Millenium and Rev 20:2-3

[garysibio]

As a Catholic I am an amillenialist but I recently had a question put to me that I had no answer for. Rev 20:2-3 says:

He overpowered the dragon, that primeval serpent which is the devil and Satan, and chained him for a thousand years. He hurled him into the Abyss and shut the entrance and sealed it over him, to make sure he would not lead the nations astray again until the thousand years had passed. At the end of that time he must be released, but only for a short time. (NJB)

I thought the Church taught that the Millennium was the church age, from Pentecost until Jesus returns. This passage is pretty clear that Satan will be bound up in Hell during the Millennium but he certainly is not bound up. How do I reconcile this?

 

[Spencerian]

As a Catholic I am an amillenialist but I recently had a question put to me that I had no answer for. Rev 20:2-3 says:

He overpowered the dragon, that primeval serpent which is the devil and Satan, and chained him for a thousand years. He hurled him into the Abyss and shut the entrance and sealed it over him, to make sure he would not lead the nations astray again until the thousand years had passed. At the end of that time he must be released, but only for a short time. (NJB)

I thought the Church taught that the Millennium was the church age, from Pentecost until Jesus returns. This passage is pretty clear that Satan will be bound up in Hell during the Millennium but he certainly is not bound up. How do I reconcile this?

Hi.

See the footnotes to the USCCB’s NAB version here. Correct: the “thousand years” note is not to be taken literally, but nor should be the concept that Satan is literally bound. A bound Satan is symbolic of Christ’s victory over death and the overt influences of evil on the world in His Resurrection, until the end of time.

Supporting this is CA’s tract on the Rapture, under the subheading “Amillenialism.”

 

[garysibio]

Hi.

See the footnotes to the USCCB’s NAB version here. Correct: the “thousand years” note is not to be taken literally, but nor should be the concept that Satan is literally bound. A bound Satan is symbolic of Christ’s victory over death and the overt influences of evil on the world in His Resurrection, until the end of time.

Supporting this is CA’s tract on the Rapture, under the subheading “Amillenialism.”

I have to say that, even though I am an amilenialist, I don’t see that as a very convincing answer. Sorry. I can see 1000 as being symbolic but why would Scripture say that Satan is bound when he is not? That’s not a symbol, that’s a contradiction.

 

[COPLAND_3]

Satan is bound in the sense that he does not exercise the power that he used to before Christ came. Satan had so much power before, that only a very small remnant of the earth’s population followed God, just a small area in the Middle East, and they (Jews) were a spiritual mess the biggest part of the time. But when Christ came and established the Church, Satan has been limited of his power so much that the people of God grew from being a small remnant in the Middle East to being world wide. But when the Great Tribulation comes at the end of time there will be a time when the Antichrist will have all the power of Satan, and God’s people will be persecuted like never before.

Here are a couple of links to what I have written on it that I highly recommend reading

Here is what I am not finished with, but has info that will help you understand the basics in depth catenas.wetpaint.com/page/The+Great+Tribulation

Here is chapter 20 of my commentary on Revelation litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Chapter+20

 

[John7]

This passage is pretty clear that Satan will be bound up in Hell during the Millennium but he certainly is not bound up. How do I reconcile this?

This is the way I think about it (could be totally wrong ) :

Are there people still coming to Christ or not? Satan at some time, whenever the 1000 years are over, will be loosed ‘a little season’ to once again deceive the nations. To deceive them about what?? I think it has something to do with the Antichrist and the denying that Jesus is the Christ. When Satan is loosed almost everyone will believe that Jesus is/was *not *the Christ and darkness will enshroud the world, no more new people (except a remnant that won’t be deceived) will be coming to Christ, a world where the spirit of Antichrist rules. Today during the millennium the Church is still huge and there are a lot of new people coming to Christ (eg China). At the end of 1000 years at loosing of Satan I don’t think this will be the case.

