Putting Jesus in His Place (Revelation 14:1)

Which chapter begins “Then I looked and lo, on Mount Zion stood the Lamb”? Revelation 14

Revelation 13 paints a bleak picture of enemies aligning against God in the final cosmic battle between Satan and God. The great red dragon (Revelation 12:3, 13:1) enlists two beasts in the war against God, one from the sea (Revelation 13:1) the other from the earth (Revelation 13:11). The beast appears to have an advantage as many have taken the notorious mark of the beast (Revelation 13:16-18). Then the scene shifts.

To the relief of the reader, Revelation 14 moves from war to peace (Revelation 14:1-5). The Lamb, last seen seven chapters earlier (Revelation 7:17), is reintroduced. Despite his extended absence, no introduction is necessary. The reader knows the Lamb to be Jesus, the lone figure worthy to unloose the seals of the scroll (Revelation 5:11-14) and receive the adulation of the multitude (Revelation 7:10). Amid the apparent chaos, the Lamb stands triumphantly with 144,000 of his followers (Revelation 14:1-5).

Then I looked, and behold, the Lamb was standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads. (Revelation 14:1 NASB)

The author emphasizes the striking quality of this visual by adding the phrase “looked and behold” (Revelation 14:1).

The picture of the Lamb atop the mountain stands in sharp contrast to the visuals from the previous chapter. The text transitions from those who have taken the mark of the beast to those who bear the mark of Christ. The names adorning the believers’ foreheads fulfills a previous promise given to the victors (Revelation 3:12). This inscription of God’s name dramatically opposes the mark of the beast, the number of his name. While the beast attempts to elicit worship, the Lamb is the recipient of true worship. The scene portrays the past invading the present while simultaneously foreshadowing the future as it recalls Revelation 7:1-8 and anticipates Revelation 21:1-22:6.

The lamb’s position, atop Mount Zion, is significant. The location is mentioned only here in Revelation. Zion is seldom mentioned in the New Testament and when it is, it is most commonly in Old Testament quotations (Matthew 21:5; John 12:15; Romans 9:33, 11:26; Hebrews 12:22; I Peter 2:6; Revelation 14:1; also Barnabas 6:2). Even so, Zion carries a lot of weight.

Though “Mount Zion” is introduced in the Bible as a fortress on one the southernmost and highest of the hills of the pre-Israelite city of Jerusalem (II Samuel 5:7) it eventually took on a broader reach, sometimes loosely encompassing all of Jerusalem. Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary charts the name’s scope:

The designation of Zion underwent a distinct progression in its usage throughout the Bible...The first mention of Zion in the Bible is...the name of the ancient Jebusite fortress situated on the southeastern hill of Jerusalem at the junction of the Kidron Valley and the Tyropoeon Valley [II Samuel 5:7]. The name came to stand not only for the fortress but also for the hill on which the fortress stood...When Solomon built the temple of Mount Moriah (a hill distinct and separate from Mount Zion), and moved the ark of the covenant there, the word “Zion” expanded in meaning to include also the Temple and the Temple area (Psalm 2:6, 48:2, 11-12, 132:13). It was only a short step until Zion was used as a name for the city of Jerusalem, the land of Judah, and the people of Israel as a whole (Isaiah 40:9; Jeremiah 31:12). (Ronald F. Youngblood [b. 1931], Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary: Completely Revised and Updated Edition), 1343)

Joseph L. Trafton (b. 1949) adds:

David took Jerusalem from the Jebusites by capturing the “stronghold of Zion,” which he renamed the city of David (II Samuel 5:6-10). Solomon built the Temple on a hill directly north of the City of David (I Kings 8:1-6). Hence, the site of the Temple, along with Jerusalem itself, came to be known as “Mount Zion” (e.g., Psalm 48:2, 74:2, 78:68-69, Isaiah 8:18, 18:7; Lamentations 5:18; cf. Psalm 2:6) or sometimes simply “Zion” (e.g., Psalm 147:12; Isaiah 37:32, 62:1; Joel 3:17; Micah 3:12, 4:2). In the Old Testament the expression “Mount Zion” is identified further as a place that will experience future deliverance (Joel 2:32; Obadiah 1:17, 21) and blessing (Isaiah 4:2-6), to which gifts will be brought by foreigners (Isaiah 18:7), which God will defend (Isaiah 31:4-5), out of which will come a remnant of survivors (Isaiah 37:32), and to which exiles will come to be ruled by the Lord forever (Micah 4:6-7). (Trafton, Reading Revelation: A Literary And Theological Commentary, 134)

At the time of Revelation’s writing, Zion was an emblematic term, long associated with the type of divine deliverance depicted here (Joel 2:32). It had an eternal quality which applied to heavenly temple in present (Hebrews 12:22; Revelation 11:19) and pointed to the new Jerusalem of the future (Revelation 21:2). Consequently, there is much debate as to whether the Zion in question is in heaven or on earth.

The text is ambiguous. Those who support a heavenly setting note that the Lamb is last seen in heaven and the narrative makes no comment about his transitioning from heaven to earth (Revelation 7:9). Likewise, the composition’s author, John, is never said to move from his initial position, also in heaven (Revelation 4:1). Another detail favoring a heavenly scene is a singing multitude of 144,000 suggesting the same group that previously appears in heaven (Revelation 7:4).

