Joh 8:51, 11:26, 1Jo 5:16-17, Rev 2:11, 20:6 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 51. If a man keep my saying . If he believes on me and obeys my commandments. He shall never see death . To see death , or to taste of death , is the same as to die , . The sense of this passage is, "He shall obtain eternal life, or he shall be raised up to that life where there shall be no death." See .

John 8:51

Verse 51. If a man keep my saying. If he believes on me and obeys my commandments.

He shall never see death. To see death, or to taste of death, is the same as to die, Lk 2:26, Mt 16:28, Mk 9:1. The sense of this passage is, "He shall obtain eternal life, or he shall be raised up to that life where there shall be no death." See Jn 6:49,50, 3:36, 5:24, 11:25,26.

John 11:26

Verse 26. Whosoever liveth. He had just spoken of the prospects of the pious dead. He now says that the same prospects are before the living who have like faith. Greek, "Every one living and believing on me."

Shall never die. As the dead, though dead, shall yet live, so the living shall have the same kind of life. They shall never come into eternal death. See Jn 6:50,51,54,58. Greek, "shall by no means die forever."

Believest thou this? This question was doubtless asked because it implied that he was then able to raise up Lazarus, and because it was a proper time for her to test her own faith. The time of affliction is a favourable period to try ourselves to ascertain whether we have faith. If we still have confidence in God, if we look to him for comfort in such seasons, it is good evidence that we are his friends. He that loves God when he takes away his comforts, has the best evidence possible of true attachment to him.

(q) "whosoever" Jn 3:15, 4:14

1 John 5:16-17

Verse 16. If a man see his brother sin a sin, etc. From the general assurance that God hears prayer, the apostle turns to a particular case in which it may be benevolently and effectually employed, in rescuing a brother from death. There has been great diversity of opinion in, regard to the meaning of this passage, and the views of expositors of the New Testament are by no means settled as to its true sense. It does not comport with the design of these Notes to examine the opinions which have been held in detail. A bare reference, however, to some of them will show the difficulty of determining with certainty what the passage means, and the impropriety of any very great confidence in one's own judgment in the case. Among these opinions are the following. Some have supposed that the sin against the Holy Ghost is intended; some that the phrase denotes any great and enormous sin, as murder, idolatry, adultery; some that it denotes some sin that was punishable by death by the laws of Moses; some that it denotes a sin that subjected the offender to excommunication from the synagogue or the church; some that it refers to sins which brought fatal disease upon the offender, as in the case of those who abused the Lord's Supper at Corinth, (1Cor 11:30;) some that it refers to crimes committed against the laws, for which the offender was sentenced to death, meaning that when the charge alleged was false, and the condemnation unjust, they ought to pray for the one who was condemned to death, and that he would be spared; but that when the offence was one which had been really committed, and the offender deserved to die, they ought not to pray for him, or, in other words, that by "the sin unto death," offences against the civil law are referred to, which the magistrate had no power to pardon, and the punishment of which he could not commute; and by the "sin not unto death," offences are referred to which might be pardoned, and when the punishment might be commuted; some that it refers to sins before and after baptism, the former of which might be pardoned, but the latter of which might not be; and some, and perhaps this is the common opinion among the Roman Catholics, that it refers to sins that might or might not be pardoned after death, thus referring to the doctrine of purgatory. These various opinions may be seen stated more at length in Rosenmuller, Lucke, Pool, (Synopsis,) and Clarke, in loc. To go into an examination of all these opinions would require a volume by itself, and all that can be done here is to furnish what seems to me to be the fair exposition of the passage. The word brother may refer either to a member of the church, whether of the particular church to which one was attached or to another, or it may be used in the larger sense which is common as denoting a fellow-man, a member of the great family of mankind. There is nothing in the word which necessarily limits it to one in the church; there is nothing in the connexion, or in the reason assigned, why what is said should be limited to such an one. The duty here enjoined would be the same whether the person referred to was in the church or not; for it is our duty to pray for those who sin, and to seek the salvation of those whom we see to be going astray, and to be in danger of ruin, wherever they are, or whoever they may be. At the same time, the correct interpretation of the passage does not depend on determining whether the word brother refers to one who is a professed Christian or not.

