CHAPTER XX.

AND I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the [611]key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

{419} 1. _And I saw an angel come down from heaven._ Comp. Notes on ch. x. 1. He does not say whether _this_ angel had appeared to him before, but the impression is rather that it was a different one. The whole character of the composition of the book leads us to suppose that different angels were employed to make these communications to John, and that, in fact, in the progress of things disclosed in the book, he had intercourse with a considerable number of the heavenly inhabitants. The scene that is recorded here occurred _after_ the destruction of the beast and the false prophet (ch. xix. 18‒21), and therefore, according to the principles expressed in the explanation of the previous chapters, what is intended to be described here will take place _after_ the final destruction of the Papal and Mahometan powers. ¶ _Having the key of the bottomless pit._ See Notes on ch. i. 18; ix. 1. The fact that he has the key of that underworld is designed to denote here, that he can fasten it on Satan so that it shall become his prison. ¶ _And a great chain in his hand._ With which to bind the dragon, ver. 2. It is called _great_ because of the strength of him that was to be bound. The chain only appears to have been in his hand. Perhaps the key was suspended to his side.

2 And he laid hold on the [612]dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and [613]bound him a thousand years,

2. _And he laid hold on._ Seized him by violence――ἐκράτησε. The word denotes the employment of strength or force; and it implies that he had power superior to that of the dragon. Comp. Mat. xiv. 3; xviii. 28; xxi. 46; xxii. 6; xxvi. 4. We can at once see the propriety of the use of this word in this connection. The great enemy to be bound has himself mighty power, and can be overcome only by a superior. This may teach us that it is only a power from heaven that can destroy the empire of Satan in the world; and _perhaps_ it may teach us that the interposition of angels will be employed in bringing in the glorious state of the millennium. Why should it not be? ¶ _The dragon._ See Notes on ch. xii. 2. Comp. ch. xii. 4, 7, 13, 16, 17; xiii. 2, 4, 11; xvi. 13. There can be no doubt as to the meaning of the word here; for it is expressly said to mean the devil, and Satan. It would seem, however, that it refers to some manifestation of the power of Satan that would exist _after_ the beast and false prophet――that is, the Papacy and Mahometanism――should be destroyed, and probably the _main_ reference is to the still existing power of Paganism. Comp. Notes on ch. xvi. 13, 14. It _may_ include, however, all the forms of wickedness which Satan shall have kept up on the earth, and all the modes of evil by which he will endeavour to perpetuate his reign. ¶ _That old serpent._ This is undoubtedly an allusion to the serpent that deceived our first parents (Ge. iii. 1, seq.), and therefore a proof that it was Satan that, under the form of a serpent, deceived them. Comp. Notes on ch. xii. 3. ¶ _Which is the Devil._ On the meaning of this word, see Notes on Mat. iv. 1. ¶ _And Satan._ On the meaning of this word, see Notes on Job i. 6. In regard to the _repetition_ of the names of that great enemy of God and the church here, Mr. Taylor, in the _Fragments to Calmet’s Dictionary_, No. 152, says that this “almost resembles a modern Old Bailey indictment, in which special care is taken to identify the culprit, by a sufficient number of _aliases_. An angel from heaven, having the key of the prison of the abyss, and a great chain to secure the prisoner, ‘apprehended the dragon, _alias_ the old serpent, _alias_ the devil, _alias_ the Satan, _alias_ the seducer of the world,’ who was sentenced to a thousand years’ imprisonment.” The _object_ here, however, seems to be not so much to _identify_ the culprit by these _aliases_, as to show that under whatever forms, and by whatever names he had appeared, it was always the same being, and that now the author of the whole evil would be arrested. Thus the one great enemy sometimes has appeared in a form that would be best represented by a fierce and fiery dragon; at another, in a form that would be best represented by a cunning and subtle serpent; now in a form to which the word devil, or accuser, would be most appropriate; and now in a form in which the word Satan――an adversary――would be most expressive of what he does. In these various forms, and under these various names, he has ruled the {420} fallen world; and when this one great enemy shall be seized and imprisoned, all those forms of evil will, of course, come to an end. ¶ _A thousand years._ This is the period usually designated as the MILLENNIUM――for the word millennium means _a thousand years_. It is on this passage that the whole doctrine of the millennium _as such_ has been founded. It is true that there are elsewhere in the Scriptures abundant promises that the gospel will ultimately spread over the world; but the notion of a _millennium as such_ is found in this passage alone. It is, however, enough to establish the doctrine, if its meaning be correctly ascertained; for it is a just rule in interpreting the Bible, that the clearly-ascertained sense of a single passage of Scripture is sufficient to establish the truth of a doctrine. The fact, however, that this passage stands alone in this respect, makes it the more important to endeavour accurately to determine its meaning. There are but three ways in which the phrase “a thousand years” can be understood here: either (a) literally; or (b) in the prophetic use of the term, where a day would stand for a year, thus making a period of three hundred and sixty thousand years; or (c) figuratively, supposing that it refers to a long but indefinite period of time. It may be impossible to determine _which_ of these periods is intended, though the first has been generally supposed to be the true one, and hence the common notion of the millennium. There is nothing, however, in the use of the language here, as there would be nothing contrary to the common use of symbols in this book in regard to time, in the supposition that this was designed to describe the longest period here suggested, or that it is meant that the world shall enjoy a reign of peace and righteousness during the long period of three hundred and sixty thousand years. Indeed, there are some things in the arrangements of nature which look as if it were contemplated that the earth would continue under a reign of righteousness through a vastly long period in the future.

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and [614]set a seal upon him that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

3. _And cast him into the bottomless pit._ See Notes on ch. ix. 1. A state of peace and prosperity would exist _as if_ Satan, the great disturber, were confined in the nether world as a prisoner. ¶ _And shut him up._ Closed the massive doors of the dark prison-house upon him. Comp. Notes on Job x. 21, 22. ¶ _And set a seal upon him._ Or, rather, “upon _it_”――ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ. The seal was placed upon the _door_ or _gate_ of the prison, not because this would fasten the gate or door of itself, and make it secure, for this was secured by the key, but because it prevented intrusion, or any secret opening of it without its being known. See Notes on Da. vi. 17, and Mat. xxvii. 66. The idea here is, that every precaution was taken for absolute security. ¶ _That he should deceive the nations no more._ That is, during the thousand years. Comp. Notes on ch. xii. 9. ¶ _Till the thousand years should be fulfilled._ That is, during that period there will be a state of things upon the earth _as if_ Satan should be withdrawn from the world, and confined in the great prison where he is ultimately to dwell for ever. ¶ _And after that he must be loosed a little season._ See ver. 7, 8. That is, a state of things will then exist, for a brief period, _as if_ he were again released from his prison-house, and suffered to go abroad upon the earth. The phrase “a little season”――μικρὸν χρόνον, _little time_――denotes properly that this would be brief as compared with the thousand years. No intimation is given as to the exact time, and it is impossible to conjecture how long it will be. All the circumstances stated, however, here and in ver. 7‒10, would lead us to suppose that what is referred to will be like the sudden outbreak of a rebellion in a time of general peace, but which will soon be quelled.

