Reigning with Christ

[Josh]

I posted this on Steve Gregg's forum, but I'd like to post it here for other responses

Rev. 20:4-6

4I 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 for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy are those who have part 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.

I was going to ask this question when Steve Gregg was in Camas last weekend, but didn't get to it.

When discussing soul sleep, he said he tended to disagree with it but expressed that he was pretty neutral on the subject (I hope that's accurate). Later, when he was discussing amillenialism, it occurred to me that the above passage, from an amillenial perspective, which I also share, seems to stand in strong contradiction to the idea of soul sleep. This in turn got me wondering what Steve's perspective, as an amillenialist, is on this reigning discussed in Rev. 20:4-6. Who and what does it actually entail? (who is ruling and what does that ruling look like)

Other perspectives are welcome, but I'm most curious about what others from an amillenialist perspective would say.

I've got some ideas I can throw in as well.

Thanks!

[Josh]

Some people responded in agreement some pointed out how all believers are currently reigning with Christ even in this life (Grace2U), and others that they see this passage as highly symbolic and therefore not a source of particular information about the "afterlife"(Paidion)

Here was my response:

I’d have to agree most with MoGrace2U here, but while it’s true that the saints on earth could be said to be reigning with Christ, I think this passage teaches that the departed saints are reigning with Him in a special way.

I see this passage as in line with Jesus’ eschatological parables (such as the one about the servants who will be left in charge of 5 cities/ 10 cities) and in Paul’s strange comments about how we will one day even “judge the angels”.

Though there may be some symbolic imagery used (such as thrones, for instance) I think this passage implies a handful of concrete expectations:

1)That the departed saints are conscious. This a strong proof text against soul sleep, imo, especially coupled with John’s emphasis on the fact that these saints are “brought to life” or “live on” after their death, as part of the first resurrection.
2)That the departed saints are aware of the events on earth (in line with John’s comments about the martyrs under the altar, which I do see as teaching their consciousness after death, though colored with some symbolic imagery)
3)That these saints reign with Christ in a real, active way. (note, that this phrase is used not to imply an equality of authority with Christ, but an active sharing in his reigning as agents of His authority) Perhaps they assist in making decisions regarding the affairs of earth, or, like the angels, act in some way as agents of his will.

Obviously, this is in stark contrast to Paidion’s view. But I don’t think it’s enough for him to say it’s “symbolic” and then point to ther “symbolic passages”. If you think this passage is highly symbolic, then I think he (you ) should tell us what it really means then and we can debate that.

[christopher]

And I responded:

Although I do not share Paidion's view of the state of the dead, I do share his view on this particular passage. The detail of the vision need not be broken down and pressed into any particular theological system. Earlier in the book, Jesus said:

Rev 2:10
Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.
NKJV

To me, "reigning with Christ" simply implies that these martyrs have "received the crown of life" by being faithful unto death. I think it safe to say that their example of being "faithful unto death" can be construed as a command to do likewise. Thus, they are reigning with Christ in the sense that Jesus commanded it, they did it, and therefore the rest have no excuse not to.

It kind of reminds me of reading Hebrews 11 and then Paul (er, um, the author) concluding:

Heb 12:1
12:1 Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,
NKJV

The testimonies of the faithful are like a cloud of witnesses telling us what to do. And there other examples like that of metaphorical personifications of dead peoples actions. Some Paidion listed, but others like Jesus saying certain people and cities would "rise up in judgment" against His generation (Matt 12)

Anyway, that makes the most sense to me at this point.

This could get tricky doing this on two forums.

[Josh]

Weak sauce, Chris. All I have to say is weak sauce. That's all you got?








Just kidding . Kinda


"I'll be bock", to coin a Schwarzennegar (?) phrase.

[christopher]

well, ya know, too much sauce can drown the flavor of the meat.

bating my breath Ah-nuld :-)

[Josh]

I just posted this on the other forum too, so I guess it's double posting for a while ;D

I'll like to respond by considering some of the implications of a passage where Paul speaks of our future judgments:

1 Corinthians 6:1-6

1If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? 2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! 5I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!

In this passage, Paul is contrasting the questionable competency of Christians in conflict with each other with the assumed competency he's convinced we will one day have in deciding issues of monumental importance (don't you love how he says "do you not know that we will judge angels" as if it's a rhetorical question. Paul is such a tease!)