A sin which is not unto death. The great question in the interpretation of the whole passage is, what is meant by the "sin unto death." The Greek (αμαρτιαπροςθανατον) would mean properly a in which tends to death; which would terminate in death; of which death was the penalty, or would be the result, unless it were arrested a sin which, if it had its own course, would terminate thus, am we should speak of a disease "unto death." Comp. Jn 11:4. The word death is used in three significations in the New Testament, and as employed here might, so far as the word is concerned, be applied in any one of those senses. It is used to denote

(a.) literally the death of the body;

(b.) spiritual death, or death "in trespasses and sin," Eph 2:1;

(c.) the "second death," death in the world of woe and despair. If the sin here mentioned refers to temporal death, it means such a sin that temporal death, must inevitably follow, either by the disease which it has produced, or by a judicial sentence where there was no hope of pardon or of a commutation of the punishment; if it refers to death in the future world, the "second death", then it means such a sin as is unpardonable. That this last is the reference here seems to me to be probable, if not clear, from the following considerations:

(1.) There is such a sin referred to in the New Testament, a sin for which there is forgiveness "neither in this life nor the life to come." Mt 12:31,32. Comp. Mk 3:29. If there is such a sin, there is no impropriety in supposing that John would refer to it here.

(2.) This is the obvious interpretation. It is that which would occur to the mass of the readers of the New Testament, and which it is presumed they do adopt; and this in general, is one of the best means of ascertaining the sons of a passage in the Bible.

(3.) The other significations attached to the word death, would be quite inappropriate here.

(a.) It cannot mean "unto spiritual death," that is, to a continuance in sin, for how could that be known? and if such a case occurred, why would it be improper to pray for it? Besides, the phrase "a sin unto spiritual death," or "unto continuance in sin," is one that is unmeaning.

(b.) It cannot be shown to refer to a disease that should be unto death, miraculously inflicted on account of sin, because, if such cases occurred, they were very rare, and even if a disease came upon a man miraculously in consequence of sin, it could not be certainly known whether it was, or was not, unto death. All who were visited in this way did not certainly die. Comp. 1Cor 5:4,5, with 2Cor 2:6,7. See also 1Cor 11:30.

(c.) It cannot be shown that it refers to the case of those who were condemned by the civil magistrate to death, and for whom there was no hope of reprieve or pardon, for it is not certain that there were such cases; and if there were, and the person condemned were innocent, there was every reason to pray that God would interpose and save them, even when there was no hope from man; and if they were guilty, and deserved to die, there was no reason why they should not pray that the sin might be forgiven, and that they might be prepared to die, unless it were a case where the sin was unpardonable. It seems probable, therefore, to me, that the reference here is to the sin against the Holy Ghost, and that John means here to illustrate the duty and the power of prayer, by showing that for any sin short of that, however aggravated, it was their duty to pray that a brother might be forgiven. Though it might not be easy to determine what was the unpardonable sin, and John does not say that those to whom he wrote could determine that with certainty, yet there were many sins which were manifestly not of that aggravated character, and for those sins it was proper to pray. There was clearly but one sin that was unpardonable--" there is a sin unto death;" there might be many which were not of this description, and in relation to them there was ample scope for the exercise of the prayer of faith. The same thing is true now. It is not easy to define the unpardonable sin, and it is impossible far us to determine in any case with absolute certainty that a man has committed it. But there are multitudes of sins which men commit, which on no proper interpretation of the passages respecting the sin which "hath never forgiveness," can come under the description of that sin, and for which it is proper, therefore, to pray that they may be pardoned. We know of cases enough where sin may be forgiven; and, without allowing the mind to be disturbed about the question respecting the unpardonable sin, it is our duty to bear such cases on our hearts before God, and to plead with him that our erring brethren may be saved.

He shall ask. That is, he shall pray that the offender may be brought to true repentance, and may be saved.

And he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. That is, God shall give life, and he shall be saved from the eternal death to which he was exposed. This, it is said, would be given to "him" who offers the prayer; that is, his prayer would be the means of saving the offending brother. What a motive is this to prayer! How faithful and constant should we be in pleading for our fellow-sinners, that we may be instrumental in saving their souls! What joy will await those in heaven who shall see there many who were rescued from ruin in answer to their prayers! Comp. Jas 5:15, Jas 5:19.

There is a sin unto death. A sin which is of such a character that it throws the offender beyond the reach of mercy, and which is not to be pardoned. See Mk 3:28,29. The apostle does not here say what that sin is; nor how they might know what it is; nor even that in any case they could determine that it had been committed. He merely says that there is such a sin, and that he, does not design that his remark about the efficacy of prayer should be understood as extending to that.