§ a.――_Condition of the world in the period referred to in ver. 1‒3._

It may be proper, in order to a correct understanding of this chapter, to present a brief summary under the different parts (see the Analysis of the chapter) of what, according to the interpretation proposed, may be expected {421} to be the condition of things in the time referred to.

On the portion now before us (ver. 1‒3), according to the interpretation proposed, the following suggestions may be made:――

(1) This will be subsequent to the downfall of the Papacy and the termination of the Mahometan power in the world. Of course, then, this lies in the future――how far in the future it is impossible to determine. The interpretation of the various portions of this book, and the book of Daniel, have, however, led to the conclusion that the termination of those powers cannot now be remote. If so, we are on the eve of important events in the world’s history. The affairs of the world look as if things were tending to a fulfilment of the prophecies so understood.

(2) It will be a condition of the world _as if_ Satan were bound; that is, where his influences will be suspended, and the principles of virtue and religion will prevail. According to the interpretation of the previous chapters, it will be a state in which all that has existed, and that now exists, in the Papacy to corrupt mankind, to maintain error, and to prevent the prevalence of free and liberal principles, will cease; in which all that there now is in the Mahometan system to fetter and enslave mankind――now controlling more than one hundred and twenty millions of the race――shall have come to an end; and in which, in a great measure, all that occurs under the direct influence of Satan in causing or perpetuating slavery, war, intemperance, lust, avarice, disorder, scepticism, atheism, will be checked and stayed. It is proper to say, however, that this passage does not require us to suppose that there will be a _total cessation_ of Satanic influence in the earth during that period. Satan will, indeed, be bound and restrained as to his former influence and power. But there will be no change in the character of man as he comes into the world. There will still be corrupt passions in the human heart. Though greatly restrained, and though there will be a general prevalence of righteousness on the earth, yet we are to remember that the race is fallen, and that even then, if restraint should be taken away, man would act out his fallen nature. This fact, if remembered, will make it appear less strange that, after this period of prevalent righteousness, Satan should be represented as loosed again, and as able once more for a time to deceive the nations.

(3) It will be a period of long duration. On the supposition that it is to be literally a period of one thousand years, this is in itself long, and will give, especially under the circumstances, opportunity for a vast progress in human affairs. To form some idea of the length of the period, we need only place ourselves in imagination _back_ for a thousand years――say in the middle of the ninth century――and look at the condition of the world then, and think of the vast changes in human affairs that have occurred during that period. It is to be remembered, also, that if the millennial period were soon to commence, it would find the world in a far different state in reference to future progress from what it was in the ninth century, and that it would _start off_, so to speak, with all the advantages in the arts and sciences which have been accumulated in all the past periods of the world. Even if there were no special divine interposition, it might be presumed that the race, in such circumstances, would make great and surprising advances in the long period of a thousand years. And here a very striking remark of Mr. Hugh Miller may be introduced as illustrating the subject. “It has been remarked by some student of the Apocalypse,” says he, “that the course of predicted events at first moves slowly, as one after one, six of seven seals are opened; that, on the opening of the seventh seal, the progress is so considerably quickened that the seventh period proves as fertile in events――represented by the sounding of the seven trumpets――as the foregoing six taken together; and that on the seventh trumpet, so great is the further acceleration, that there is an amount of incident condensed in this seventh part of the seventh period equal, as in the former case, to that of all the previous six parts in one. There are three cycles, it has been said, in the scheme――cycle within cycle――the second comprised within a seventh portion of the first, and the third within a seventh portion of the second. Be this as it may, we may, at least, see something that exceedingly resembles it in that actual economy of change and revolution manifested in English history for the last two centuries.

_It would seem as if events, in their downward course, {422} had come under the influence of that law of gravitation through which falling bodies increase in speed, as they descend, according to the squares of the distance_” (_First Impressions of England and its People_, pp. vii., viii.). If to this we add the supposition, which we have seen (Notes on ver. 2) to be by no means improbable, that it is intended, in the description of the millennium in this chapter, that the world will continue under a reign of peace and righteousness for the long period of three hundred and sixty thousand years, it is impossible to anticipate what progress will be made during that period, or to enumerate the numbers that will be saved. On this subject, see some very interesting remarks in the _Old Red Sandstone_, by Hugh Miller, pp. 248‒250, 258, 259. Comp. Professor Hitchcock’s _Religion and Geology_, pp. 370‒409.

(4) What, then, will be the state of things during that long period of a thousand years?

(a) There will be a great increase in the population of the globe. Let wars cease, and intemperance cease, and slavery cease, and the numberless passions that now shorten life be stayed, and it is easy to see that there must be a vast augmentation in the number of the human species.

(b) There will be a general diffusion of intelligence upon the earth. Every circumstance would be favourable to it, and the world would be in a condition to make rapid advances in knowledge, Da. xii. 4.

(c) That period will be characterized by the universal diffusion of revealed truth, Is. xi. 9; xxv. 7.

(d) It will be marked by unlimited subjection to the sceptre of Christ, Ps. ii. 7; xxii. 27‒29; Is. ii. 2, 3; lxvi. 23; Zec. ix. 10; xiv. 9; Mat. xiii. 31, 32; Re. xi. 15.

(e) There will be great progress in all that tends to promote the welfare of man. We are not to suppose that the resources of nature are exhausted. Nature gives no signs of exhaustion or decay. In the future there is no reason to doubt that there will yet be discoveries and inventions more surprising and wonderful than the art of printing, or the use of steam, or the magnetic telegraph. There are profounder secrets of nature that may be delivered up than any of these, and the world is tending to their development.

(f) It will be a period of the universal reign of peace. The attention of mankind will be turned to the things which tend to promote the welfare of the race, and advance the best interests of society. The single fact that wars will cease will make an inconceivable difference in the aspect of the world; for if universal peace shall prevail through the long period of the millennium, and the wealth, the talent, and the science now employed in human butchery shall be devoted to the interests of agriculture, the mechanical arts, learning, and religion, it is impossible now to estimate the progress which the race will make, and the changes which will be produced on the earth. For Scripture _proofs_ that it will be a time of universal peace, see Is. ii. 4; xi. 6‒9; Mi. iv. 3.

