Posted on 10/24/2002 11:08:42 AM PDT by Jean Chauvin
THE TEACHING OF 1 CORINTHIANS 15:23—26
George Eldon Ladd, an able defender of the premillennialist view, has argued that 1 Corinthians 15:20—28, and especially verses 23—26, teaches three stages in the unfolding of redemptive history, which include an interim period that is the equivalent of the millennium of Revelation 20:1—6. Though this passage does not speak expressly of a millennium, it at least corroborates, according to Ladd, the sequence of events clearly set forth in Revelation 20. He summarizes his position as follows:
There is . . . one passage in Paul which may refer to an interim kingdom if not a millennium. In 1 Corinthians 15:23—26 Paul pictures the triumph of Christ’s kingdom as being accomplished in several stages. The resurrection of Christ is the first stage (tagma). The second stage will occur at the parousia when those who are Christ’s will share his resurrection. ‘Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.’ The adverbs translated ‘then’ are epeita, eita, which denote a sequence: ‘after that’. There are three distinct stages: Jesus’ resurrection; after that (epeita) the resurrection of believers at the resurrection; after that (eita) the end (telos). An unidentified interval falls between Christ’s resurrection and his parousia, and a second undefined interval falls between the parousia and the telos, when Christ completes the subjugation of his enemies.1
Ladd’s argument is that, though this passage may not explicitly speak of a millennial period, it allows for an intervening period between the time of Christ’s coming and the resurrection of believing saints, and the time of Christ’s subjection of all his enemies at the end of the age. This intervening period is the millennium of Revelation 20.
Though Ladd’s argument can be defended on strictly grammatical grounds that the adverbs ‘then. . . and then’ used by the Apostle Paul can express a sequence in which a period of time could intervene, this requires an unnatural reading of this passage for several reasons.
First, in all the other New Testament instances where the words used in this passage (‘epeita . . . eita’) are found, they are used to express events in the closest temporal connection, without any protracted period of time intervening (Luke 8:12, Mark 4:17, John 20:27). In the immediate context of i Corinthians 15:23—26, we find the same adverbs used inter-changeably, and there, too, they express a simple sequence of events (1 Cor. 15:5—7). Furthermore, the second of these two, ‘and then’, is used alone in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 to express an immediate sequence of events. If context and ordinary usage have a bearing upon the interpretation of a text, then it seems evident that these words ought to be read as expressing a simple sequence of events — when Christ comes, the dead in Christ will be raised and the end state will ensue with all things subject to him.
Second, the New Testament generally and the epistles of Paul particularly, show a close connection between the ‘coming’ (parousia) of Christ and the ‘end’ (telos). However, on Ladd’s and the premillennialists’ construction of this passage, these terms in 1 Corinthians 15:23—26 refer to distinct events, separated by a period of one thousand years. In 1 Corinthians 1:7—8, the Apostle Paul speaks of the ‘revelation’ and the ‘day’ of the Lord as the end to which believers look forward and until which they will be kept blameless. When Christ is revealed, the end will come and the believer’s need to persevere in hope will conclude (cf. 2 Cor. 1:13—14, Matt. 10:22; 24:6, 13—14, Mark 13:7,13, Luke 21:9, Heb. 3:6, 14; 6:11, 1 Pet. 4:7). Thus, treating the ‘coming’ of Christ and the ‘end’ in 1 Corinthians 15:23—26 as events that are closely connected, or even conjoined, is in keeping with the ordinary pattern found in the New Testament. That pattern is broken by Ladd’s view.
And third, the believer’s victory over death is said in 1 Corinthians 15:54—55 to occur when believers receive resurrection bodies. This coincides with what is said in 1 Corinthians 15:23—26 to occur in conjunction with both the ‘coming’ of Christ and the ‘end’, when the believer’s last enemy, death, will be overcome. The simplest and most obvious reading of these verses in their context is that when Christ comes and believers share in his resurrection, this event will coincide with or introduce the ‘end’, that circumstance in which death has been swallowed up in victory.
In short, though Ladd’s reading of this passage is grammatically possible, there are good and powerful reasons to conclude that it is contextually and comparatively most improbable. When 1 Corinthians 15:23—26 is read in its immediate context and in the more remote context of New Testament teaching generally, it corroborates the pattern we earlier termed the general analogy of Scripture: when Christ comes at the end of the age, this will mark the closure of redemptive history and commence (with the resurrection of the just and the unjust, the judgement of the living and the dead, etc.) the final state. The Scriptures simply contain no clear evidence for a premillennialist understanding of the return of Christ, with the possible exception of Revelation 20:1—6.
1. Ladd, ‘Historic Premillennialism’, in The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views, ed. Robert G. Clouse, p. 39.
"grammatically possible", the author claims, but awkward in light of other passages in Scripture.
"First, in all the other New Testament instances where the words used in this passage (‘epeita . . . eita’) are found, they are used to express events in the closest temporal connection, without any protracted period of time intervening (Luke 8:12, Mark 4:17, John 20:27)."
I must note, thought, that it is not 'grammatically possible' that people who are alive in the body (Revelation 20:4) experience the event of the Resurrection of the ~DEAD~.