I do not say that he shall pray for it. "I do not intend that my remark shall be extended to all sin, or mean to affirm that all possible forms of guilt are the proper subjects of prayer, for I am aware that there is one sin which is an exception, and my remark is not to be applied to that." He does not say that this sin was of common occurrence: or that they could know when it had been committed; or even that a case could ever occur in which they could determine that; he merely says that in respect to that sin he did not say that prayer should be offered. It is indeed implied in a most delicate way that it would not be proper to pray for the forgiveness of such a sin, but he does not say that a case would ever happen in which they would know certainly that the sin had been committed. There were instances in the times of the prophets in which the sin of the people became so universal and so aggravated, that they were forbidden to pray for them. Isa 14:11, "Then said the Lord unto me, Pray not for this people for their good;" Isa 15:1, "Then said the Lord unto me, Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my mind could not be toward this people; cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth." Comp. Isa 1:15. But these were cases in which the prophets were directly instructed by God not to pray for a people. We have no such instruction; and it may be said now with truth, that as we can never be certain respecting any one that he has committed the unpardonable sin, there is no one for whom we may not with propriety pray. There may be those who are so far gone in sin that there may seem to be little, or almost no ground of hope. They may have cast off all the restraints of religion, of morality, of decency; they may disregard all the counsels of parents and friends; they may be sceptical, sensual, profane; they may be the companions of infidels and of mockers; they may have forsaken the sanctuary, and learned to despise the sabbath; they may have been professors of religion, and now may have renounced the faith of the gospel altogether, but still, while there is life it is our duty to pray for them, "if peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth," 2Ti 2:26. "All things are possible with God;" and he has reclaimed offenders more hardened, probably, than any that we have known, and has demonstrated that there is no form of depravity which he has not the power to subdue. Let us remember the cases of Manasseh, of Saul of Tarsus, of Augustine, of Bunyan, of Newton, of tens of thousands who have been reclaimed from the vilest forms of iniquity, and then let us never despair of the conversion of any, in answer to prayer, who may have gone astray, as long as they are in this world of probation and of hope. Let no parent despair who has an abandoned son; let no wife cease to pray who has a dissipated husband. How many a prodigal son has come back to fill with happiness an aged parent's heart! How many a dissipated husband has been reformed to give joy again to the wife of his youth, and to make a paradise again of his miserable home!

(a) "unto death" Mt 12:31,32 (b) "not say" Jer 7:16 (*) "it" "that" Verse 17. All unrighteousness is sin, etc. This seems to be thrown in to guard what he had just said, and there is one great and enormous sin, a sin which could not be forgiven. But he says also that there are many other forms and degrees of sin, sin for which prayer may be made. Everything, he says, which is unrighteous --αδικια-- everything which does not conform to the holy law of God, and which is not right in the view of that law, is to be regarded as sin; but we are not to suppose that all sin of that kind is of such a character that it cannot possibly be forgiven. There are many who commit sin who we may hope will be recovered, and for them it is proper to pray. Deeply affected as we may be in view of the fact that there is a sin which can never be pardoned, and much as we may pity one who has been guilty of such a sin, yet we should not hastily conclude in any case that it has been committed, and should bear constantly in mind that while there is one such sin, there are multitudes that may be pardoned, and that for them it is our duty unceasingly to pray.

Revelation of John 2:11

Verse 11. He that hath an ear, etc. Rev 2:7.

He that overcometh. Rev 2:7. The particular promise here is made to him that should "overcome;" that is, that would gain the victory in the persecutions which were to come upon them. The reference is to him who would show the sustaining power of religion in times of persecution; who would not yield his principles when opposed and persecuted; who would be triumphant when so many efforts were made to induce him to apostatize and abandon the cause.

Shall not be hurt of the second death. By a second death. That is, he will have nothing to fear in the future world. The punishment of hell is often called death, not in the sense that the soul will cease to exist, but

(a) because death is the most fearful thing of which we have any knowledge, and

(b) because there is a striking similarity, in many respects, between death and future punishment. Death cuts off from life--and so the second death cuts off from eternal life; death puts an end to all our hopes here, and the second death to all our hopes for ever; death is attended with terrors and alarms--the faint and feeble emblem of the terrors and alarms in the world of woe. The phrase, "the second death," is three times used elsewhere by John in this book, (Rev 20:6,14, 21:8) but does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament. The words death and to die, however, are not unfrequently used to denote the future punishment of the wicked.