(g) There will be a _general_ prevalence of evangelical religion. This is apparent in the entire description in this passage, for the two most formidable opposing powers that religion has ever known――the beast and the false prophet――will be destroyed, and Satan will be bound. In this long period, therefore, we are to suppose that the gospel will exert its fair influence on governments, on families, on individuals; in the intercourse of neighbours, and in the intercourse of nations. God will be worshipped in spirit and in truth, and not in the mere _forms_ of devotion; and temperance, truth, liberty, social order, honesty, and love, will prevail over the world.

(h) It will be a time when the Hebrew people――the Jews――will be brought to the knowledge of the truth, and will embrace the Messiah whom their fathers crucified, Zec. xii. 10; xiii. 1; Ro. xi. 26‒29.

(i) Yet we are not necessarily to suppose that _all_ the world will be absolutely and entirely brought under the power of the gospel. There will be still on the earth the remains of wickedness in the corrupted human heart, and there will be so much _tendency_ to sin in the human soul, that Satan, when released for a time (ver. 7, 8), will be able once more to deceive mankind, and to array a formidable force, represented by Gog and Magog, against the cause of truth and righteousness. We are not to suppose that the nature of mankind, as fallen, will be essentially changed, or that there may not be sin enough in the human heart to make it capable of the same opposition to the {423} gospel of God which has thus far been evinced in all ages. From causes which are not fully stated (ver. 8, 9), Satan will be enabled once more to rouse up their enmity, and to make one more desperate effort to destroy the kingdom of the Redeemer by rallying his forces for a conflict. See these views illustrated in the work entitled _Christ’s Second Coming_, by Rev. David Brown, of St. James’ Free Church, Glasgow, pp. 398‒442; New York, 1851.

4 And I saw [615]thrones, and they sat upon them, and [616]judgment was given unto them: and [617]_I saw_ the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received _his_ mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and [618]reigned with Christ a thousand years.

