israel that is delivered in Ezekiel is the Israel that had been sent into the nations at AD 70 (Ezek. 39:21-29; cf. Luke 21:20-24). It was physical Israel that had been banished to the nations, not God’s new covenant people.
ARE REVELATION 19:11-21 AND 20:7-10 SHOWING THE SAME BATTLE?
The call to the birds to feast on those who set themselves against the Lord in Revelation 19:17-18 is similar to the call to scavenging birds in Ezekiel 39:17-20 at the end of the battle of Gog and Magog. Because of this, some connect the confrontation between Christ and Antichrist in Revelation 19:11-21 with the war of Gog and Magog that happens at the end of the millennium in Revelation 20:7-10 (which also alludes to Ezekiel 38-39). This question has important ramifications for the sequence of Revelation 19-20. If Revelation 19 is showing the Second Advent (something almost everyone can agree on except for partial preterists, who say it is a metaphorical judgment coming of Jesus)26 and if the events of Revelation 20 chronologically follow the events of chapter 19, then the millennium begins after the Second Coming and a premillennial sequence is shown. If Revelation 20 is a recapitulation, however (a backing up of the narrative to AD 30), then an amillennial or postmillennial position is supported. I shall discuss the millennium in the next chapter but will digress a little on this issue here.
One of the evidences given for the “recapitulation theory” is that the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 (as well as the battle prophesied in Rev. 16:14-16) are all referred to as “the war” (Rev. 16:14; 19:19; 20:8).27 While it is true that all three of these battles are designated as the war (and that Revelation 16:14 and 19:19 are referencing the same battle which happens at the parousia), there are significant differences between the wars in Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10. These differences indicate that they are not the same conflict. For example, the battle of Revelation 19 happens at the time of the parousia; in contrast, there is no coming of God shown in the battle of Revelation 20:7-10.
Osborne, in contrasting the battles of Revelation 19:17-21 and 20:7-10, writes the following:
"The battle of 16:14-16 and 19:17-21 was led by the beast, this one [Rev. 20:7-10] by Satan. The army of the first [in Rev. 19:17-21] was destroyed by the sword from the mouth of the Lord, this army by fire coming down from heaven [in Rev. 20:9]. At the end of that battle, the beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire; after this one, Satan himself is cast into the lake of fire [Rev. 20:10]. In other words, the details are sufficiently different to warrant the view of a second battle rather than a recapitulation of the first."28
In evaluating the proposal that the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 are the same, one has to be careful of a theory that relies too heavily on the nuances of John’s grammar (as the recapitulation theory tends to do). The Greek of Revelation is far from perfect (whether or not this is intentional is debated).29 Ladd describes John’s Greek as “rough and harsh, with many grammatical and syntactical irregularities.”30 As an example of this, in Revelation 13:10b John’s grammar is so irregular that Aune calls it “impossible Greek.”31 Thus, the fact that Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:8-10 both use the term the war does not in and of itself mean they are referring to the same conflict; other factors must be taken into account.
ONE BATTLE HAPPENS RIGHT BEFORE THE MILLENNIUM;
THE OTHER BATTLE HAPPENS RIGHT AFTER THE MILLENNIUM
Because of the differences between the two wars, I see the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 as referring to different conflicts. Note that the battle of Gog and Magog is explicitly said to happen at the end of the millennium
Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is like the sand of the sea.
Revelation 20:7-8
In contrast, the aftermath of the defeat of the beast and false prophet in the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 is alluded to in the discussion of the beginning of the millennium. (Keep in mind that it was the land beast/false prophet that made people take the mark of the beast, Rev. 13:11-18.)
And I saw thrones, and they sat on them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
Revelation 20:4
That those who had been killed by the beast come alive at the beginning of the millennium indicates they went through the great tribulation of AD 67-70 (Rev. 13:4-18). The tribulation is ended by the coming of God/Christ at the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 (cf. Dan. 7:21-22). Thus this battle ended just before the beginning of the millennium (Rev. 19:11-20:4). With the defeat of the beast and false prophet in that battle, those killed by them come to life and reign with Christ (cf. Rev. 11:7-18).