They are alive in the body, after all. They are not dead.
Jean
Jean
Jean
| Revelation 5:9-10 | 9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. | Christians Serving as Kings & PRIESTS who SHALL (FUTURE) reign with Christ on the EARTH |
| Revelation 20:4-5 | 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and 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 reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. | Resurrected saints (along with those in fine linen Rev 19: 8, 14 same as Rev 5:10) REIGN with Christ a THOUSAND YEARS. |
| Revelation 20:6 | 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. | Christians serving as priests reign with Christ a thousand years |
| Revelation 20:7-9 | Revelation 20 7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. 9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.. | After 1000 years those in Holy City ON EARTH are attacked but enemy is destroyed |
| Summary | 100% Scripture from the Book of Revelation.. | Irrefutable 1000 Year Reign of Christ on Earth. Christians serving as priests with Christ for 1000 years ON EARTH. This is the definition of Premillenialism. Anyone who says premillennialism is NOT a valid biblical position is unfair with SCRIPTURE. |
| Text | Scripture | Associated Resurrection | Time |
| 1 Co 15: 23a | 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; | Jesus’ Own was the First Resurrection | Time Point: Resurrection Sunday, approx 33 AD |
| 1 Co 15: 23b | 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. | Those who are Christ’s (those who are dead in Christ + the rapture of those who are alive …1Th4:16-17) | Time Point: At the 2nd Coming of Christ |
| 1 Co 15: 24-26 | 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. | The Remainder Resurrected at the End | TIME SPAN Beginning at THE RETURN "He MUST REIGN" UNTIL All enemies, INCLUDING DEATH, destroyed. |
Jean
Isaiah 65 makes a declaration regarding the New Heavens and the New Earth. It then goes on into a description of what you claim is the "millennial kingdom". You simply declare, as if by fiat, that this is 'obviously' a reference to the "millennial kingdom" even though it would then be a description of the Saints of God dying during this "millennial kingdom". Your interpret this in such a way that we wouldn't remember any of this happening any way (vs 17) -so what would be the point?
You then read 1 Corinthians 15:23-26 and, likewise, insert the "millennial kingdom" in between "afterward they that are Christ's at his coming" and "Then cometh the end" even thought nothing of the sort is mentioned in the text.
You also continue to insist that Rev 20 describes Christ reigning on earth -even though no mention is ever made of the earth regarding this "millennial kingdom". You, again, insert this earthly "millennial kingdom" into a text in which it is not remotely found.
You find a text which refers to the saints reigning on earth (Rev 5:10) and insist that this is in reference to this "millennial kingdom" "on earth" of Rev 20 even though Rev 20 never mentions even mentions this supposed "millennial kingdom" and even in the light of the FACT that John tells us we will be reigning on the Earth with Christ "for ever and ever" in the New Heavens and the New Earth. You maintain that 5:10 cannot be refering to 22:5 even though 22:5 is an explicit description of reining "on earth".
And you call this "proof"??????
Seems as though your Interpolation Error is quite high! You continue to insert this "millennial kingdom" in passages which don't remotely talk about it!
You ought to be ashamed of yourself!
Jean
Not actually..there are two groups mentioned
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [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 reigned with Christ a thousand years.
The and can be translated and, also, even, indeed, but
It is one of those prepositions which can have a variety of meanings (which have a tendency to blur together, in my opinion). The interlinear I trust the most renders the dia as "on account of."
This agrees with the Calvinists' preferred rendering of the dia in an analogous grammatical situation in Romans 4:25. The KJV says "He was raised for our justification," whereas the NASB says more precisely "He was raised because of our justification"--which, of course, is essentially equivalent to the idea of "on account of".
(The point which Paul seems to be making in Romans 4:25a is that the Lord's death is what accomplishes the justification of the elect. By contrast, the Lord's resurrection, mentioned in 4:25b, proclaims God's election-specific satisfaction with that sacrifice. [Of course, the death and resurrection are coupled, so we should not separate the death and resurrection in an artificial way; nevertheless, there is a theologically strong connotation of the idea that the Lord was released from the grave because He had succeeded in purging sin from His body--which, in mystical terms, is us.)
Anyway, the point which I want to make is that there may very well be an idea of instrumentality inherent in dia. Again, if we read Romans 4:25b as "raised because of our justification," we could say, in effect, that our justification secured His resurrection.
If this is the connotative idea in dia--and the NASB rendering of Romans 4:25 suggests that it is (especially when we realize that particular redemption is true!)--then Revelation 20:4 would be saying that Jesus's (Own?) witness somehow secured their beheading.
Think about that one for a while.
I agree that there is, in a sense, 'one group' -the elect! And they are described in two ways -dead "beheaded..." and living "which did not worship the beast".
~They~ (the group as a whole) "lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
Unfortunately for the PreMillennialists, people who are alive in the body do not experience Resurrection of the Dead (1 Corinthians 15:51,52).
Thus, Rev 20's "first resurrection" ~CANNOT~ be a reference to a bodily resurrection.