4. _And I saw thrones_――θρόνους. See ch. i. 4; iii. 21; iv. 3, 4. John here simply says, that he saw in vision _thrones_, with persons sitting on them, but without intimating who they were that sat on them. It is not the throne of God that is now revealed, for the word is in the plural number, though the writer does not hint how _many_ thrones there were. It _is_ intimated, however, that these thrones were placed with some reference to pronouncing a judgment, or determining the destiny of some portion of mankind, for it is immediately added, “and judgment was given unto them.” There is considerable resemblance, in many respects, between this and the statement in Daniel (vii. 9): “I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit;” or, as it should be rendered, “I beheld”――that is, I continued to look――“until the thrones were _placed_ or _set_,” to wit, for the purposes of judgment. See Notes on that passage. So John here sees, as the termination of human affairs approaches, thrones placed with reference to a determination of the destiny of some portion of the race, _as if_ they were now to have a trial, and to receive a sentence of acquittal or condemnation. The _persons_ on whom this judgment is to pass are specified, in the course of the verse, as those who were “beheaded for the witness of Jesus, who had the word of God, who had not worshipped the beast,” &c. The _time_ when this was to occur manifestly was at the beginning of the thousand years. ¶ _And they sat upon them._ _Who_ sat on them is not mentioned. The natural construction is, that _judges_ sat on them, or that persons sat on them to whom judgment was intrusted. The language is such as would be used on the supposition either that he had mentioned the subject before, so that he would be readily understood, or that, from some other cause, it was so well understood that there was no necessity for mentioning who they were. John seems to have assumed that it would be understood who were meant. And yet to us it is not entirely clear; for John has not before this given us any such intimation that we can determine with certainty what is intended. The probable construction is, that those are referred to, to whom it appropriately belonged to occupy such seats of judgment, and who they are is to be determined from other parts of the Scriptures. In Mat. xix. 28, the Saviour says to his apostles, “When the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” In 1 Co. vi. 2, Paul asks the question, “Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?” The meaning as thus explained is, that Christians will, in some way, be employed in judging the world; that is, that they will be exalted to the right hand of the Judge, and be elevated to a station of honour, _as if_ they were associated with the Son of God in the judgment. Something of that kind is, doubtless, referred to here; and John probably means to say that he saw the thrones placed on which those will sit who will be employed in judging the world. If the apostles are specially referred to, it was natural that John, eminent for modesty, should not particularly mention them, as he was one of them, and as the true allusion would be readily understood. ¶ _And judgment was given unto them._ The power of pronouncing sentence in the case referred to was conferred on them, and they proceeded to exercise that power. This was not in relation to the whole race of mankind, but to the martyrs, and to those who, amidst many temptations and trials, had kept themselves pure. The sentence which is to be passed would seem to be that in consequence of which they are to be permitted to “live and reign with Christ a thousand years.” The _form_ of this expressed approval is that of a resurrection and judgment; whether this be the _literal_ mode is another inquiry, and will properly be considered when the exposition {424} of the passage shall have been given. ¶ _And |I saw| the souls of them._ This is a very important expression in regard to the meaning of the whole passage. John says he saw _the souls_――not _the bodies_. If the obvious meaning of this be the correct meaning; if he saw the _souls_ of the martyrs, not the _bodies_, this would seem to exclude the notion of a _literal_ resurrection, and consequently overturn many of the theories of a literal resurrection, and of a literal reign of the saints with Christ during the thousand years of the millennium. The doctrine of the last resurrection, as everywhere stated in the Scripture, is, that the _body_ will be raised up, and not merely that the _soul will live_ (see 1 Co. xv., and the Notes on that chapter); and consequently John must mean to refer in this place to something different from that resurrection, or to _any_ proper resurrection of the dead as the expression is commonly understood. The doctrine which has been held, and is held, by those who maintain that there will be a _literal resurrection_ of the saints to reign with Christ during a thousand years, can receive no support from this passage, for there is no ambiguity respecting the word _souls_――ψυχὰς――as used here. By no possible construction can it mean the _bodies_ of the saints. If John had intended to state that the saints, as such, would be raised as they will be at the last day, it is clear that he would not have used this language, but would have employed the common language of the New Testament to denote it. The language here does not express the doctrine of the resurrection of the body; and if no other language but this had been used in the New Testament, the doctrine of the resurrection, as now taught and received, could not be established. These considerations make it clear to my mind that John did not mean to teach that there would be a _literal_ resurrection of the saints, that they might live and reign with Christ personally during the period of a thousand years. There was undoubtedly something that might be _compared_ with the resurrection, and that might, in some proper sense, be _called_ a resurrection (ver. 5, 6), but there is not the slightest intimation that it would be a resurrection of the _body_, or that it would be identical with the _final_ resurrection. John undoubtedly intends to describe some honour conferred on the _spirits_ or _souls_ of the saints and martyrs during this long period, _as if_ they were raised from the dead, or which might be represented by a resurrection from the dead. What that honour is to be, is expressed by their “_living_ and _reigning_ with Christ.” The meaning of this will be explained in the exposition of these words; but the word used here is fatal to the notion of a literal resurrection and a personal reign with Christ on the earth. ¶ _That were beheaded._ The word here used――πελεκίζω――occur nowhere else in the New Testament. It properly means, _to axe_, that is, to hew or cut with an axe――from πέλεκυς, _axe_. Hence it means to behead with an axe. This was a common mode of execution among the Romans, and doubtless many of the Christian martyrs suffered in this manner; but “it cannot be supposed to have been the intention of the writer to confine the rewards of martyrs to those who suffered in this particular way; for this specific and ignominious method of punishment is designated merely as the symbol of any and every kind of martyrdom” (Professor Stuart). ¶ _For the witness of Jesus._ As witnesses of Jesus; or bearing in this way their testimony to the truth of his religion. See Notes on ch. i. 9; comp. ch. vi. 9. ¶ _And for the Word of God._ See Notes on ch. i. 9. ¶ _Which had not worshipped the beast._ Who had remained faithful to the principles of the true religion, and had resisted all the attempts made to seduce them from the faith, even the temptations and allurements in the times of the Papacy. See this language explained in the Notes on ch. xiii. 4. ¶ _Neither his image._ Notes on ch. xiii. 14, 15. ¶ _Neither had received |his| mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands._ See Notes on ch. xiii. 16. ¶ _And they lived_――ἔζησαν, from ζάω, _to live_. Very much, in the whole passage, depends on this word. The meanings given to the word by Professor Robinson (_Lex._) are the following:――(a) to live, to have life, spoken of physical life and existence; (b) to live, that is, to sustain life, to live _on_ or _by_ anything; (c) to live in any way, to pass one’s life in any manner; (d) to live and prosper; to be blessed. It _may_ be applied to those who were before dead (Mat. ix. 18; Mar. {425} xvi. 11; Lu. xxiv. 23; Jn. v. 25; Ac. i. 3; ix. 41), but it does not necessarily imply this, nor does the mere use of the word _suggest_ it. It is the proper notion of living, or having life _now_, whatever was the former state――whether non-existence, death, sickness, or health. The mind, in the use of this word, is fixed on the _present as a state of living_. It is not necessarily in contrast with a former state _as dead_, but it is on the fact that they are now _alive_. As, however, there is reference, in the passage before us, to the fact that a portion of those mentioned had been “beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” it is to be admitted that the word here refers, in some sense, to that fact. They were put to death in the body, but their “_souls_” were now seen to be alive. They had not ceased _to be_, but they lived and reigned with Christ _as if_ they had been raised up from the dead. And when this is said of the “_souls_” of those who were beheaded, and who were seen to reign with Christ, it cannot mean (a) that their _souls_ came to life again, for there is no intimation that they had for a moment ceased to exist; nor (b) that they then became _immortal_, for that was always true of them; nor (c) that there was any literal _resurrection of the body_, as Professor Stuart (ii. 360, 475, 476) supposes, and as is supposed by those who hold to a literal reign of Christ on the earth, for there is no intimation of the resurrection of the _body_. The meaning, then, so far as the language is concerned, must be, that there would exist, at the time of the thousand years, a state of things _as if_ the martyrs were raised up from the dead――an honouring of the martyrs _as if_ they should live and reign with Christ. Their names would be vindicated; their principles would be revived; they would be exalted in public estimation above other men; they would be raised from the low rank in which they were held by the world in times of persecution to a state which might well be represented by their sitting with Christ on the throne of government, and by their being made visible attendants on his glorious kingdom. This would not occur in respect to the rest of the dead――even the pious dead (ver. 5)――for _their_ honours and rewards would be reserved for the great day when _all_ the dead should be judged according to their deeds. In this view of the meaning of this passage there is nothing that forbids us to suppose that the martyrs will be _conscious_ of the honour thus done to their names, their memory, and their principles on earth, or that this consciousness will increase their joy even in heaven. This sense of the passage is thus expressed, substantially, by Archbishop Whately (_Essays on the Future State_): “It may signify not the literal raising of dead men, but the raising up of an increased Christian zeal and holiness; the revival in the Christian church, or in some considerable portion of it, of the _spirit_ and _energy_ of the noble martyrs of old (even as John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elias), so that Christian principles shall be displayed in action throughout the world in an infinitely greater degree than ever before.” This view of the signification of the word _lived_ is sustained by its use elsewhere in the Scriptures and by its common use among men. Thus in this very book, ch. xi. 11: “And after three days and a half, the Spirit of _life_ from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet.” So in Ezekiel, in speaking of the restoration of the Jews: “Thus saith the Lord God, O my people, _I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves_, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, and brought you up out of your graves, and shall put my Spirit in you, and ye shall _live_,” ch. xxvii. 12‒14. So in Ho. vi. 2: “After two days he will _revive_ us [cause us to live again]; in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall _live_ in his sight.” So in the parable of the prodigal son: “This thy brother was _dead_, and _is alive again_,” Lu. xv. 32. So in Is. xxvi. 19: “Thy dead men shall _live_, together with my dead body shall they arise.” The following extract, from D’Aubigné’s _History of the Reformation_, will show how natural it is to use the _very_ language employed here when the idea is intended to be conveyed of reviving former principles _as if_ the men who held them should be raised to life again. It is the language of the martyr John Huss, who, in speaking of himself in view of a remarkable dream that he had, said, “I am no dreamer, but I maintain this for {426} certain, that the image of Christ will never be effaced. They [his enemies] have wished to destroy it, but it shall be painted afresh in all hearts by much better preachers than myself. The nation that loves Christ will rejoice at this. _And I, awaking from among the dead, and rising, so to speak, from my grave, shall leap with great joy._” So a Brief addressed by Pope Adrian to the Diet at Nuremberg contains these words: “The heretics Huss and Jerome _are now alive again_ in the person of Martin Luther.” For a further illustration of the passage see the remarks which follow (§ b) on the state of things which may be expected to exist in the time referred to in ver. 4‒6. ¶ _And reigned with Christ._ Were exalted in their principles, and in their personal happiness in heaven, _as if_ they occupied the throne with him, and personally shared his honours and his triumphs. Who can tell, also, whether they may not be employed in special services of mercy, in administering the affairs of his government during that bright and happy period? ¶ _A thousand years._ During the period when Satan will be bound, and when the true religion will have the ascendency in the earth. Notes on ver. 2.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished. This _is_ the first resurrection.