In the Revelation 19 battle, the beast and the false prophet are the chief opponents; at the end of the conflict they are thrown into the lake of fire (while Satan is bound and put in the abyss, Rev. 19:19-20:3). In the Gog and Magog war of Revelation 20, Satan is the opponent (having been released from the abyss, Rev. 20:7-8). The beast and the false prophet are nowhere to be seen in the Gog and Magog war. This is because it happens at the end of the millennium and they were put in the lake of fire at the AD 70 beginning of the millennium (Rev. 19:20). This proposed sequence is supported by the fact that at the end of the Gog and Magog war, when Satan is thrown into the lake of fire, the beast and the false prophet are there waiting for him (Rev. 20:10). Bøe has the following comments on this:
"The “Satanic trinity” is reunited after “a thousand years”, but now in the lake of fire. [The] NIV makes this explicit by translating: “. . . where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown.” The Greek does not express this in a verbal clause, but only in a non-verbal clause."32
If the battles of Revelation 19:11-21 and the Gog and Magog war of Revelation 20:7-10 were the same conflict one would expect to see Satan, the beast, and the false prophet all thrown into the lake of fire at the same time; this is not what Revelation shows. Gentry relates some of the problems he has with the two wars being the same.
"If John had wanted us to understand recapitulation rather than sequence in this passage [Rev. 19-20], John “did us no favor” by: (a) recasting the beast and false prophet (19:20) as Gog and Magog (20:8); (b) inserting a thousand year period between the two battles (20:2-5); (c) representing the period of Christian history from the first century to the end as “a short time” (12:12) and as “a thousand years” (20:2–6) . . . (d) offering no hint that Satan is bound before Rev 19:11ff while emphasizing his being bound before Rev 20:7ff; and (e) telling us that Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet already are (20:10)."33
It is important to note that there is no coming of God in the Revelation 20:7-10 battle. There is the fire of God’s judgment descending from heaven at this time (at the end of the millennium, v. 9; cf. Ezek. 38:22; 39:6), but no parousia. Looking at Ezekiel 38-39, there is similarly no coming of God shown. This is in contrast to the battle of Revelation 19:11-21, which clearly happens at the parousia. Lastly, the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 happens right after the AD 70 destruction of physical Israel (Rev. 19:1-8). This was the time when she was sent into the nations (Luke 21:34). In contrast, the Gog and Magog war happens after the regathering of physical Israel from the nations. It results in her deliverance, not her destruction (Ezek. 39:21-29).34
A DOUBLE USE OF AN EZEKIELIAN MOTIF
Some say that because the battles of Revelation 19 and 20 both use material from Ezekiel 38-39 they must be referring to the same conflict. Bøe, however, concludes that while both Revelation 19:17-21 and 20:7-10 do contain allusions to the Gog and Magog battle of Ezekiel, “the battle recorded in 20:7-10 [is] a different battle from that recorded in 19:11-21.”35 He answers those who say that the allusions to Ezekiel 38-39 found in Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 must mean they are the same conflict in the following manner:
"It is hard to accept this argumentation, it would not give much meaning to claim that the double use of the theme of measuring the temple [in Rev. 11:1-2 and 21:15-21] implies that the two accounts are actually the same. On the contrary, the measuring of the temple in 11:1-2 is not the same incident as that in 21:15-21, nobody ever claimed it was, even though both allude to Ezekiel’s measuring of the temple, Ezekiel 40-48. Similarly we should not suppose that the very fact of a double use of one Ezekielian motif proves that John spoke of the same event. Other factors must determine that question; the double use of one pre-text or motif is by itself not decisive."36
To summarize, the arguments for the recapitulation hypothesis—that Revelation 19:11-21 and 20:7-10 are two descriptions of the same battle—are not convincing. The differences between the two battles outweigh any evidence in favor of recapitulation and indicate that they are two different conflicts. There are certainly recapitulations in Revelation—chapter 20 is just not one of them. Thus, the battle of Revelation 19:11-21 happens at the AD 70 parousia, right before the millennium begins; in contrast, the battle of Revelation 20:7-10 happens at the end of the millennium. This is why the beast and false prophet are nowhere to be found in the Gog and Magog war.
Allow me to make one last point related to the sequence of Revelation 19-20. The sequence of Revelation 19:11-20:4 parallels that of Daniel 7:21-22.
I was watching and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.