Something also having to do with the means by which the devil does this, by miracles (can make fire come down from heaven and other ‘lying signs and wonders’)
Revelation 13:14 “And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast…”

Matthew 24:24 "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.The ‘elect’ won’t be deceived, the Church at that time will still be standing in some sort of remnant form.

oh, I just read COPLAND’s post…I agree with COPLAND

 

[Hiskid1973]

Hi…Your question might fit better being asked over here:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=487054

 

[garysibio]

Satan is bound in the sense that he does not exercise the power that he used to before Christ came. Satan had so much power before, that only a very small remnant of the earth’s population followed God, just a small area in the Middle East, and they (Jews) were a spiritual mess the biggest part of the time. But when Christ came and established the Church, Satan has been limited of his power so much that the people of God grew from being a small remnant in the Middle East to being world wide. But when the Great Tribulation comes at the end of time there will be a time when the Antichrist will have all the power of Satan, and God’s people will be persecuted like never before.

Here are a couple of links to what I have written on it that I highly recommend reading

Here is what I am not finished with, but has info that will help you understand the basics in depth catenas.wetpaint.com/page/The+Great+Tribulation

Here is chapter 20 of my commentary on Revelation litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Chapter+20

I’m sorry again but this argument is unconvincing. There is absolutely nothing about the text I asked about that leaves room for there being degrees of deception. It is pretty simple, Satan will not be allowed to deceive anyone during this period.

 

[garysibio]

This is the way I think about it (could be totally wrong ) :

Are there people still coming to Christ or not? Satan at some time, whenever the 1000 years are over, will be loosed ‘a little season’ to once again deceive the nations. To deceive them about what?? I think it has something to do with the Antichrist and the denying that Jesus is the Christ. When Satan is loosed almost everyone will believe that Jesus is/was *not *the Christ and darkness will enshroud the world, no more new people (except a remnant that won’t be deceived) will be coming to Christ, a world where the spirit of Antichrist rules. Today during the millennium the Church is still huge and there are a lot of new people coming to Christ (eg China). At the end of 1000 years at loosing of Satan I don’t think this will be the case.

Something also having to do with the means by which the devil does this, by miracles (can make fire come down from heaven and other ‘lying signs and wonders’)
Revelation 13:14 “And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast…”

Matthew 24:24 "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.The ‘elect’ won’t be deceived, the Church at that time will still be standing in some sort of remnant form.

oh, I just read COPLAND’s post…I agree with COPLAND

John7,

I’m a bit confused. Are you saying that, when Satan is released, absolutely everyone alive will reject Jesus?

 

[Luke65]

Who says he hasn’t already been unleashed?

“When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations [with the Evolution myth - check the date!] in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves [can you tell?]. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.” (Rev. 20:7-9)

Our Lady of La Sallette (1846): “In the year 1864 Lucifer, together with a great number of devils, will be loosed from hell;”

Our Lady of Akita (1973): “As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and wipe out a great part of humanity…”

Pray, pray, pray! Penance, penance, penance!

 

[COPLAND_3]

I’m sorry again but this argument is unconvincing. There is absolutely nothing about the text I asked about that leaves room for there being degrees of deception. It is pretty simple, Satan will not be allowed to deceive anyone during this period.

As Augustine pointed out, John does not say Satan will not decieve ‘anyone’, but he will not decieve the ‘nations.’ Big difference. Here is Augustine’s comments litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/1000+year+reign%3A+Church+Fathers

 

[John7]

John7,

I’m a bit confused. Are you saying that, when Satan is released, absolutely everyone alive will reject Jesus?

No. In this scenario, there would be a remnant (a relatively very small number ??] of Christians in comparison to over 1 billion now, perhaps like number at time of Paul or less) of a church, which is comprised of the ‘elect’ from Mt 24:24.

Matthew 24:24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect”

 

[garysibio]

Who says he hasn’t already been unleashed?

"When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations [with the Evolution myth - check the date

!] in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves [can you tell?]. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them." (Rev. 20:7-9)

Our Lady of La Sallette (1846): “In the year 1864 Lucifer, together with a great number of devils, will be loosed from hell;”

Our Lady of Akita (1973): “As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and wipe out a great part of humanity…”

Pray, pray, pray! Penance, penance, penance!

I almost agree with your assessment here but I think it’s a little off. It is my understanding - and I might be wrong - that the Church teaches that the Church Age (the symbolic Millenium) ends when Jesus returns. Since Satan is released at the end of the Millenium according to this passage (“until the thousand years had passed”), Satan could not have been released yet.

