Gordon Fee on Revelation 20:1-6 - "the thousand years"

Every now and then people would ask me about what the "thousand years" mean in Revelation 20:1-6. Here I will cite a few comments from Gordon Fee's commentary (Eugene: Cascade Books, 2011) to help us answer that. But first, here the NIV2011 version of the passage:

"And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time. I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And 

I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.  (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.  Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years."

Here are excerpts from Gordon Fee's commentary on Revelation.

"[T]he two paragraphs, both of which begin yet again with the verb 'I saw,' are best understood together as an interlude between the divine overthrow of the unholy triumvirate (Satan, the Empire, the cult of the emperor) delineated in the preceding section (19:11-21), and the final judgement of all evil, both demonic and human, in 20:7-15. Again, as throughout, judgment itself is not the last word. So the book concludes in turn with 'a new heaven and a new earth' (21:1-8), and a 'new Jerusalem' (21:2, 9-26), which evolves into a restored Eden (22:1-5)!" (page 280)

As to the question of what is the role of this passage to the narrative as a whole, Fee says,

"[S]ince Jewish apocalypses (after Daniel) regularly have such a moment in them, although this is the only instance of 'a thousand years' as such. Millennial ideas, for example, can be found in 2 Baruch 29-30 and the Psalms of Solomon 17; but neither of these specify a thousand-year time period, rather they look forward to a time of messianic bliss on earth. However, in neither of these cases is there also a final 'heavenly' existence as well. Thus, whatever millennial ideas may have preceded John, the present passage is remarkably his own, and has specifically to do with the special place Christian martyrs have in the divine economy." (page 282)

What then is the meaning of "after that, he must be set free for a short time" in Rev 20:3?

"[It] is mostly likely related to ... that John's major concern here is not with time as such, but with the special place God has reserved for those who have been killed by the state simply because they were followers of the once slain, now risen Lamb. In any case, John's obvious concern lies with the second paragraph (vv. 4-6), and thus not with the time period as such. The picture itself is ultimately about the role of the martyrs during the thousand-year period. And even though there is no specific geographical location given, John seems clearly to have planet earth still in view. This is made certain by the language about 'the nations' in verse 3 and the picture of the resurrected martyrs 'reigning' with Christ, plus the reality that it is literally sandwiched between the Last Battle in 19:11-21 and the release of Satan to 'deceive the nations' in 20:7-10." (page 282)

Here are some Fee's conclusion remarks on Rev 20:1-6.

"So John's apparent intent here is not to say something about them [ie. the martyrs], but to make sure that the reader recognizes that what is true for all believers is true for them in particular. That is, since all of God's redeemed people will experience the first resurrection, it is therefore also true that all of God's people are thereby 'blessed and holy' and will not experience the 'second death.' This, however, is especially true of the martyrs, about whom John then concludes, they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years. Here again the reader can hardly miss the high Christology, in which the Father and Son are once more brought together at the Eschaton. What is noteworthy in this case is that the final pronoun 'him' is singular, therefore referring to Christ alone. Thus believers will serve as a kind of eternal priesthood before God and Christ, but the special privilege of the martyrs is that they 'reign' with Christ (alone) for the thousand-year period allotted especially to them. After all, according to the preceding sentence this privilege does not include 'the rest of the dead.'" (page 284)

Some good quotes about the poor, the Bible, faith and discipleship (Fee, Gombis, Pahl, Barth, Willitts)

Some quotes I collected recently:

(1) Something about the Letter of James and the poor

"James is decidedly - as in the whole of Scripture - on the side of the poor. The rich are consistently censured and judged, not because of their wealth per se, but because it has caused them to live without taking God into account and thus to abuse the lowly ones for whom God cares." Gordon Fee, in Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to read the Bible Book by Book (Grand Rapid: Zondervan, 2002), page 399.

(2) On the "scandal of the empty tomb", Michael Pahl says, "To put this simply, everyone knows that dead people do not come back from the dead, let alone to some transformed human existence, but that's precisely the point of the Christian claim that God raised Jesus from the dead - the utterly impossible has in fact occurred. And the impossible has now become the norm, the standard by which all else is measured." Michael Pahl, From the Resurrection to New Creation (Eugene: Cascade, 2010), page 12.