The promise here made would be all that was necessary to sustain them in their trials. Nothing more is requisite to make the burdens of life tolerable than an assurance that, when we reach the end of our earthly journey, we have arrived at the close of suffering, and that beyond the grave there is no power that can harm us. Religion, indeed, does not promise to its friends exemption from death in one form. To none of the race has such a promise ever been made, and to but two has the favour been granted to pass to heaven without tasting death. It could have been granted to all the redeemed, but there were good reasons why it should not be; that is, why it would be better that even they who are to dwell in heaven should return to the dust, and sleep in the tomb, than that they should be removed by perpetual miracle, translating them to heaven. Religion, therefore, does not come to us with any promise that we shall not die. But it comes with the assurance that we shall be sustained in the dying hour; that the Redeemer will accompany us through the dark valley; that death to us will be a calm and quiet slumber, in the hope of awaking in the morning of the resurrection; that we shall be raised up again with bodies incorruptible and undecaying; and that beyond the grave we shall never fear death in any form. What more is needful to enable us to bear with patience the trials of this life, and to look upon death when it does come, disarmed as it is of its sting, (1Cor 15:55-57) with calmness and peace?

(d) "second death" Rev 20:14

Revelation of John 20:6

Verse 6. Blessed. That is, his condition is to be regarded as a happy or a favoured one. This is designed apparently to support and encourage those who in the time of John suffered persecution, or who might suffer persecution afterwards.

And holy. That is, no one will be thus honoured who has not an established character for holiness. Holy principles will then reign, and none will be exalted to that honour who have not a character for eminent sanctity.

That hath part in the first resurrection. That participated in it; that is, who is associated with those who are thus raised up.

On such the second death hath no power. The "second death" is properly the death which the wicked will experience in the world of woe. See Rev 20:14. The meaning here is, that all who are here referred to as having part in the first resurrection will be secure against that. It will be one of the blessed privileges of heaven that there will be absolute security against DEATH in any and every form; and when we think of what death is here, and still more when we think of "the bitter pains of the second death," we may well call that state "blessed" in which there will be eternal exemption from either.

But they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him. Rev 1:6; 5:10.

(b)--Condition of the world in the period referred to in Rev 20:4-6.

I. It is well known that this passage is the principal one which is relied on by those who advocate the doctrine of the literal reign of Christ on the earth for a thousand years, or who hold what are called the doctrines of the "second advent." The points which are maintained by those who advocate these views are substantially,

(a) that at that period Christ will descend from heaven to reign personally upon the earth;

(b) that he will have a central place of power and authority, probably Jerusalem;

(d) that they will be his attendants, and will participate with him in the government of the world;

(e) that this will continue during the period of a thousand years;

(f) that the world will be subdued and converted during this period, not by moral means, but by "a new dispensation"--by the power of the Son of God; and

(g) that at the close of this period all the remaining dead will be raised, the judgment will take place, and the affairs of the earth will be consummated.

The opinion here adverted to was held substantially by Papins, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and others among the Christian Fathers, and, it need not be said, is held by many modern expositors of the Bible, and by large numbers of Christian ministers of high standing, and other Christians. See the Literalist, passim. The opinion of the Christian Fathers, with which the modern "literalists," as they are called, substantially coincide, is thus stated by Mr. Elliott: "This resurrection is to be literally that of departed saints and martyrs, then at length resuscitated in the body from death and the grave; its time to synchronize with, or follow instantly after, the destruction of the beast Antichrist, on Christ's personal second advent; the binding of Satan to be an absolute restriction of the power of hell from tempting, deceiving, or injuring mankind, throughout a literal period of a thousand years, thence calculated; the government of the earth during its continuance to be administered by Christ and the risen saints--the latter being now ισαγγελοι--in nature like angels; and under it, all false religion having been put down, the Jews and saved remnant of the Gentiles been converted to Christ, the earth renovated by the fire of Antichrist's destruction, and Jerusalem made the universal capital, there will be a realization on earth of the blessedness depicted in the Old Testament prophecies, as well as perhaps of that too which is associated with the New Jerusalem in the visions of the Apocalypse--until at length this millennium having ended, and Satan gone forth to deceive the nations, the final consummation will follow; the new-raised enemies of the saints, Gog and Magog, be destroyed by fire from heaven: and then the general resurrection and judgment take place, the devil and his servants be cast into the lake of fire, and the millennial reign of the saints extend itself into one of eternal duration."--Elliott on the Apocalypse, iv. 177, 178.