Daniel 7:21-22
Daniel 7 clearly shows that it is right after the AD 70 coming of God to defeat the Antichrist (the little horn) that the saints possess the kingdom.37 This parallels Revelation 19:11-20:4. It is right after the AD 70 coming of the Word of God to defeat the Antichrist (the individual beast) that the saints possess the kingdom (as the millennium begins, Rev. 19:11-20:4; cf. Dan. 7:7-11). Notice how Daniel 7 shows God’s people having gone through the great tribulation just prior to possessing the kingdom (i.e., the little horn prevailing against the saints in verse 21; cf. v. 25). It is the same in Revelation 20:4; one of the groups that comes alive at the beginning of the millennium consists of those who had been killed for not taking the mark of the beast (i.e., they had gone through the great tribulation, Rev. 13:7-18). Thus, those killed in the great tribulation (cf. Rev. 7:9-17) are being resurrected at the AD 70 beginning of the millennium.
Endnotes:
26. Partial preterists say Rev. 19:11-21 is not the Second Advent but an AD 70 metaphorical judgment coming of Jesus. They look for the Second Coming to happen at the end of time. If this is true then Revelation does not show the Second Advent. Partial preterists say it is shown in Rev. 20:9, but it is not. Rev. 20:7-10 is based on Ezekiel 38-39—neither shows a coming of God. For the partial preterist to suggest that the mention of God’s judgment of fire in Rev. 20:9 is the Second Coming is grasping at straws. It would mean that the Second Advent is shown in only one verse in all of Revelation, and even that verse barely contains an allusion to it!
27. I am not arguing against the existence of recapitulations in Revelation; I just don’t think Revelation 20 is one of them.
28. Osborne, Revelation, 713.
29. For a discussion of the irregular Greek of Revelation see Beale, Book of Revelation, 100-07. Beale thinks “the overall purpose of these Septuagintalisms, stylistic Semitisms, and awkward OT allusions was probably to create a ‘biblical’ effect on the hearer and hence, to show the solidarity of the writing with that of the OT . . .” (p. 103).
30. Ladd, Commentary on the Revelation of John, 7.
31. Aune, Revelation 6-16, 750.
32. Bøe, Gog and Magog, 341.
33. Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., “Recapitulation v. Progression in Rev. 19 and 20,” unpublished paper (2010). Gentry is responding to the following from R. Fowler White:
If John really expected us to interpret the revolts in Revelation 19–20 as different events, he certainly did us no favor by describing both revolts in language, images and plots that are reminiscent of one and the same event in Ezekiel’s prophecy.
R. Fowler White, “Making Sense of Rev 20:1-10?” JETS 37:4, 1994. 545.
34. It is a mistake to try to spiritualize Israel here. The Israel that is delivered in Ezekiel is the Israel that had been sent into the nations at AD 70 (Ezek. 39:21-29; cf. Luke 21:20-24). It was physical Israel that had been banished to the nations, not God’s new covenant people.
Re: R. F. White on recapitulation in Rev. 19 and 20
Duncan,
I'm curious about your response to this specific point,
"My focus here is on an assumption common to both viewpoints, viz., the supposed coherence of the events depicted in 19:11–20:3 when they are read as a historical chronicle. An analysis of this assumption is highly significant, for, given the clear indications of progression in 20:1–10 , all arguments in favor of progression in 19:11–20:10 have no force unless the logical coherence of 19:11–20:3 can be presumed.
The contention that there is a discrepancy in a chronological approach to 19:11–20:3 is based on the observation that reading the events of 19:11–21 and 20:1–3 in historical sequence does not yield a logically coherent picture. The incongruence of 19:11–21 and 20:13 surfaces when we consider that 20:1–3 describes actions taken to prevent Satan’s deception of the very nations who had just been destroyed in 19:19–21 as a result of their deception by Satan ( 16:13–16 ).[5] In other words, the discrepancy consists in this: it makes no sense to speak of protecting the nations from deception by Satan in 20:1–3 after they have just been both deceived by Satan ( 16:13–16 , cf. 19:19–20 ) and destroyed by Christ at his return in 19:11–21 (cf. 16:15a , 19 ).[6]"
Doug
I'm curious about your response to this specific point,
"My focus here is on an assumption common to both viewpoints, viz., the supposed coherence of the events depicted in 19:11–20:3 when they are read as a historical chronicle. An analysis of this assumption is highly significant, for, given the clear indications of progression in 20:1–10 , all arguments in favor of progression in 19:11–20:10 have no force unless the logical coherence of 19:11–20:3 can be presumed.