(3) "God is as much present in the scientifically and historically explainable as he is in that which has not yet been explained. Nor should we expect to see God only in the "miraculous," or in the triumphs of life. God is as much present in the mundane and in life's tragedies as he is in those experiences which are typically seen as the more likely demonstrations of divine activity." Michael Pahl, From the Resurrection to New Creation (Eugene: Cascade, 2010), page 70.

(4) Two quotes of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (via Joel Willitts)

True believers must participate in the suffering of Christ. This call to self-denial and suffering is the “hard word of grace”. "Just as Christ is only Christ as one who suffers and is rejected, so a disciple is a disciple only in suffering and being rejected, thereby participating in crucifixion." "Suffering becomes the identifying mark of a follower of Christ." (Dietrich Bonhoeffer via Joel Willitts) (Click here for Willitts' post)

"The call to discipleship is a commitment solely to the person of Jesus . . . It is beyond enmity between law and gospel. Christ calls; the disciple follows. That is grace and commandment in one." (Bonhoeffer via Joel Willitts)

(5) "The social dynamics of celebrity culture are now so familiar that they no longer shock us... I...  have thought often about the social and cultural forces that tempt us to focus on image-maintenance.  These dynamics make us inauthentic and lead to shallow and manipulative relationships.  Because we want others to be impressed with us, we’re tempted to craft public images that mask our failures and weaknesses and trumpet our strengths." Tim Gombis - Click here for Gombis' blog post.

(6) Quotes of Karl Barth (via Tim Gombis)

“God can be known only when those of the highest rank regard suffering with the whole social order of their age and bearing its heavy burden as the noblest achievement of which they are capable; when the rich in spirit think nothing of their wealth—not even in order to share it—but themselves become poor and the brothers of the poor..." (Karl Barth via Tim Gombis - Click here for Gombis' blog post)

A paradox of the cruciform God: “God gives life only through death.” (Karl Barth via Tim Gombis - click here for Gombis' blog post)

A paradox of the cross: “The cross is the bridge which creates a chasm and the promise which sounds a warning” (Karl Barth via Tim Gombis - click here for Gombis' blog post)

(7) "I am because we are, since we are, therefore I am." (John S Mbiti, African scholar) No individualistic religion there.

Gordon Fee: A professor on fire (filled with the Spirit)

In the Charisma magazine there is an article on Professor Gordon Fee, who is one of the most respected New Testament scholars today. I like Gordon Fee because he endeavours to read the Scripture on its own terms, rather than through the lens of a particular theology. I still find his commentaries and books most helpful.

Here are some excerpts from the article.

"Gordon Fee knows how it feels to be a lone ranger. Regarded as the first Bible scholar of the modern Pentecostal movement, Fee is a maverick. For 40 years he has fought an uphill battle in Pentecostal circles, within a movement that has been traditionally wary of theological endeavors and has placed far stronger emphasis on spiritual experience. "

"Yet his insights into the apostle Paul’s teachings have influenced thousands of believers. And his writings have opened up the New Testament for Christians across the theological span."

"As he pursued opportunities to teach and write, his reputation as an independent thinker and New Testament scholar grew quickly. Many Bible scholars, Fee says, write books to fit their theology. He strives to plumb the Scriptures without a preconceived Pentecostal bent, an approach known as exegesis in scholarly terms."

"“I don’t think of myself as a Pentecostal scholar,” says Fee, who today holds a dual U.S.-Canadian citizenship and lives in Vancouver, Canada. “I think of myself as a scholar who happens to be a lifelong Pentecostal.”"

Click here for the article.

God speaks through his Spirit, who dwells in us

One of the most precious things I learned in ministry under an experienced senior minister in the 1990's was his desire to listen to God.

God speaks to his people. This is found frequently from Genesis to the prophetic writings in the Old Testament. People in the earliest church continued to hear God's voice, as the book of Acts illustrates. People like John Wesley and Hudson Taylor also seem to have heard God speak to them.

In my own experience I have never heard the audible voice of God. (But I know people who have.) But often I hear him speak to me. Mostly he speaks to me on matters relating to my own life and my loved ones. But not infrequently God speaks to others, with me being the deliverer of the message.