Mr. Elliott's own opinion, representing, it is supposed, that of the great body of the "literalists," is thus expressed: "It would seem, therefore, that in this state of things and of feeling in professing Christendom [a feeling of carnal security], all suddenly, and unexpectedly, and conspicuous over the world as the lightning that shineth from the east even unto the west, the second advent and appearing of Christ will take place; that at the accompanying voice of the archangel and trump of God, the departed saints of either dispensation will rise from their graves to meet him--alike patriarchs, and prophets, and apostles, and martyrs, and confessors all at once and in the twinkling of an eye; and then instantly the saints living at the time will be also caught up to meet him in the air; these latter being separated out of the ungodly nations, as when a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats, and all, both dead and living saints, changed at the moment from corruption to incorruption, from dishonour to glory, though with very different degrees of glory; and so in a new angelic nature, to take part in the judging and ruling in this world. Meanwhile, with a tremendous earthquake accompanying, of violence unknown since the revolutions of primeval chaos, an earthquake under which the Roman world at least is to rock to and fro like a drunken man, the solid crust of this earth shall be broken, and fountains burst forth from its inner deep, not as once of water, but of liquid fire; and that the flames shall consume the Antichrist and his confederate kings, while the sword also does its work of slaughter; the risen saints being perhaps the attendants of the Lord's glory in this destruction of Antichrist, and assessors in his judgment on a guilty world. And then immediately the renovation of this our earth is to take place, its soil being purified by the very action of the fire, and the Spirit poured out from on high, in a yet better sense, the moral face of nature; the Shekinah, or personal glory of Christ amidst his saints being manifested chiefly in the Holy Land and at Jerusalem, but the whole earth partaking of the blessedness; and thus the regeneration of all things, and the world's redemption from the curse, having their accomplishment, according to the promise, at the manifestation of the sons of God," iv. 224-231. (I have slightly abridged this passage, but have retained the sense.)

To this account of the prevailing opinion of the "literalists" in interpreting the passage before us, there should be added that of Professor Stuart, who, in general, is as far as possible from "they sympathizing with this class of writers. He says in his explanation of expression lived" in Rev 20:4, "There would seem to remain, therefore, only one meaning which can be consistently given to εζησαν, [they lived,] viz.: that they (the martyrs who renounced the beast) are now restored to life, viz., such life as implies the vivification of the body. Not to a union of the soul with a gross material body indeed, but with such an one as the saints in general will have at the final resurrection--a spiritual body, 1Cor 15:44. In no other way can this resurrection be ranked as correlate with the second resurrection named in the sequel," ii. 360. So again, Excursus vi., (vol. ii. p. 476,) he says, "I do not see how we can, on the ground of exegesis, fairly avoid the conclusion that John has taught in the passage before us, that there will be a resurrection of the martyr-saints, at the commencement of the period after Satan shall have been shut up in the dungeon of the great abyss." This opinion he defends at length, pp. 476-490. Professor Stuart, indeed, maintains that the martyrs thus raised up will be taken to heaven and reign with Christ there, and opposes the whole doctrine of the literal reign on the earth, ii. 480. The risen saints and martyrs are to be "enthroned with Christ; that is, they are to be where he dwells, and where he will continue to dwell, until he shall make his descent at the final judgment-day."

II. In regard to these views as expressive of the meaning of the passage under consideration, I would make the following remarks:--

(1.) There is strong presumptive evidence against this interpretation, and especially against the main point in the doctrine--that there will be a literal resurrection of the bodies of the saints at the beginning of that millennial period to live and reign with Christ on earth--from the following circumstances:

(a) It is admitted on all hands that this doctrine, if contained in the Scriptures at all, is found in this one passage only. It is not pretended that there is in any other place a direct affirmation that this will literally occur, nor would the advocates for that opinion undertake to show that it is fairly implied in any other part of the Bible. But it is strange, not to say improbable, that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the righteous a thousand years before the wicked should be announced in one passage only. If it were so announced in plain and unambiguous language, I admit that the believer in the Divine origin of the Scriptures would be bound to receive it; but this is so contrary to the usual method of the Scriptures on all great and important doctrines, that this circumstance should lead us at least to doubt whether the passage is correctly interpreted. The resurrection of the dead is a subject on which the Saviour often dwelt in his instructions; it is a subject which the apostles discussed very frequently and at great length in their preaching, and in their writings; it is presented by them in a great variety of forms, for the consolation of Christians in time of trouble, and with reference to the condition of the world at the winding up of human affairs; and it is strange that in respect to so important a doctrine as this, if it be true, there is not elsewhere in the New Testament a hint, an intimation, an allusion, that would lead us to suppose that the righteous are to be raised in this manner.