The contention that there is a discrepancy in a chronological approach to 19:11–20:3 is based on the observation that reading the events of 19:11–21 and 20:1–3 in historical sequence does not yield a logically coherent picture. The incongruence of 19:11–21 and 20:13 surfaces when we consider that 20:1–3 describes actions taken to prevent Satan’s deception of the very nations who had just been destroyed in 19:19–21 as a result of their deception by Satan ( 16:13–16 ).[5] In other words, the discrepancy consists in this: it makes no sense to speak of protecting the nations from deception by Satan in 20:1–3 after they have just been both deceived by Satan ( 16:13–16 , cf. 19:19–20 ) and destroyed by Christ at his return in 19:11–21 (cf. 16:15a , 19 ).[6]"
Doug
Re: R. F. White on recapitulation in Rev. 19 and 20
Hey Doug,
First one has to ask what is being destroyed in Rev. 19? In Rev. 17-18 the beast destroys the harlot (unfaithful Jerusalem) and then the beast and his armies are destroyed by the coming of the Word of God in Rev. 19. I am pretty sure White is thinking about physical destruction of nations and armies here. That presents a problem for preterists, how was Rome destroyed in AD 70?
As I think you know I believe that is wrong. Revelation is unveiling the spiritual realm and showing what was happening in that realm in the events leading up to AD 70. The warfare shown is spiritual, the beast comes from the abyss (Rev. 11:7; 17:8). So we are not talking about the physical destruction of armies or nations. In Rev 19:15 it says the Jesus would strike the nations and in the next breath it says He will rule over them. How can he rule over them if he has destroyed them? That is White's supposed conundrum all in the same verse!
Also White would probably think it was the kings of the earth (Rev. 19:19) aligned with the beast. As many preterists know, ge is usually better translated as "Land" in Revelation. It was the kings of the Land--not the kings of the earth--that were destroyed here (but again there is a strong spiritual aspect to all this). See Acts 4:25-27 where it is the kings of the Land (Herod and Pontius Pilate)--not the earth--that align with the Gentiles against Jesus.
So in Rev. 20 Satan is bound from deceiving the nations (he is the one who had given his authority to the beast, Rev. 13:2) and thrones are put in place as the saints fully possess the kingdom reign. (cf the thrones put in place at AD 70 in Dan. 7-12, 17-27. See the destruction of those who were (morally) destroying the Land at the full establishment of the kingdom in Rev. 11:15-18).
First one has to ask what is being destroyed in Rev. 19? In Rev. 17-18 the beast destroys the harlot (unfaithful Jerusalem) and then the beast and his armies are destroyed by the coming of the Word of God in Rev. 19. I am pretty sure White is thinking about physical destruction of nations and armies here. That presents a problem for preterists, how was Rome destroyed in AD 70?
As I think you know I believe that is wrong. Revelation is unveiling the spiritual realm and showing what was happening in that realm in the events leading up to AD 70. The warfare shown is spiritual, the beast comes from the abyss (Rev. 11:7; 17:8). So we are not talking about the physical destruction of armies or nations. In Rev 19:15 it says the Jesus would strike the nations and in the next breath it says He will rule over them. How can he rule over them if he has destroyed them? That is White's supposed conundrum all in the same verse!
Also White would probably think it was the kings of the earth (Rev. 19:19) aligned with the beast. As many preterists know, ge is usually better translated as "Land" in Revelation. It was the kings of the Land--not the kings of the earth--that were destroyed here (but again there is a strong spiritual aspect to all this). See Acts 4:25-27 where it is the kings of the Land (Herod and Pontius Pilate)--not the earth--that align with the Gentiles against Jesus.
So in Rev. 20 Satan is bound from deceiving the nations (he is the one who had given his authority to the beast, Rev. 13:2) and thrones are put in place as the saints fully possess the kingdom reign. (cf the thrones put in place at AD 70 in Dan. 7-12, 17-27. See the destruction of those who were (morally) destroying the Land at the full establishment of the kingdom in Rev. 11:15-18).