To me, the Bible remains the only reliable source of God's revelation, and it's the primary means by which God speaks to me. But in my own prayer life my experience is that God speaks to his people.

God speaks to us, and it's comforting and empowering. He gives us understanding of the Scripture, and guides us in our daily life.

As Gordon Fee says, the Holy Spirit is God's empowering Presence in those who are in Christ.

Who is Tom Wright?

Some time ago I spoke at a Christian gathering about the righteousness and justice of God as well as the lordship of Christ. I used some of N T (Tom) Wright's material in my presentation. Afterwards someone asked me about Tom Wright's teaching because she had heard some negative comments about him.

I don't intend to defend Tom Wright's theology here. But I think it is unfortunate that Tom Wright has attracted quite a few negative comments about his teaching. Tom Wright is a fellow follower of Jesus who has made significant contribution to the church and the academic community. Wright is not always right. Nor is anyone of us.

One rather unfortunate misunderstanding is the association of the so-called New Perspective with Tom Wright. Some Christians express grave concerns about the New Perspective. But one must note that Tom Wright would have disagreed with certain views of E P Sanders, who is a leading figure of the New Perspective. In Wright's writings he regularly points out how Sanders has got it wrong (but agrees with him at certain points, as every good academic would have done).

In a previous post, I have mentioned how I came across Tom Wright's books. (Click here for the post.) But here I would like to say again that respected scholars like Gordon Fee has spoken very kindly of Tom Wright. Click here for an interview with Fee. Similarly, people like J I Packer have recommended Wright's books. (See back cover of some of Wright's books.) I have read books written by respected respected Christian leaders/scholars like Christopher Wright, Richard Hays and others, and often they cite Tom Wright and use his materials.

(An informed reader would know that there are other opponents of Tom Wright, who come from the other end of the theological spectrum. Space does not allow me to deal with that.)

I also found an article written by Doug Green, who is a professor at the Westminster Theological Seminary. This article is worth reading if one wants to read something from a conservative evangelical perspective. Click here for the article.

It does not mean that Fee, Packer and others would have agreed with Wright all the time. Nor does it mean that Wright would have agreed with them totally. But it does mean that Tom Wright is well received by respected evangelical Christian leaders.

Everyone has to read the Bible and determine whether they agree with Tom Wright. I can only let his own teaching speak for himself. But I feel a bit sad to find that people reject a Christian like him when they themselves haven't read much of him. Let's be a bit more gracious toward one another.

My pilgrimage (2) - Walking with Bible teachers

As mentioned in an earlier post, I am one of those people who try to read the Bible from cover to cover once a year (and, again, that practice does not make me superior to others in any way). Along the way I have come across two Bible teachers who have major influence on me.

Just over 21 years ago I came across a book called How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, written by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart. It is about how to read the Bible within its own contexts and according to the different genres of the books in the Scripture. I learned heaps from it. One of the reasons why I liked it is that what it says resonates with my own reading of the Bible.

As I embarked on my own theological studies and later on worked on a postgraduate research project in the New Testament, I found myself studying and enjoying Professor Gordon Fee's commentaries and books all the time. I would say that he was my best Bible teacher, despite the fact that I had never met him personally.

Some years ago I eventually had a chance to sit in one of Prof Fee's public lectures at Regent College, Vancouver. At the lecture someone asked him which New Testament scholars he liked most. He was reluctant to single out anyone, but mentioned F. F. Bruce and N. T. (Tom) Wright specifically.

(Recently I found a video clip of Prof Fee in which he mentioned Tom Wright. Click here for the clip.)

At the time I was reading Bishop Tom Wright's books on the apostle Paul. Upon Prof Fee's recommendation, I have since read many of Wright's writings. I have to say that they really resonate with my own reading of the Bible. Tom Wright is able to put together a lot of things in the Bible that I would not have articulated in my own words. Yet I find myself agreeing with him because I have read the Bible in very similar ways over the last 28 years.

This does not mean that I agree with Tom Wright and Gordon Fee all the time. Nor does it mean that they are better than all the other Bible teachers. But I do have to thank them for being my teachers in my own journey of seeking God and learning from the Scriptures.