In my last article, I attempted to show that Revelation should be interpreted figuratively rather than literally. The purpose was to begin to make a case for why it is not essential to understand the 1,000 years of Chapter 20 as a literal 1,000 years. I used the issue of 144,000 to argue that a literal interpretation of Revelation cannot be sustained. In that effort, I mainly showed why we shouldn’t use a literal interpretation. Now, I’d like to show why we should use a figurative interpretation.
Reasons to apply a figurative interpretation to the 144,000 (and therefore to all of Revelation)
1. Jesus Himself provided a figurative interpretation.
In Chapter 1, John saw seven golden lampstands, and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man. In his right hand, he held seven stars. Then the Lord Jesus interpreted that vision symbolically or figuratively. The lampstands and stars represented something: As for the mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand, and the seven golden lampstands, the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches (Rev 1:20).
2. Statements made about the 144,000 in Revelation 14 point toward a symbolic or figurative meaning.
With a literal interpretation, you have 144,000 virgin male Jews. (See the previous article for problems with this.) A symbolic reading makes more sense. Males undefiled by women—being virgins—fits with what is written about them in 14:5: and in their mouth no lie was found, for they are blameless. They are not literal men, literal virgins, blameless in themselves. Rather, these are all ways of speaking of the fact that they have been washed clean by the blood of the lamb.
3. A figurative interpretation makes more sense of the identities and order of the tribes mentioned in Chapter 7.
I didn’t mention it in the first article, but the order of the tribes is peculiar. Judah—who wasn’t the firstborn—is listed first. Why might that be? Perhaps because Jesus is from the tribe of Judah.
Then comes Reuben, who was the firstborn. Based upon the Old Testament birth order, next we would expect Simeon, then Levi. However, Simeon isn’t next, nor is Levi. Gad, Asher, and Naphtali are next. What do these three have in common? They were sons of the concubines, not sons of Jacob’s wives, Leah and Rachel. John puts the sons of the concubines before the sons of the wives. What might we make of this? Judah comes first because of his preeminence as the tribe from which the Messiah came. Reuben comes next to establish that Judah has supplanted Reuben, and that this isn’t just a list in random order.
Then come the sons of the concubines because of their lowly status as a kind of outsider. Those formerly on the outside are on the inside. Do we see that theme elsewhere – particularly in the New Testament? Eph 2:11ff – you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. Then come the sons of the wives.
Why is Dan omitted? Dan became the poster boy for idolatry and its ensuing moral degradation. Dan was the last tribe mentioned in the taking of the land in Judges 1. They did a miserable job and failed to take their portion at all. Many years later, in Judges 18, they still haven’t found a portion of land, and they are the subjects of the sordid, bizarre events of that chapter surrounding their theft of false gods. Consider the last two verses of that chapter: And the people of Dan set up the carved image for themselves, and Jonathan the son of Gershom, son of Moses, and his sons were priests to the tribe of the Danites until the day of the captivity of the land. So they set up Micah's carved image that he made, as long as the house of God was at Shiloh (Jdg 18:30-31).
The people of Dan became long-term idolators and led the other Israelites into idolatry. Conversely, remember what Revelation 14:4 says of the 144,000 – they follow the Lamb wherever He goes. That Dan is left off the list is a depiction of an idea stated numerous times and in different ways in the New Testament: For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart… (Rom 2:28-29).
And regarding the inclusion of Joseph and Manasseh – I believe that is done intentionally to prevent us from interpreting the passage literally. You cannot interpret it literally without arriving at a huge biblical error. (Again, see the previous article.)
4. The New Testament teaches that there is one people of God.
To understand the 144,000 literally, as a non-raptured body of Jews, we have to hold to a segregated body of Christ.
Gal 3:27-29: 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.
Who are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise? Those who belong to Christ. That is, the church. Romans 2:28-29, mentioned above is a great cross reference.
However, the clearest teaching in the New Testament to the effect that there is one people of God, not two, is Ephesians 2:11-19:
11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--
12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near.
18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.
19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God…
How strange for Paul to write in such detail that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile, but then for John to depict, “Yes there is a distinction— a big one.” A figurative meaning of the 144,000 would be more consistent with the clear teaching of the New Testament that there is one people of God.
This article is getting rather lengthy. We'll continue next time!
Comments