5. _But the rest of the dead._ In contradistinction from the beheaded martyrs, and from those who had kept themselves pure in the times of great temptation. The phrase “rest of the dead” here would most naturally refer to the _same general class_ which was before mentioned――the pious dead. The meaning is, that the martyrs would be honoured as if they were raised up and the others not――that is, that special respect would be shown to their principles, their memory, and their character. In other words, _special_ honour would be shown _to a spirit of eminent piety_ during that period above the _common_ and _ordinary_ piety which has been manifested in the church. The “rest of the dead”――the pious dead――would indeed be raised up and rewarded, but they would occupy comparatively humble places, _as if_ they did not partake in the exalted triumphs when the world should be subdued to the Saviour. Their places in honour, in rank, and in reward would be _beneath_ that of those who in fiery times had maintained unshaken fidelity to the cause of truth. ¶ _Lived not._ On the word _lived_ see Notes on ver. 4. That is, they lived not during that period in the peculiar sense in which it is said (ver. 4) that the eminent saints and martyrs lived. They did not come into remembrance; their principles were not what then characterized the church; they did not see, as the martyrs did, _their_ principles and mode of life in the ascendency, and consequently they had not the augmented happiness and honour which the more eminent saints and martyrs had. ¶ _Until the thousand years were finished._ Then all who were truly the children of God, though some might be less eminent than others had been, would come into remembrance, and would have their proper place in the rewards of heaven. The _language_ here is not necessarily to be interpreted as meaning that they _would_ be raised up then, or would live then, whatever may be true on that point. It is merely an emphatic mode of affirming that _up to that period they would not live_ in the sense in which it is affirmed that the others would. But it is not affirmed that they would even then “live” immediately. A long interval _might_ elapse before that would occur in the general resurrection of the dead. See the Analysis of the chapter. ¶ _This is the first resurrection._ The resurrection of the saints and martyrs, as specified in ver. 4. It is called the _first_ resurrection in contradistinction from the second and last――the general resurrection――when all the dead will be _literally_ raised up from their graves and assembled for the judgment, ver. 12. It is not necessary to suppose that what is called here the “first resurrection” will resemble the real and literal resurrection in every respect. All that is meant is, that there will be such a resemblance as to make it proper to call it _a_ resurrection――a coming to life again. This will be, as explained in the Notes on ver. 4, in the honour done to the martyrs, in the restoration of their principles as the great actuating principles of the church, and perhaps in the increased happiness conferred on them in heaven, and in their being employed in promoting the cause of truth in the world.

6 Blessed and holy _is_ he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the [619]second death hath no power, but they shall be [620]priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

6. _Blessed._ That is, his condition is to be regarded as a happy or a {427} favoured one. This is designed apparently to support and encourage those who, in the time of John, suffered persecution, or who might suffer persecution afterwards. ¶ _And holy._ That is, no one will be thus honoured who has not an established character for holiness. Holy principles will then reign, and none will be exalted to that honour who have not a character for eminent sanctity. ¶ _That hath part in the first resurrection._ That participated in it; that is, who is associated with those who are thus raised up. ¶ _On such the second death hath no power._ The “second death” is properly the death which the wicked will experience in the world of woe. See ver. 14. The meaning here is, that all who are here referred to as having part in the first resurrection will be secure against that. It will be one of the blessed privileges of heaven that there will be absolute security against DEATH in any and every form; and when we think of what death _is_ here, and still more when we think of “the bitter pains of the second death,” we may well call that state “blessed” in which there will be eternal exemption from either. ¶ _But they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him._ Notes ch. i. 6; v. 10.

§ b.――_Condition of the world in the period referred to in ver. 4‒6._

I. It is well known that this passage is the principal one which is relied on by those who advocate the doctrine of the literal reign of Christ on the earth for a thousand years, or who hold what are called the doctrines of the “second advent.” The points which are maintained by those who advocate these views are substantially, (a) that at that period Christ will descend from heaven to reign personally upon the earth; (b) that he will have a central place of power and authority, probably Jerusalem; (c) that the righteous dead will then be raised, in such bodies as are to be immortal; (d) that they will be his attendants, and will participate with him in the government of the world; (e) that this will continue during the period of a thousand years; (f) that the world will be subdued and converted during this period, not by moral means, but by “a new dispensation”――by the power of the Son of God; and (g) that at the close of this period all the remaining dead will be raised, the judgment will take place, and the affairs of the earth will be consummated.

The opinion here adverted to was held substantially by Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, and others among the Christian Fathers, and, it need not be said, is held by many modern expositors of the Bible, and by large numbers of Christian ministers of high standing, and other Christians. See the _Literalist_, _passim_. The opinion of the Christian Fathers, with which the modern “literalists,” as they are called, substantially coincide, is thus stated by Mr. Elliott: “This resurrection is to be literally that of departed saints and martyrs, then at length resuscitated in the body from death and the grave; its _time_ to synchronize with, or follow instantly after, the destruction of the beast Antichrist, on Christ’s personal second advent; the _binding_ of Satan to be an absolute restriction of the power of hell from tempting, deceiving, or injuring mankind, throughout a literal period of a thousand years, thence calculated; the _government of the earth_, during its continuance to be administered by Christ and the risen saints――the latter being now ἰσάγγελοι――in nature like angels; and under it, all false religion having been put down, the Jews and saved remnant of the Gentiles been converted to Christ, the earth renovated by the fire of Antichrist’s destruction, and Jerusalem made the universal capital, there will be a realization on earth of the blessedness depicted in the Old Testament prophecies, as well as perhaps of that too which is associated with the New Jerusalem in the visions of the Apocalypse――until at length this millennium having ended, and Satan gone forth to deceive the nations, the final consummation will follow; the new-raised enemies of the saints, Gog and Magog, be destroyed by fire from heaven: and then the general resurrection and judgment take place, the devil and his servants be cast into the lake of fire, and the millennial reign of the saints extend itself into one of eternal duration” (Elliott on the Apocalypse, iv. 177, 178).