(b) If this is a true doctrine, it would be reasonable to expect that a clear and unambiguous statement of it would be made. Certainly, if there is but one statement on the subject, that might be expected to be a perfectly clear one. It would be a statement about which there could be no diversity of opinion, concerning which those who embraced it might be expected to hold the same views. But it cannot be pretended that this is so in regard to this passage. It occurs in the book which of all the books in the Bible is most distinguished for figures and symbols; it cannot be maintained that it is directly and clearly affirmed; and it is not so taught that there is any uniformity of view among those who profess to hold it. In nothing has there been greater diversity among men than in the opinions of those who profess to hold the "literal" views respecting the personal reign of Christ on the earth. But this fact assuredly affords presumptive evidence that the doctrine of the literal resurrection of the saints a thousand years before the rest of the dead is not intended to be taught.

(c) It is presumptive proof against this, that nothing is said of the employment of those who are raised up; of the reason why they are raised; of the new circumstances of their being; and of their condition when the thousand years shall have ended. In so important a matter as this, we can hardly suppose that the whole subject would be left to a single hint in a symbolical representation-- depending on the doubtful meaning of a single word, and with nothing to enable us to determine with absolute certainty that this must be the meaning.

(d) If it be meant that this is a description of the resurrection of the righteous as such--embracing all the righteous-- then it is wholly unlike all the other descriptions of the resurrection of the righteous that we have in the Bible. Here the account is confined to "those that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus," and to "those who had not worshipped the beast." If the righteous as such are here referred to, why are these particular classes specified Why are not the usual general terms employed? Why is the account of the resurrection confined to these? Elsewhere in the Scriptures the account of the resurrection is given in the most general terms, (compare Mt 25:41, Jn 4:54, 5:28-29, Romm 2:7, 1Cor 15:23, Php 3:20-21) (2Thes 1:10, Heb 9:28, 1Jn 2:28-29, 3:2;) and if this had been the designed reference here, it is inconceivable why the statement should be limited to the martyrs, and to those who have evinced great fidelity in the midst of temptations and allurements to apostasy. These circumstances furnish strong presumptive proofs, at least, against the doctrine that there is to be a literal resurrection of all the saints at the beginning of the millennial period. Compare "Christ's Second Coming," by Rev. David Brown, p. 219, seq.

(2.) In reference to many of the views necessarily implied in the doctrine of the "Second Advent," and avowed by those who hold that doctrine, it cannot be pretended that they receive any countenance or support from this passage. In the language of Professor Stuart, (Com. ii. 479,) there is "not a word of Christ's descent to the earth at the beginning of the millennium. Nothing of the literal assembling of the Jews in Palestine; nothing of the Messiah's temporal reign on earth; nothing of the overflowing abundance of worldly peace and plenty." Indeed, in all this passage, there is not the remotest hint of the grandeur and magnificence of the reign of Christ as a literal king upon the earth; nothing of his having a splendid capital at Jerusalem or anywhere else; nothing of a new dispensation of a miraculous kind; nothing of the renovation of the earth to fit it for the abode of the risen saints. All this is the mere work of fancy, and no man can pretend that it is to be found in this passage.

(3.) Nor is there anything here of a literal resurrection of the bodies of the dead, as Professor Stuart himself supposes. It is not a little remarkable that a scholar so accurate as Professor Stuart is, and one too who has so little sympathy with the doctrines connected with a literal reign of Christ on the earth, should have lent the sanction of his name to perhaps the most objectionable of all the dogmas connected with that view--the opinion that the bodies of the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period. Of this there is not one word, one intimation, one hint, in the passage before us. John says expressly, and as if to guard the point from all possible danger of this construction, that he "saw the SOULS of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus;" he saw them "living" and "reigning" with Christ--raised to exalted honour during that period, as if they had been raised from the dead; but he nowhere mentions or intimates that they were raised up from their graves; that they were clothed with bodies; that they had their residence now literally on the earth; or that they were in any way otherwise than disembodied spirits. There is not even one word of their having "a spiritual body."