Jean
I. Kai eidov (And I saw)
...A. thpovous, kai ekathisav eP' autous, (thrones, And THEY sat upon them)
.......-- kai kpima edothn autois, (and judgement was given to them)
...B. kai tas psuXas twv pepelekismevwv (and the souls of the ones having been beheaded)
.......1. dia tnv marturiav Insou kai (because of the witness of Jesus and)
.......2. dia tov logov tou theou, (because of the word of God)
...C. kai hoitives ou Pposekuvnsav to thnpiov (and the ones WHO did not worship the beast)
.......1. oude tnv eikova autou kai (nor its image and)
.......2. ouk elabov to Xapagma ePi to metwPov (did not receive the mark on the forehead)
..............-- kai ePi tnv Xeipa autwv; (and on their hand;)
II. kai exnsav kai ebasileusav meta tou Xpistou Xilia etn. (and they lived and reigned with the Christ a thousand years.)
I. And I saw
...A. thrones, And THEY sat upon them
.......-- and judgement was given to them
...B. and the souls of the ones having been beheaded
.......1. because of the witness of Jesus and
.......2. because of the word of God
...C. and the ones WHO did not worship the beast
.......1. nor its image and
.......2. did not receive the mark on the forehead
..............-- and on their hand;
II. and they lived and reigned with the Christ a thousand years.
I. What does John see? (1) thrones with judges, (2) souls of beheaded, (3) Non-worshippers of the beast. II. AND THEY lived and reigned with Christ a 1000 years. Verse 5 points out that THIS is the 1st resurrection.
One could make a case for. (I don't have my Machen here, and there's a gerundy-type thingy with "the having-been-beheaded-ones" and I'm unsure if it's repeated as "the-not- worshipping-the-beast-ones." That would give it the sense of "those WHO were not worshipping the beast ones.") If it repeats, then we get:
I. What does John see? (1) thrones with judges, (2) souls, ((a)) of beheaded ones, and ((b))ones who didn't worship the beast. II. AND THEY lived and reigned with Christ a 1000 years. Verse 5 points out that THIS is the 1st resurrection.
Who are the ones doing the judging? They are called "they." (They sat upon them.) Paul said, 1 Corinthians 6:2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
Therefore, the tribulation martyrs and faithful will join THOSE ALREADY THERE (ALL THEY) in reigning with Christ for a 1000 years.
The literal translation of the Greek would be:
And I saw thrones; and they sat upon them, and a verdict was given to them; and the souls of those beheaded on account of the testimony of Jesus, and on account of the word of God, and those who did not do homage to the geast nor his image and did not receive the mark upon their forhead, and upon their hand; and they lived and reinged with Christ the thousand years
Now, regarding the Greek "...and the souls of those beheaded...":
In the various translations, "I saw" is placed before this phrase because this verb is assumed into the reading of the Greek:
KJV: "and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded..."
NASB: "And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded..."
NIV: "And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded..."
ASV: "and I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded..."
Unfortunately, this leads many to believe that "and which had not worshipped the beast" is a description of, at least, some of the 'souls' John sees. This has lead many, such as yourself, to conclude that John is telling us he sees all dead people.
However, the Greek term for 'soul' is psuche. "Psuche" is not necessarily an indicator of dead people. It is usually used in the N.T. as a positive reference to "life". We know from John 11:25,26 that those in Christ will "never die". Thus, we can understand that, even though the "souls" John sees might be absent from the body, they are very much alive -just as Christ told the theif on the cross that "this day" he would be with him in paradise.
This really ~is~ the point John is trying to make. The issue of a 'millennium' is really a side issue. John is telling us that these folks live because Jesus ~is~ the resurrection!
If the above does not convince you that there are also living people which John sees, it is because it is technically not a correct exposition of the grammar of Rev 20:4. It just happens to be an exposition of the various translations of Rev 20 -with exception to the NIV which butchers Rev 20.
The technical detail I did not mention is the clincher that John also sees living people.
The Greek word for 'souls', as I already mentioned, is "psuche". The gender of "Psuche" is feminine. The "which" in the phrase "which had not worshipped the beast" is the Greek word hostis. The gender of "hostis" is masculine. Thus "hostis" cannot be a description or included among the "souls" which John describes seeing. It is a group which is distinct over against the "souls which were beheaded".
Thus the proper translation of Rev 20:4 would be:
"and [I saw} the souls of them that were beheaded.....and [I saw} those who had not worshipped the beast..."
John is telling us he sees some who are dead and some who are alive. All these people together in one group are said to have "lived and reigned with Christ". The point is not about some millennial kingdom. The point John is making is that all Christ's sheep are alive in Him! (John 11:25,26; John 5:24,25)
20:5 continues and tells us that this collective group of Saints -some who live but are absent the body and some who are currently alive in the body are all participants of the "First Resurrection". Because some of these persons are indeed alive in the body, this, obviously, cannot be a reference to a bodily resurrection. For people who are alive in the body do not experience the resurrection of the dead, since they are not dead!
Properly identify just what is the object of 20:4 (who John sees) and you are well on your way to the proper interpretation. Unfortunately, PreMillennialists make the "millennium" the main point of this passage. It isn't at all. It is not even the emphasis!
Jean
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.