Revelation 20:1-6

May 2, 2021

Lord’s Day Worship

Sean Higgins

The sermon starts around 19:00 in the audio file.

Series: Just Conquer #56

Introduction

Many years ago at a Shepherds’ Conference I heard John MacArthur describe the work of John Calvin in a way that planted a mental seed which still bears fruit every week as I study the Bible. John Calvin wrote his Institutes of the Christian Religion fairly early in his life (27 years old). He continued to revise it, editing and adding, for the next two decades until his death. His work explained the theology that the Reformers believed, and were willing to die for. By the time Calvin’s earthly ministry was finished, he had also published verse-by-verse commentaries for almost every book of the Bible. MacArthur commented something to the effect that Calvin dragged his theology through text after text of Scripture which sharpened his theology and kept it driven by the Word.

At a different level, we all have some sort of “theology” when we come to read whatever book we pick up, including the Bible. With the Bible, though, we want to constantly, intentionally, submit ourselves to it. We don’t need to claim that we come without any assumptions, but we must be willing to have our assumptions challenged, if not rebuked and corrected, depending on what we read. It is a process, and that’s good. God’s revelation was progressive, so is our understanding of it.

One reason I wanted to preach through the Apocalypse is because I wanted to drag my own notions of eschatology through every seal, trumpet, and bowl. It’s true, I also wanted to drag you all (and your theological assumptions) along together. Being honest with our assumptions is tough, and it is even tougher to willingly barrage those assumptions with questions to see what still stands. Preaching through Revelation has been the most difficult series for me, not necessarily because of the apostle John’s visions, but because of trying to consider some of the interpretations of those visions by those with a different approach.

This can be done charitably, not building figurative bunkers about eschatology. Some of my closest friends are wrong.

It’s also been difficult because eschatology seems to be one of the most dualistic doctrines by default. What I mean is, the way I’ve heard Revelation talked about is more for bunker-builders than bold conquerors. If the world is going to hell in a handbasket, as is often talked about, then we should hunker down until the rapture. But I wanted to drag my Kuyperianism through these chapters to see what would come out.

As we like to say, we are Reformed and still reading Revelation (ha!). No, we’re “Reformed and still reforming,” which includes reading the verses in Revelation for themselves, which promise blessing (Revelation 1:3), rather than assuming what they can’t mean because of our “theology.” Also, for what it’s worth, John Calvin never wrote a commentary on Revelation. Who knows what might have happened if it had been otherwise.

We’ve looked at the first two paragraphs in Revelation 20, paragraphs that repeatedly refer to the “thousand years.” Satan is bound for a thousand years (verses 1-3), some group of people are resurrected and are said to reign for a thousand years (verses 4-6). After the thousand years, Satan is released for a little while and then is finally defeated (verses 7-10). I have mentioned some of the categories, but have tried to drag us through the verses first.

If the eschatology of Revelation were a vision chart, and Jesus is the big “E” on the top line, we have some among us who’ve never looked closely at any of the lines below, and others who are arguing over the fine print of copyright information. And great. Today I want to get a higher perspective with some of the theological categories, show how they are understood to fit in Revelation (and a “thousa[...]