(4.) There are positive arguments, which are perfectly decisive, against the interpretation which supposes that the bodies of the saints will be raised up at the beginning of the millennial period to reign with Christ on the earth for a thousand years. Among these are the following :--

(a) If the "first resurrection" means rising from the grave in immortal and glorified bodies, we do not need the assurance (Rev 20:6) that "on such the second death hath no power;" that is, that they would not perish for ever. That would be a matter of course, and there was no necessity for such a statement. But if it be supposed that the main idea is that the principles of the martyrs and of the most eminent saints would be revived and would live--as if the dead were raised up--and would be manifested by those who were in mortal bodies--men living on the earth--then there would be a propriety in saying that all such were exempt from the danger of the second death. Once indeed they would die; but the second death could not reach them. Compare Rev 2:10-11.

(b) In the whole passage there are but two classes of men referred to. There are those "who have part in the first resurrection;" that is, according to the supposition, all the saints; and there are those over whom "the second death" has power. Into which of these classes are we to put the myriads of men having flesh and blood who are to people the world during the millennium? They have no part in "the first resurrection" if it be a bodily one. Are they then given over to the power of the "second death?" But if the "first resurrection" be regarded as figurative and spiritual, then the statement that those who are actuated by the spirit of the martyrs and of the eminent saints shall not experience the "second death," is seen to have meaning and pertinency.

(c) The mention of the time during which they are to reign, if it be literally understood, is contrary to the whole statement of the Bible in other places. They are to "live and reign with Christ" a thousand years. What then? Are they to live no longer? Are they to reign no longer with him? This supposition is entirely contrary to the current statement in the Scriptures, which is, that they are to live and reign with him for ever: 1Thes 4:17, "And so shall we ever be with the Lord." According to the views of the "literalists," the declaration that they "should live and reign with Christ," considered as the characteristic features of the millennial state, is to terminate with the thousand years--for this is the promise, according to that view, that they should thus live and reign. But it need not be said that this is wholly contrary to the current doctrine of the Bible, that they are to live and reign with him for ever.

(d) A farther objection to this view is, that the wicked part of the world--"the rest of the dead who lived not again until the thousand years were finished"--must of course be expected to "live again" in the same bodily sense when those thousand years were finished. But, so far from this, there is no mention of their living then. When the thousand years are finished, Satan is loosed for a season; then the nations are roused to opposition against God; then there is a conflict, and the hostile forces are overthrown; and then comes the final judgment. During all this time we read of no resurrection at all. The period after this is to be filled up with something besides the resurrection of "the rest of the dead." There is no intimation, as the literal construction as it is claimed would demand, that immediately after the "thousand years are finished" the "rest of the dead"--the wicked dead--would be raised up; nor is there any intimation of such a resurrection until all the dead are raised up for the final trial, Rev 20:12. But every consideration demands, if the interpretation of the "literalists" be correct, that the "rest of the dead"--the unconverted dead--should be raised up immediately after the close of the millennial period, and be raised up as a distinct and separate class.

(e) There is no intimation in the passage itself that the righteous will be raised up as such in this period, and the proper interpretation of the passage is contrary to that supposition. There are but two classes mentioned as having part in the first resurrection. They are those who were "beheaded for the witness of Jesus," and those who "had not worshipped the beast;" that is, the martyrs, and those who had been eminent for their fidelity to the Saviour in times of great temptation and trial. There is no mention of the resurrection of the righteous as such--of the resurrection of the great body of the redeemed; and if it could be shown that this refers to a literal resurrection, it would be impossible to apply it, according to any just rules of interpretation, to any more than the two classes that are specified. By what rules of interpretation is it made to teach that all the righteous will be raised up on that occasion, and will live on the earth during that long period? In this view of the matter, the passage does not express the doctrine that the whole church of God will be raised bodily from the grave. And supposing it had been the design of the Spirit of God to teach this, is it credible, when there are so many clear expressions in regard to the resurrection of the dead, that so important a doctrine should have been reserved for one single passage so obscure, and where the great mass of the readers of the Bible in all ages have failed to perceive it? That is not the way in which, in the Scriptures, great and momentous doctrines are communicated to mankind.

(f) The fair statement in Rev 20:11-15 is, that all the dead will then be raised up, and be judged. This is implied in the general expressions there used "the dead, small and great;" the "book of life was opened"--as if not opened before; "the dead"--all the dead --"were judged out of those things which were written in the books;" "the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and hell (hades) delivered up the dead which were in them." This is entirely inconsistent with the supposition that a large part of the race --to wit, all the righteous--had been before raised up; had passed the solemn judgment; had been clothed with their immortal bodies, and had been admitted to a joint reign with the Saviour on his throne. In the last judgment, what place are they to occupy? In what sense are they to be raised up and judged? Would such a representation have been made as is found in Rev 20:11-15, if it had been designed to teach that a large part of the race had been already raised up, and had received the approval of their judge?

