|
(a)
|
The prophecies of lasting peace in the kingdom of Christ are
quite explicit: “they shall learn war no more”.
|
|
(b)
|
Also, there is to be lasting godliness: “At that time
they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord, and all the nations shall be
gathered unto it, to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk
any more after the imagination of their evil heart” (Jeremiah 3:
17). “Violence shall no more be heard in thy land, wasting nor
destruction within thy borders” (Isaiah 60:18). “Of the increase
of his government and peace there shall be no end” (Isaiah
9:7).
|
|
(c)
|
Rebellion against immortals is so palpably
silly. By comparison modern nuclear armament, which every Bible reader can see
to be a lunatic policy, has calm reason on its side. For, armed with the big
bombs, there is always a thin chance that you will devastate the other half of
the world before it does the same to you. But for nations, who have had a
thousand years’ experience of divine power and immortality, to calculate
that their puny strength can win against God presupposes a mental deterioration
to kindergarten level during the millenium.
|
|
(d)
|
The practical problem insists on obtruding itself - where will
these rebel nations get their weapons from? Swords will have all been turned
into ploughshares.
|
|
(e)
|
“He must reign until he hath put all enemies under his
feet” (1 Corinthians 15: 25). The words imply a steady progress towards
complete godliness. The idea of a great boil-up of rebellion at the end is
surely most difficult to reconcile with this.
|
|
(f)
|
A massive rebellion at the end of a thousand years would stamp
the reign of Christ as a failure. To think that the end of all his efforts in
teaching, guidance, personal influence and benign rule (to say nothing of the
immortal aid of men like Moses and Paul) is to be “We will not have this
man to reign over us” - this is just incredible to any who settle down to
consider it seriously. Jesus accomplished his work as Prophet, Sacrifice and
High Priest perfectly. Can anyone be happy that his work as king is to end in
failure? - for can a long, long reign which ends in turbulent rebellion be
reckoned as a success?
|
|
(g)
|
A rebellion such as is described in Revelation 20 does not
arise in five minutes. Even a triviality like the Suez episode in 1957 called
for weeks of detailed organization, which could not be kept secret from the rest
of the world. Nevertheless one is asked to believe that Christ and his immortals
will know nothing at all of this mighty Gog-Magog uprising until it bursts upon
the world. The only alternative seems to be that, knowing all that is being
secretly concocted, they will pretend to ignore it, so that the rebels may be
lured to their own destruction. Would any reader be happy about the morality of
such a proceeding?
|
|
(h)
|
It is sometimes postulated that if the visible authority of
Christ were to be withdrawn for a time, then - human nature being what it is -
rebellion would be almost certain to ensue within a short while. But does
Scripture speak of any such withdrawal of the Messiah’s authority? This
seems to have been invented specially to cope with a big difficulty. On the
other hand, Isaiah is explicit that “thy sun shall no more go down,
neither shall thy moon withdraw itself: for the Lord shall be thine
everlasting light” (60:20).
|
|
(i)
|
The coincidence of the names Gog and Magog in Revelation 20
with that of the leader of the great confederacy of Ezekiel 38 does not seem to
have been given its proper weight. With any other Bible problem such a
coincidence would shout for the two to be equated with each other. Then may it
not be said that any interpretation which does line up these two prophecies as
having the same fulfilment has a much stronger claim to acceptance than one
which severs all connection between them and instead inserts a gap of a thousand
years? or is “Interpret Scripture by Scripture” to stand as a sound
principle everywhere except in Revelation 20?
|
|
(j)
|
Revelation 15 :I R.V. The Vials are described as “the
seven plagues which are the last, for in them is finished the
wrath of God.” The logical conclusion from these words is that the
judgement of the Gog-Magog rebellion takes place before the outpouring of the
Vials is concluded.
|
|
(k)
|
Has the difficulty ever been properly faced that this amazing
rising against all that is good and beneficent is spoken of in Scripture
in one place only? Are Christadelphians to copy Mormons,
“Jehovah’s Witnesses” and such, in their disreputable habit of
confidently basing major beliefs on one passage of Scripture? Have we,
the people of the Book, not yet learned the elementary lesson of mistrust in our
own powers of Bible interpretation? We believe what we believe about our
“First Principles” not because of one text of Scripture but
because of the massive over-all testimony of many passages. Shall we then go
back on this thoroughly sound attitude here, and this, concerning verses in the
Book of Revelation, of all places, the book about the interpretation of which
there is less room for dogmatism than any other in the Bible?
|
|
(a)
|
Luke 22:37: “This that is written must yet be
accomplished in me.”
|
|
(b)
|
Galatians 5:16: “Walk ye in the Spirit, and ye shall
not fulfil the lust of the flesh.” To read “finish”
here is to make nonsense of the passage.
|
|
(c)
|
James 2:8: “If ye fulfil the royal law ... Thou
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye shall do well.” Again, the
substitution of “finish” makes the meaning ludicrous.
|
|
(d)
|
Romans 2:27: “And shall not uncircumcision which is by
nature, if it fulfil (finish?) the law, judge thee who ... dost
transgress the law?”
|
|
(e)
|
Ruth 3:18: “the man (Boaz) will not be in rest until he
have finished (i.e. accomplished, achieved) the thing this
day.”
|
|
(f)
|
Isaiah 55:11: “My word ... shall not return unto me
void, but it shall accomplish (but not ‘finish’) that which I
please.”
|
|
(g)
|
Daniel 4:30: “Is not this great Babylon, that I have
built” - here “achieved, fully established” are both
appropriate; “finished” also is suitable in the sense of
“finished building”, but certainly not in the sense of
“ended”.
|