Jim Hamilton on Revelation 20

My buddy Jim Hamilton preaches up a storm on Revelation 20 about the millennium. If you are amillennial, only listen to it with proper protective equipment covering your groin because Hamilton will sock it to you at your most vulnerable point.

Revelation Bonanza - Part 4: Stuckenbruck on the Millennium

There are some very good Revelation commentaries out there: Beale is near encyclopedic, Caird is an oldie but a goodie, Keener is great on application, and I'm also partial to Witherington. In terms of short commentaries in one volumes whole Bible commentaries, I am a great admirer of Loren T. Stuckenbruck in the Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible. This is what he says about Revelation 20:

The scenarios in 20:1-3 and 4-6 are patterned, respectively, after two Jewish apocalyptic traditions: (1) the notion of a temporary abode for evil powers in anticipation of the final judgment (cf. Isa 24:21-22; 1 Enoch 10:12; 21:1-10; Jub. 5:10; 4Q203 7, 8) and (2) the expectation of a period of messianic rule before the final judgment (cf., eg., 1 Enoch 91:12-16; Sib. Or 3:635-701; 4 Ezra 7:27-35; 2 Bar 29:3-30:5). The combination of these traditions allows John to split up the eschatological judgment into two stages or resurrections, one which stresses the reward of the martyred righteous ("first resurrection") and another which stresses the judgment of the wicked ("the second resurrection"). This, in turn, throws the spotlight on the privileges afforded to loyal Christians during a millennial reign.

Read in sequence, 20:4-6 and 11-15 could be read as an eschatological judgmnt occurring in two stages. What may seem to be successive stages could actually be a literary device used by John to focus singly on the vindication of the righteous martyrs and on the eradication of the wicked and evil. It is, therefore, misleading to insist that John was simply interested in chronology. Many have deliberated whether the millennial reign precedes or follows the final judgment. So formulated, this question has produced traditions of interpretation which, respectively, are labeled "premillennial" and "postmillennial". Whereas the former [I think "latter" is meant] regards the millennium as the culmination of a gradual improvement brought about by the church in the world, the latter [I think "former"] expects that the world will only be changed decisively when God's activity intervenes in a world in a downward spiral of evil. While it might be possible to read 19:11-20:15 either way, the passage in its prsent form is inconsistent. The impression is left that John, rather than being concerned primarily with the order of events to be, was attempting to draw attention to the ultimate destinies of the righteous and the wicked that is, to show in sharprest relief that God will vindicate the faithful ones and annihilate those who are allies of Satan.

Justin Martyr on the Resurrection and Millennium

In Dial. Tryph. 80, Justin writes:

Then I answered, "I am not so miserable a fellow, Trypho, as to say one thing and think another. I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and[believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise. Moreover, I pointed out to you that some who are called Christians, but are godless, impious heretics, teach doctrines that are in every way blasphemous, atheistical, and foolish. But that you may know that I do not say this before you alone, I shall draw up a statement, so far as I can, of all the arguments which have passed between us; in which I shall record myself as admitting the very same things which I admit to you. For I choose to follow not men or men's doctrines, but God and the doctrines[delivered] by Him. For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit this[truth], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians, even as one, if he would rightly consider it, would not admit that the Sadducees, or similar sects of Genist , Meristae,Gelilaeans, Hellenists, Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews(do not hear me impatiently when I tell you what I think), but are[only] called Jews and children of Abraham, worshipping God with the lips, as God Himself declared, but the heart was far from Him. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare.

What jumps out at me here is:

1. Not all 'Christians' believed in a resurrection and some held to the immortality of the soul (which I think describes a lot of contemporary Christians too).

2. I wonder if Justin's reading of resurrection + millennium is based on his reading of Revelation 20 or is it an independent tradition?

3. For Justin, belief in the resurrection is a non-negotiable item in his belief matrix.