This argument would seem to lose most of it's steam if, as you seem to be describing, the reign of the departed saints is merely figurative "example" rather than a conscious reigning as an agent of Christ's authority, because, you see, he seems to be implying that we will need competency for it.

In regard to your Hebrews reference, while I agree that the text does not necessitate that the cloud of witnesses referred to is anything more than a literary device, I think it is reasonable to infer that to the author of Hebrews it is more than a literary device. When later in chapter 12:22-24 he says:

22But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, 24to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

I think he really means that in the Church real angels and real saints (the cloud of witnesses) are mystically present just as assuredly as Jesus Christ himself in present.

And let's not forget the disciples experience on the Mount of Transfiguration, when two of those "literary references" actually show up on the scene tangibly as witnesses (I guess instead of a cloud of witnesses, Moses and Elijah here were witnesses in a cloud :lol: )

Lastly, the view I'm arguing for is much more romantic. Am I right or am I right?

[robin]

Matthew 12:42
42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

Josh,
How do you see this passage, and how does it fit into your thinking on this subject? Is the Queen of the south one of the saints? Is the Judgment referred to here 70AD, of the final judgment? Is the Judgment symbolic, or actual?

Robin

[Josh]

I don't see the judgment referred to here as the judgment of 70 AD, I see it as referring to the final judgment day/ Great White Throne Judgment of Rev. 20:11-15.

Yes, I would say that the Ninevites and the Queen of the South would be in the "company of the saints".

The wicked and adulterous generation Jesus spoke to was judged temporally in AD 70 and awaits the final judgment at the end of the millenium.

Both judgments are, from my perspecitve, simultaneoulsy "symbolic" and "actual" though I'm not exactly sure what the difference is. If you mean by "actual" occurring in space and time as an interaction between conscious persons, then yes.

That's my take. Chris and I have discussed this elsewhere, I'm not sure where (maybe on the Matthew sub-forum?)

[christopher]

Argh! twice the posts, twice the work:

Alrighty, it’s settled then. Let’s all polish up our gavels and get ready to judge.

But wait, there are a few things that have always perplexed me about this whole notion of us “judging” and “reigning” and being the ruler over 5 to 10 cities.

1. In the passage you quoted, it’s hard to know how the Corinthians would be expected to already know that the saints will “judge” the world and angels. Which angels? The ones held in chains in 2 Peter and Jude? How would they know that and why would Paul speak as if they should know it? Where’s he getting that idea from? And if these angels are already in chains awaiting judgment, haven’t they been (in some sense) judged already? What’s the point of our judging them? What will they be judged for? It doesn’t quite say. What happens if there’s a hung jury? Will God allow us to reverse His decision?

2. Paul just got though saying: “For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But those who are outside God judges. (1 Cor 5:12-13 NKJV)”. So which is it Paul, are we the judges of the world or is it God? How do we square that with the scores of other scriptures that say God alone is the sole judge of all men? (Acts 17:31, Rom 2, 2Tim 4:1, Heb 10:30, Heb 12:23, etc. etc.)

3. Why is it that this role of judge is always changing hands in scripture? One minute, God is the judge of sinners, the next it’s the saints, the next it’s cities, and better yet, sometimes it may even be demons. Jesus speaking to the Pharisees says:

Matt 12:26-28
26 If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? 27 And if I cast out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges.
NKJV

So, who is the “they” in this passage? The demons? The “sons” (disciples) of the Pharisees? So in what way should we take these words? Are either of these options saying that righteous people will be the Pharisees judges? I think there is hyperbole in use here that is not at all uncommon in scripture. Judging needs to be done by a standard. We often see that words and actions are used as metaphorical personifications of the standard by which people are judged. Jesus says to the wicked servant:

Luke 19:22
'Out of your own mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant. NKJV

He also personified His words as that which judges:

John 12:47-48
47 And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.

NKJV[/blockquote]


So when Paul says we are going to “judge” the world and angels, could it not be said that it is actually God doing the judging through the standard of obedience to God set by those who are obedient? And as such, is he not saying that since that is so, let us be found worthy of that standard by being obedient to the command of Christ to “love one another” (as opposed to suing one another).

Anyway, that makes the most sense to me and seems to harmonize the rest of the scriptures that emphasize God as the exclusive sovereign judge of all. And to be quite honest, I have no desire to rule over or judge anyone, including angels. I take comfort that an all-knowing, all-loving, merciful and just God has that job.

[Carmel]

You said it perfectly..