Mr. Elliott’s own opinion, representing, it is supposed, that of the great body of the “_literalists_,” is thus expressed: {428} “It would seem, therefore, that in this state of things and of feeling in professing Christendom [a feeling of carnal security], all suddenly, and unexpectedly, and conspicuous over the world as the lightning that shineth from the east even unto the west, the second advent and appearing of Christ will take place; that at the accompanying voice of the archangel and trump of God, the departed saints of either dispensation will rise from their graves to meet him――alike patriarchs, and prophets, and apostles, and martyrs, and confessors――all at once and in the twinkling of an eye; and then instantly the saints living at the time will be also caught up to meet him in the air; these latter being separated out of the ungodly nations, as when a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats, and all, both dead and living saints, changed at the moment from corruption to incorruption, from dishonour to glory, though with very different degrees of glory; and so in a new angelic nature, to take part in the judging and ruling in this world. Meanwhile, with a tremendous earthquake accompanying, of violence unknown since the revolutions of primeval chaos, an earthquake under which the Roman world at least is to rock to and fro like a drunken man, the solid crust of this earth shall be broken, and fountains burst forth from its inner deep, not as once of water, but of liquid fire; and that the flames shall consume the Antichrist and his confederate kings, while the sword also does its work of slaughter; the risen saints being perhaps the attendants of the Lord’s glory in this destruction of Antichrist, and assessors in his judgment on a guilty world. And then immediately the renovation of this our earth is to take place, its soil being purified by the very action of the fire, and the Spirit poured out from on high, to renew, in a yet better sense, the moral face of nature; the Shekinah, or personal glory of Christ amidst his saints, being manifested chiefly in the Holy Land and at Jerusalem, but the whole earth partaking of the blessedness; and thus the regeneration of all things, and the world’s redemption from the curse, having their accomplishment, according to the promise, at the manifestation of the sons of God,” iv. 224‒231.[621]

To this account of the prevailing opinion of the “literalists” in interpreting the passage before us, there should be added that of Professor Stuart, who, in general, is as far as possible from sympathizing with this class of writers. He says, in his explanation of the expression “_they lived_,” in ver. 4, “There would seem to remain, therefore, only one meaning which can be consistently given to ἔζησαν [_they lived_]; viz., that they (the martyrs who renounced the beast) are now _restored to life_, viz., such life as implies the vivification of the body. Not to a union of the soul with a gross material body indeed, but with such an one as the saints in general will have at the final resurrection――a spiritual body, 1 Co. xv. 44. In no other way can this resurrection be ranked as _correlate_ with the second resurrection named in the sequel,” vol. ii. p. 360. So again, Excursus vi. (vol. ii. p. 476), he says, “I do not see how we can, on the ground of exegesis, fairly avoid the conclusion that John has taught in the passage before us, that _there will be a resurrection of the martyr-saints, at the commencement of the period after Satan shall have been shut up in the dungeon of the great abyss_.” This opinion he defends at length, pp. 476‒490. Professor Stuart, indeed, maintains that the martyrs thus raised up will be taken to heaven and reign with Christ _there_, and opposes the whole doctrine of the literal reign on the earth, vol. ii. p. 480. The risen saints and martyrs are to be “_enthroned_ with Christ; that is, they are to be where he dwells, and where he will continue to dwell, until he shall make his descent at the final judgment day.”

II. In regard to these views, as expressive of the meaning of the passage under consideration, I would make the following remarks:――

(1) There is strong _presumptive_ evidence against this interpretation, and especially against the main point in the doctrine, that there will be a _literal resurrection_ of the bodies of the saints at the beginning of that millennial period, to live and reign with Christ on earth, from the following circumstances:――(a) It is admitted, on all hands, that this doctrine, if contained in the Scriptures at all, is found in this one passage only. It is not pretended that there is, in any other place, a direct affirmation that this will literally occur, nor would the advocates for that opinion undertake {429} to show that it is fairly implied in any other part of the Bible. But it is strange, not to say improbable, that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the righteous, a thousand years before the wicked, should be announced in one passage only. If it were so announced in plain and unambiguous language, I admit that the believer in the divine origin of the Scriptures would be bound to receive it; but this is so contrary to the usual method of the Scriptures on all great and important doctrines, that this circumstance should lead us at least to doubt whether the passage is correctly interpreted. The resurrection of the dead is a subject on which the Saviour often dwelt in his instructions; it is a subject which the apostles discussed very frequently and at great length in their preaching, and in their writings; it is presented by them in a great variety of forms, for the consolation of Christians in time of trouble, and with reference to the condition of the world at the winding up of human affairs; and it is strange that, in respect to so important a doctrine as this, if it be true, there is not elsewhere, in the New Testament, a hint, an intimation, an allusion, that would lead us to suppose that the righteous are to be raised in this manner. (b) If this is a true doctrine, it would be reasonable to expect that a clear and unambiguous statement of it would be made. Certainly, if there is but _one_ statement on the subject, that might be expected to be a perfectly clear one, it would be a statement about which there could be no diversity of opinion, concerning which those who embraced it might be expected to hold the same views. But it cannot be pretended that this is so in regard to this passage. It occurs in the book which, of all the books in the Bible, is most distinguished for figures and symbols; it cannot be maintained that it is _directly_ and _clearly_ affirmed; and it is _not_ so taught that there is any uniformity of view among those who profess to hold it. In nothing has there been greater diversity among men than in the opinions of those who profess to hold the “_literal_” views respecting the personal reign of Christ on the earth. But this fact assuredly affords _presumptive_ evidence that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the saints a thousand years before the rest of the dead, is not intended to be taught. (c) It is presumptive proof against this, that nothing is said of the employment of those who are raised up; of the reason why they are raised; of the new circumstances of their being; and of their condition when the thousand years shall have ended. In so important a matter as this, we can hardly suppose that the whole subject would be left to a single hint in a symbolical representation, depending on the doubtful meaning of a single word, and with nothing to enable us to determine, with absolute certainty, that this _must_ be the meaning. (d) If it be meant that this is a description of the resurrection of the _righteous_ as such――embracing _all_ the righteous――then it is wholly unlike all the other descriptions of the resurrection of the righteous that we have in the Bible. Here the account is confined to “those that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” and to “those who had not worshipped the beast.” If the righteous, as such, are here referred to, why are these particular classes specified? Why are not the usual general terms employed? Why is the account of the resurrection confined to these? Elsewhere in the Scriptures, the account of the resurrection is given in the most _general_ terms (comp. Mat. xxv. 41; Jn. iv. 54; v. 28, 29; Ro. ii. 7; 1 Co. xv. 23; Phi. iii. 20, 21; 2 Th. i. 10; He. ix. 28; 1 Jn. ii. 28, 29; iii. 2); and if this had been the designed reference here, it is inconceivable why the statement should be limited to the martyrs, and to those who have evinced great fidelity in the midst of temptations and allurements to apostasy. These circumstances furnish strong _presumptive_ proofs, at least, against the doctrine that there is to be a literal resurrection of _all_ the saints at the beginning of the millennial period. Comp. _Christ’s Second Coming_, by Rev. David Brown, p. 219, seq.