Now, if I am wrong about it ending with the return of Jesus, then we might be on to something. Taking the messages from Our Lady into consideration and other things like the vision of Pope Leo XIII, maybe this period ends before Jesus’ return during that period which the Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of here:

675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.

If that is the case - and I am not saying it is, only speculating - it would fit in with those apparitions and visions. Under this scenario, Satan could have been released sometime around the beginning of the twentieth century.

Note: I understand the difference between public and private revelation. I am not trying to raise a private revelation to the level of a public one. I’m only saying that, if a private revelation is true, it must be in agreement with public revelation. Nothing more.

There is still a big problem with this, however. Even if Satan was freed then, he certainly exercised a lot of deceptive power during the last 1,900 years when he is supposed to have been bound and unable to deceive if the 1,000 years is symbolic of the church age. That problem is beginning to seem insurmountable to me.

 

[garysibio]

As Augustine pointed out, John does not say Satan will not decieve ‘anyone’, but he will not decieve the ‘nations.’ Big difference. Here is Augustine’s comments litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/1000+year+reign%3A+Church+Fathers

Where were these quotes taken from?

 

[garysibio]

No. In this scenario, there would be a remnant (a relatively very small number ??] of Christians in comparison to over 1 billion now, perhaps like number at time of Paul or less) of a church, which is comprised of the ‘elect’ from Mt 24:24.

Matthew 24:24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect”

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[James224]

As a Catholic I am an amillenialist but I recently had a question put to me that I had no answer for. Rev 20:2-3 says:

He overpowered the dragon, that primeval serpent which is the devil and Satan, and chained him for a thousand years. He hurled him into the Abyss and shut the entrance and sealed it over him, to make sure he would not lead the nations astray again until the thousand years had passed. At the end of that time he must be released, but only for a short time. (NJB)

I thought the Church taught that the Millennium was the church age, from Pentecost until Jesus returns. This passage is pretty clear that Satan will be bound up in Hell during the Millennium but he certainly is not bound up. How do I reconcile this?

Satan is bound. I know it doesn’t look like it but if he weren’t it would be much worse.

 

[beehumble]

I have to say that, even though I am an amilenialist, I don’t see that as a very convincing answer. Sorry. I can see 1000 as being symbolic but why would Scripture say that Satan is bound when he is not? That’s not a symbol, that’s a contradiction.

We must be careful to not be contradicting ourselves also. You say you see the 1000 yrs as symbolic, but are forgetting that most of Revelation is symbolic, and are failing to apply it to the ‘Satan is bound’ part. Satan being bound is also symbolic, and means what other posters here have said - his power has become limited or inhibited by the death/resurrection of Jesus and His sending the Holy Spirit to us.

There will come a time (actually we are in it now) called the short time of Satan, the end times, ‘time, times, and a half time’ the ‘twelve hundred sixty days’, or the ‘forty-two months’, in which Satan is granted more power to test the people of God - to test Christ’s Church. This precedes the Last Day, coming immediately before it.

Hope this helps.

God bless you.

 

[COPLAND_3]

Where were these quotes taken from?

That is from his writing called the ‘City of God.’ I took what he wrote and placed his comments in the order of a typical Bible commentary in order to make it easier to follow. You can it at 20.7-9. Here it is bookmarked at the spot ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.iv.XX.7.html

On the link that I gave in the last post I also provide comments from other Church Fathers on the 1000 year reign, Bede, Victorinus, Hippolytus, Oecumenius, and Various Ancient Commentators.

I am working on a gloss on Revelation, in which I may go ahead and work on Rev 20.

 

[beehumble]

I almost agree with your assessment here but I think it’s a little off. It is my understanding - and I might be wrong - that the Church teaches that the Church Age (the symbolic Millenium) ends when Jesus returns. Since Satan is released at the end of the Millenium according to this passage (“until the thousand years had passed”), Satan could not have been released yet.

Now, if I am wrong about it ending with the return of Jesus, then we might be on to something. Taking the messages from Our Lady into consideration and other things like the vision of Pope Leo XIII, maybe this period ends before Jesus’ return during that period which the Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of here:

675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.

If that is the case - and I am not saying it is, only speculating - it would fit in with those apparitions and visions. Under this scenario, Satan could have been released sometime around the beginning of the twentieth century.

