Asbury Bible Commentary – C. Binding of Satan (20:1-10)
Resources chevron-right Asbury Bible Commentary chevron-right C. Binding of Satan (20:1-10)
C. Binding of Satan (20:1-10)

C. Binding of Satan (20:1-10)

John gives four names to the ultimate spiritual antagonist and accuses it of a ministry of deception (also in 12:9). These titles appear throughout Scripture. Their order in 20:2 is of increasing abstraction even though the mission of deception is constant.

Six times the text mentions a thousand years in terms of the binding of Satan and the reign of the martyrs and saints. Wesley mused over these verses asking, “How far these expressions are to be taken literally, how far figuratively only, who can tell?” (Wesley, Notes, 723). Bence’s conclusion that “in no place does Wesley introduce a millennial concept into his doctrine of the coming kingdom” is shared by David Cubie and Charles Dillman (Bence, 53). Five basic interpretations of these verses exist. A postmillennialist believes the return of Christ will not take place until the church has set up the kingdom of God on earth. Premillenialists, such as J.B. Smith, understand these verses to say that Christ’s return (19:11-16) will be followed by the binding of Satan and a thousand-year reign of saints before the final judgment (20:11-15). Dispensationalists, disciples of a specific form of premillennialism based on the teachings of John Nelson Darby, divide history into seven eras or dispensations, with the final era culminating in a kingdom centered in a renewed Jerusalem with a rebuilt temple. Charles Ryrie, Hal Lindsey, and John F. Walvoord articulate dispensational theologies. Amillennialists do not look for a thousand-year reign on earth, because they interpret the thousand-year reign symbolically. Harvey Blaney in The Wesleyan Bible Commentary accepts such a view (Blaney, 508), as do I. Adam Clarke agrees: “I am satisfied that this period should not be taken literally” (Clarke, 1055). The fifth position, realized eschatology, as taught by Mathias Rissi, contends that the reign of Christ began with the Resurrection and that any talk of a second return of Christ is metaphorical.

In spite of these genuine differences, at least two truths can be affirmed. First, as noted by David Cubie, “The last word in any true Christian millennialism or amillennialism is God’s victory” (Cubie, 404). The capture and defeat of the evil trinity ends the struggle between God and Satan, the church and the world, good and evil. Second, the faithful saints of John’s day and thereafter will reign eventually with Christ in heaven.