(2) In reference to many of the views necessarily implied in the doctrine of the “second advent,” and avowed by those who hold that doctrine, it cannot be pretended that they receive any countenance or support from this passage. In the language of Professor Stuart (_Com._ vol. ii. p. 479), there is “not a word of Christ’s descent to the earth at the beginning of the millennium. Nothing of the literal assembling of the Jews in Palestine; nothing of the Messiah’s temporal reign on _earth_; nothing of the overflowing abundance {430} of worldly peace and plenty.” Indeed, in all this passage, there is not the remotest hint of the grandeur and magnificence of the reign of Christ as a literal king upon the earth; nothing of his having a splendid capital at Jerusalem, or anywhere else; nothing of a new dispensation of a miraculous kind; nothing of the renovation of the earth to fit it for the abode of the risen saints. All this is the mere work of fancy, and no man can pretend that it is to be found in this passage.

(3) Nor is there anything here of a literal resurrection of the _bodies_ of the dead, as Professor Stuart himself supposes. It is not a little remarkable that a scholar so accurate as Professor Stuart is, and one, too, who has so little sympathy with the doctrines connected with a literal reign of Christ on the earth, should have lent the sanction of his name to perhaps the most objectionable of all the dogmas connected with that view――the opinion that the _bodies_ of the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period. Of this there is not one word, one intimation, one hint, in the passage before us. John says expressly, _and as if to guard the point from all possible danger of this construction_, that he “saw the SOULS of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus;” he saw them “_living_” and “reigning” with Christ――raised to the exalted honour during that period, as if they had been raised from the dead; but he nowhere mentions or intimates that they were raised up from their graves; that they were clothed with bodies; that they had their residence now literally on the earth; or that they were, in any way, otherwise than disembodied spirits. There is not even one word of their having “_a spiritual body_.”

(4) There are _positive_ arguments, which are perfectly decisive, against the interpretation which supposes that the bodies of the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period, to reign with Christ on the earth for a thousand years. Among these are the following:――

(a) If the “first resurrection” means rising from the grave in immortal and glorified bodies, we do not need the assurance (ver. 6), that “on such the second death hath no power;” that is, that they would not perish for ever. That would be a matter of course, and there was no necessity for such a statement. But if it be supposed that the main idea is that the _principles_ of the martyrs and of the most eminent saints would be revived and would live, _as if_ the dead were raised up, and would be manifested by those who were in _mortal_ bodies――men living on the earth――then there would be a propriety in saying that all such were exempt from the danger of the _second_ death. _Once_, indeed, they would die; but the _second_ death could not reach them. Comp. Re. ii. 10, 11.

(b) In the whole passage there are but two classes of men referred to. There are those “who have part in the first resurrection;” that is, according to the supposition, _all_ the saints; and there are those over whom “the second death” _has_ power. Into which of these classes are we to put the myriads of men having flesh and blood who are to people the world during the millennium? They have no part in “the first resurrection,” if it be a bodily one. Are they then given over to the power of the “second death?” But if the “first resurrection” be regarded as figurative and spiritual, then the statement that those who are actuated by the spirit of the martyrs and of the eminent saints, shall not experience the “second death,” is seen to have meaning and pertinency.

(c) The mention of the _time_ during which they are to reign, if it be literally understood, is contrary to the whole statement of the Bible in other places. They are to “live and reign with Christ” _a thousand years_. What, then? Are they to live no longer? Are they to reign no longer with him? This supposition is entirely contrary to the current statement in the Scriptures, which is, that they are to live and reign with him _for ever_: 1 Th. iv. 17, “_And so shall we ever be with the Lord_.” According to the views of the “literalists,” the declaration that they “should live and reign with Christ,” considered as the characteristic features of the millennial state, is to terminate with the thousand years――for this is the promise, according to that view, that they should thus live and reign. But it need not be said that this is wholly contrary to the current doctrine of the Bible, that they are to live and reign with him for ever.

(d) A further objection to this view is, that the wicked part of the world――“the rest of the dead who lived not {431} again _until_ the thousand years were finished”――must of course be expected to “live again” in the same bodily sense _when_ those thousand years were finished. But, so far from this, there is no mention of their living then. When the thousand years are finished, Satan is loosed for a season; then the nations are roused to opposition against God; then there is a conflict, and the hostile forces are overthrown; and then comes the final judgment. During all this time we read of no resurrection at all. The period after this is to be filled up with something besides the resurrection of the “rest of the dead.” There is no intimation, as the _literal_ construction, as it is claimed, would demand, that immediately after the “thousand years are finished” the “rest of the dead”――the wicked dead――would be raised up; nor is there any intimation of such a resurrection until _all_ the dead are raised up for the final trial, ver. 12. But every consideration demands, if the interpretation of the “literalists” be correct, that the “rest of the dead”――the unconverted dead――should be raised up immediately after the close of the millennial period, and be raised up as a distinct and separate class.

(e) There is no intimation in the passage itself that the _righteous_ will be raised up _as such_ in this period, and the proper interpretation of the passage is contrary to that supposition. There are but two classes mentioned as having part in the first resurrection. They are those who were “beheaded for the witness of Jesus,” and those who “had not worshipped the beast”――that is, the martyrs, and those who had been eminent for their fidelity to the Saviour in times of great temptation and trial. There is no mention of the resurrection of the righteous _as such_――of the resurrection of the great body of the redeemed; and if it could be shown that this refers to a _literal_ resurrection, it would be impossible to apply it, according to any just rules of interpretation, to any more than the two classes that are specified. By what rules of interpretation is it made to to teach that _all_ the righteous will be raised up on that occasion, and will live on the earth during that long period? In this view of the matter, the passage _does not_ express the doctrine that the whole church of God will be raised bodily from the grave. And supposing it had been the design of the Spirit of God to teach this, is it credible, when there are so many clear expressions in regard to the resurrection of the dead, that so important a doctrine should have been reserved for one single passage so obscure, and where the great mass of the readers of the Bible in all ages have failed to perceive it? That is not the way in which, in the Scriptures, great and momentous doctrines are communicated to mankind.

(f) The fair statement in ver. 11‒15 is, that _all_ the dead will then be raised up and be judged. This is implied in the general expressions there used――“the dead, small and great;” the “book of life was opened”――as if _not_ opened before; “the dead”――_all_ the dead――“were judged out of those things which were written in the books;” “the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and hell (hades) delivered up the dead which were in them.” This is entirely inconsistent with the supposition that a large part of the race――to wit, all the righteous――had been before raised up; had passed the solemn judgment; had been clothed with their immortal bodies, and had been admitted to a joint reign with the Saviour on his throne. In the last judgment what place are _they_ to occupy? In what sense are _they_ to be raised up and judged? _Would_ such a representation have been made as is found in ver. 11‒15, if it had been designed to teach that a large part of the race had been already raised up, and had received the approval of their judge?