(g) This representation is wholly inconsistent, not only with Rev 20:11-15, but with the uniform language of the Scriptures that all the righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. On no point are the statements of the Bible more uniform and explicit than on this, and it would seem that the declarations had been of design so made that there should be no possibility of mistake. I refer for full proof on this point to the following passages of the New Testament: Mt 10:32-33, compared with Mt 7:21-23, 13:30,38-43, 16:24-27, 25:10,31-46, Mk 8:38, Jn 5:28-29 Acts 17:31, Rom 2:5-16, 14:10,12, 1Cor 3:12-15, 4:5, 2Cor 5:9-11, 2Thes 1:6-10 1Timm 5:24-25, 2Pet 3:7,10,12; 1Jn 2:28; 4:17; Rev 3:5; 20:11-15; Rev 22:12-15. It is utterly impossible to explain these passages on any other supposition than that they are intended to teach that the righteous and the wicked will be judged together, and both at the coming of Christ. And, if this is so, it is of course impossible to explain them consistently with the view that all the righteous will have been already raised up at the beginning of the millennium in their immortal and glorified bodies, and that they have been solemnly approved by the Saviour, and admitted to a participation in his glory. Nothing could be more irreconcilable than these two views, and it seems to me, therefore, that the objections to the literal resurrection of the saints at the beginning of the millennial period are insuperable.

III. The following points, then, according to the interpretation proposed, are implied in this statement respecting the "first resurrection," and these will clearly comprise all that is stated on the subject.

(1.) There will be a reviving, and a prevalence of the spirit which actuated the saints in the best days, and a restoration of their principles as the grand principles which will control and govern the church, as if the most eminent saints were raised again from the dead, and lived and acted upon the earth.

(2.) Their memory will then be sacredly cherished, and they will be honoured on the earth with the honour which is due to their names, and which they should have received when in the land of the living. They will be no longer cast out and reproached; no longer held up to obloquy and scorn; no longer despised and forgotten, but there will be a reviving of sacred regard for their principles, as if they lived on the earth, and had the honour which was due to them.

(3.) There will be a state of things upon the earth as if they thus lived and were thus honoured. Religion will no longer be trampled under foot, but will triumph. In all parts of the earth it will have the ascendency, as if the most eminent saints of past ages lived and reigned with the Son of God in his kingdom. A spiritual kingdom will be set up with the Son of God at the head of it, which will be a kingdom of eminent holiness, as if the saints of the best days of the church should come back to the earth and dwell upon it. The ruling influence in the world will be the religion of the Son of God, and the principles which have governed the most holy of his people.

(4.) It may be implied that the saints and martyrs of other times will be employed by the Saviour in embassies of mercy; in visitations of grace to our world to carry forward the great work of salvation on earth. Nothing forbids the idea that the saints in heaven may be thus employed, and in this long period of a thousand years, it may be that they will be occupied in such messages and agencies of mercy to our world as they have never been before--as if they were raised from the dead, and were employed by the Redeemer to carry forward his purposes of mercy to mankind.

(5.) In connexion with these things, and in consequence of these things, they may be, during that period, exalted to higher happiness and honour in heaven. The restoration of their principles to the earth; the Christian remembrance of their virtues; the prevalence of those truths to establish which they laid down their lives, would in itself exalt them, and would increase their joy in heaven. All this would be well represented, in vision, by a resurrection of the dead; and admitting that this was all that was intended, the representation of John here would be in the highest degree appropriate. What could better symbolize it--and we must remember that this is a symbol--than to say that at the commencement of this period there was, as it were, a solemn preparation for a judgment, and that the departed dead seemed to stand there, and that a sentence was pronounced in their favour, and that they became associated with the Son of God in the honours of his kingdom, and that their principles were now to reign and triumph in the earth, and that the kingdom which they laboured to establish would be set up for a thousand years, and that in high purposes of mercy and benevolence during at period they would be employed in maintaining and extending the principles of religion in the world? Admitting that the Holy Spirit intended to represent these things, and these only, no more appropriate symbolical language could have been used; none that would more accord with the general style of the book of Revelation.

(a) "second death" Rev 2:11, 21:8 (b) "priests" Rev 1:6, Isa 60:6