Note: I understand the difference between public and private revelation. I am not trying to raise a private revelation to the level of a public one. I’m only saying that, if a private revelation is true, it must be in agreement with public revelation. Nothing more.

There is still a big problem with this, however. Even if Satan was freed then, he certainly exercised a lot of deceptive power during the last 1,900 years when he is supposed to have been bound and unable to deceive if the 1,000 years is symbolic of the church age. That problem is beginning to seem insurmountable to me.

The ‘thousand years had passed’ directly refers to what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24:14 -
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come.

The preaching of the good news of Jesus Christ throughout the world will symbolically take ‘1000 years’. Then the end comes. The end is the short time of Satan, the ‘time, times, and a half-time’, and this ends with the terrible Great Day of the Lord, the Last Day. During the short time of Satan (meaning he is unbound), the Church that was built up for the ‘1000 years’ is severely attacked, but it still exists, and in fact will continue to exist. When leaders of the nations (gog) and the people who follow them in those nations (magog) feel they have conquered the Gospel message of Christ (via an anti-Christ message which is teachings and laws that attack family, marriage, life of innocents, etc etc) , when the ‘city of God’, the people of God, are surrounded on all sides by evil and physically and spiritually assaulted by evil forces, then God will act and a consuming fire will descend and Satan will be chained forever, and the General Judgment will occur and there will be a new heaven and a new earth and God will dwell with His people.

Here is an admittedly simplistic way to look at it:
A father watches his son build a beautiful sand castle (Church - the people who follow God). The neighbor kid comes over and sees it and is jealous and tries to wreck it, but the father holds the kid back so he can only kick and destroy the parts of the beautiful castle that his feet can reach (the miseries of the past 1900 years of Satan’s limited power). Then when the castle is done (gospel preached to the world), the father lets the neighbor kid - who by now has stopped kicking and struggling- go. The neighbor kid immediately runs at the castle, kicking and destroying a great deal of it before the son and father grab him, restrain him, and throw him out of the yard and lock the yard fence. Then father and son restore the parts of the castle the neighbor kid ruined. (I try to keep things simple. - somebody else can fit the Holy Spirit into this simplistic analogy if they wish for He has a big part too.)

 

[Spencerian]

I have to say that, even though I am an amilenialist, I don’t see that as a very convincing answer. Sorry. I can see 1000 as being symbolic but why would Scripture say that Satan is bound when he is not? That’s not a symbol, that’s a contradiction.

I think that there is a confusion in the effects of Satan with Satan himself.

Perhaps as well, we are confusing the notion that Christ’s Passion should have somehow removed from the earth all sin, all evil, wretched nations, disco, boy bands, bogey-monsters, crooked car salesmen, reality TV, yellowing laundry and the heartbreak of psoriasis. It did not.

Christ’s Passion removed the permanent death of all mankind, the ultimate effect of the Serpent’s work against Man, never to see God at the least, or permanently detached by hell at worst. Christ, by offering a perfect sacrifice that we may choose to accept, offers us an opportunity to enter heaven and have the beatific vision.

The Bible can be read in a literalist POV or be taken in a literal POV. CAL airings often tackle this question. CA apologist Tim Staples sums it up that the symbolism present in Revelation and other passages must be viewed via the lens of the culture that wrote it–and preferably not in soundbites, reading the whole passage for context and not in fragments.

Apologist John Martignoni gives one example: I could write a book about my days, noting that one day it rained cats and dogs. The book survives thousands of years later and some archeologist digs it up. When they get to reading that passage, will they interpret the rain event as dogs and cats dropping from the sky (a literalist POV) or literally (by taking the author’s intention into play)?

If you are handling arguments from someone trying to piece apart Revelation as if it were a literalist (fundamentalist) guide, try that analogy. You may also consider Christ’s many parables where He often used hyperbole to emphasize a point to the masses. For instance, in Matthew 18, Christ emphasizes the importance of avoiding sin by giving extremes, such as “And if your eye scandalize you, pluck it out, and cast it from you. It is better for you having one eye to enter into life, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.” Does Christ mean that we *really *should pluck our eyes out to avoid sin? No.

Same is true here in Revelation, where imagery is rampant and literalist POVs can really defeat the overall message.