(g) This representation is wholly inconsistent, not only with ver. 11‒15, but with the uniform language of the Scriptures, _that all the righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ_. On no point are the statements of the Bible more uniform and explicit than on this, and it would seem that the declarations had been of design so made that there should be no possibility of mistake. I refer for full proof on this point to the following passages of the New Testament:――Mat. x. 32, 33, compared with Mat. vii. 21‒23; xiii. 30, 38‒43; xvi. 24‒27; xxv. 10, 31‒46; Mar. viii. 38; Jn. v. 28, 29; Ac. xvii. 31: Ro. ii. 5‒16; xiv. 10, 12; 1 Co. iii. 12‒15; iv. 5; 2 Co. v. 9‒11; 2 Th. i. 6‒10; 1 Ti. v. 24, 25; 2 Pe. iii. 7, 10, 12; 1 Jn. ii. 28; iv. 17; Re. iii. 5; xx. 11‒15; xxii. 12‒15. It is utterly _impossible_ to explain these passages on any other supposition than that they are intended to teach that {432} the righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. And if this is so, it is of course impossible to explain them consistently with the view that all the righteous will have been already raised up at the beginning of the millennium in their immortal and glorified bodies, and that they have been solemnly approved by the Saviour, and admitted to a participation in his glory. Nothing could be more irreconcilable than these two views; and it seems to me, therefore, that the objections to the literal resurrection of the saints at the beginning of the millennial period are insuperable.

III. The following points, then, according to the interpretation proposed, are implied in this statement respecting the “first resurrection,” and these will clearly comprise _all_ that is stated on the subject.

(1) There will be a reviving, and a prevalence of the spirit which actuated the saints in the best days, and a restoration of their principles as the grand principles which will control and govern the church, _as if_ the most eminent saints were raised again from the dead, and lived and acted upon the earth.

(2) Their memory will then be sacredly cherished, and they will be honoured on the earth with the honour which is due to their names, and which they should have received when in the land of the living. They will be no longer cast out and reproached; no longer held up to obloquy and scorn; no longer despised and forgotten; but there will be a reviving of sacred regard for their principles, _as if_ they lived on the earth, and had the honour which was due to them.

(3) There will be a state of things upon the earth as if they thus lived and were thus honoured. Religion will no longer be trampled under foot, but will triumph. In all parts of the earth it will have the ascendency, as if the most eminent saints of past ages lived and reigned with the Son of God in his kingdom. A spiritual kingdom will be set up with the Son of God at the head of it, which will be a kingdom of eminent holiness, as if the saints of the best days of the church should come back to the earth and dwell upon it. The ruling influence in the world will be the religion of the Son of God, and the principles which have governed the most holy of his people.

(4) It may be implied that the saints and martyrs of other times will be employed by the Saviour in embassies of mercy; in visitations of grace to our world to carry forward the great work of salvation on earth. Nothing forbids the idea that the saints in heaven may be thus employed, and in this long period of a thousand years, it may be that they will be occupied in such messages and agencies of mercy to our world as they have never been before――_as if_ they were raised from the dead, and were employed by the Redeemer to carry forward his purposes of mercy to mankind.

(5) In connection with these things, and in consequence of these things, they may be, during that period, exalted to higher happiness and honour in heaven. The restoration of their principles to the earth; the Christian remembrance of their virtues; the prevalence of those truths to establish which they laid down their lives, would in itself exalt them, and would increase their joy in heaven. All this would be well represented, in vision, by a resurrection of the dead; and admitting that this was all that was intended, the representation of John here would be in the highest degree appropriate. What could better symbolize it――and we must remember that this is a symbol――than to say that at the commencement of this period there was, as it were, a solemn preparation for a judgment, and that the departed dead seemed to stand there, and that a sentence was pronounced in their favour, and that they became associated with the Son of God in the honours of his kingdom, and that their principles were now to reign and triumph in the earth, and that the kingdom which they laboured to establish would be set up for a thousand years, and that, in high purposes of mercy and benevolence during that period, they would be employed in maintaining and extending the principles of religion in the world? Admitting that the Holy Spirit intended to represent these things, and these only, no more appropriate symbolical language could have been used; none that would more accord with the general style of the book of Revelation.

7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

7. _And when the thousand years are {433} expired_. See ver. 2. ¶ _Satan shall be loosed out of his prison._ See ver. 3. That is, a state of things will then occur as if Satan should be for a time let loose again, and should be permitted to go as formerly over the world. No intimation is given _why_ or _how_ he would be thus released from his prison. We are not, however, to infer that it would be a mere arbitrary act on the part of God. All that is necessary to be supposed is, that there would be, in certain parts of the world, a temporary outbreak of wickedness, _as if_ Satan were for a time released from his chains.

8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, [622]Gog and Magog, to [623]gather them together to battle: the number of whom _is_ as the sand of the sea.

8. _And shall go out to deceive the nations._ See Notes on ch. xii. 9. The meaning here is, that he would again, for a time, act in his true character, and in some way delude the nations once more. In what way this would be done is not stated. It would be, however, clearly an appeal to the wicked passions of mankind, exciting a hope that they might yet overthrow the kingdom of God on the earth. ¶ _Which are in the four quarters of the earth._ Literally, _corners_ of the earth, as if the earth were one extended square plain. The earth is usually spoken of as divided into four parts or quarters――the eastern, the western, the northern, and the southern. It is implied here that the deception or apostasy referred to would not be confined to one spot or portion of the world, but would extend afar. The idea seems to be, that during that period, though there would be a _general_ prevalence of the gospel, and a _general_ diffusion of its blessings, yet that the earth would not be entirely under its influence, and especially that the native character of the human heart would not be changed. Man, under powerful temptations, would be liable to be deluded by the great master spirit that has so often corrupted the race. Once more he would be permitted to make the trial, and then his power would for ever come to an end. ¶ _Gog and Magog._ The name _Gog_ occurs as the name of a prince in Eze. xxxviii. 2, 3, 16, 18; xxxix. 1, 11. “He is an invader of the land of Israel, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,” Eze. xxxviii. 2. _Magog_ is also mentioned in Eze. xxxviii. 2, “the land of Magog;” and in Eze. xxxix. 6, “I will send a fire on Magog.” As the terms are used in the Old Testament, the representation would seem to be that _Gog_ was the king of a people called _Magog_. The signification of the names is unknown, and consequently nothing can be determined about the meaning of this passage from that source. Nor is there much known about the _people_ who are referred to by Ezekiel. His representation would seem to be, that a great and powerful people, dwelling in the extreme recesses of the north (ch. xxxviii. 15;