Those who support an earthly vision argue that the text itself says nothing of heaven. The 144,000 had been sealed and protected previously, which would be presumably unnecessary if they resided in heaven (Revelation 7:3). Some also note that the fact that in the next verse the author hears “a voice from heaven” indicates that he is situated on earth (Revelation 14:2).

Scholars are divided on the issue. Stephen S. Smalley (b. 1931) compares:

The precise location of Mount Zion in Revelation 14:1 is not immediately clear. In the view of some commentators, the setting of this verse is on earth; even if the reality represented is spiritual (William Milligan [1821-1893] 240-41; Henry Barclay Swete [1835-1917] 177; Isbon Thaddeus Beckwith [1843-1936] 647, 651; R.H. Charles [1855-1931] 2, 4-5; Michael Wilcock [b. 1932] 132; Robert W. Wall [b. 1947] 179; David E. Aune [b. 1939] 803). Others regard the vision of the Lamb of Zion, with the 144,000, as taking place in heaven (Martin Kiddle 262-65; William Hendriksen [1900-1982] 151; P.W.L. Walker [b. 1961], Holy City 261; Robert H. Mounce [b. 1921] 264-65); cf. 4 Ezra 2.42-48. A third interpretation equates Zion in this context with the new Jerusalem, which ‘comes down from heaven’ (Revelation 21:2), and becomes part of the new creation after the destruction of the old; so George Eldon Ladd [1911-1982] 189-90...also G.R. Beasley-Murray [1916-2000] 222, who believes there is a contrast here between the earthly Jerusalem, which has become a symbol for the godless world (Revelation 11:8-10) and the Jerusalem from above, where heaven and earth are brought together in a unity (Revelation 21:16). (Smalley, The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse, 354)

The inconclusiveness is not surprising as Revelation is typically unconcerned with geography, frequently mixing temporal and spatial images. The book’s subject matter transcends time and space. The setting of Revelation’s Mount Zion could be heaven, earth, both or neither.

Ian Boxall (b. 1964) opts for a more general spiritual interpretation of the salvation community:

John is not concerned with physical geography: where the Lamb is standing is not the Temple Mount or even the heavenly Mount Zion (cf. Hebrews 12:22), but that spiritual Zion which is nowhere and everywhere. It describes that state of openness to God and protection by him which has been referred to elsewhere as the measured sanctuary (Revelation 11:1) or the ‘holy city’ (Revelation 11:2). It is that place of true spiritual worship which takes place neither on Mount Gerizim nor in Jerusalem (John 4:21-24). Understood in this way, the question as to whether this scene is located on earth or in heaven is superfluous. (Boxall, Revelation of Saint John, The (Black’s New Testament Commentary), 200)

James L. Resseguie (b. 1945) adds:

The symbolic mountain Zion is a sanctuary for the 144,000 who have the Lamb’s name and the name of the Father written on their foreheads (Revelation 14:1). Zion, a place of safety, is similar to the wilderness sanctuary (Revelation 12:6, 14) and the measured temple (Revelation 11:1). In the Old Testament, Zion is a refuge where God reigns along with the Messiah (Psalm 2:6-12; cf. 4 Ezra 13:25-35). The mountain is neither in heaven nor on earth, but is “nowhere and everywhere” at the same time. It is not found on John’s physical map, but on his spiritual map. Zion is God’s mountain, the “site of God’s presence,” and contrasts with Babylon, also located on mountains (Revelation 17:9). This is the first of several contrasts developed in the chapter that express an ideological point of view. Not only does Zion contrast Babylon (Revelation 14:1, 8), but also the names on the foreheads of the 144,000 contrast with the name of the beast on the foreheads or hands of its followers (Revelation 14:1, 9, 11); the grain harvest of the righteous contrasts with a grape harvest of the wicked (Revelation 14:14-16, 17-20); the wrath of God contrasts with the blessing of those who die in the Lord (Revelation 14:10, 13); and celibacy contrasts with fornication (Revelation 14:4, 8). (Resseguie, The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary, 193-194)

The reference to Mount Zion conveyed hope of restoration in and of itself to the original audience as the earthly Mount Zion had been pillaged by the Romans when Revelation was written.

Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) reminds:

Perhaps most significant of our observation here is the location of the 144,000. They are with the Lamb on Mount Zion, God’s dwelling in the present (Psalm 74:2, 76:2) and the future (Zechariah 2:10, 8:3), a place of Israel’s hopes for salvation (Psalm 53:6, 69:35, 87:5, 102:13) and triumph (Psalm 110:2; Obadiah 1:21; II Baruch 40:1). Although Jerusalem after 70 AD lay mostly in shambles and the nations were now trampling God’s sanctuary even in a symbolic sense (Revelation 11:2), John’s audience knew that the prophets had promised Zion’s restoration (Isaiah 1:27, 4:5, 46:13, 51:3, 61:11; Micah 4:2, 7). God would dwell in the midst of Zion as the triumphant warrior who delivered them (Zephaniah 3:15-19). He would make war form Mount Zion (Isaiah 31:4; cf. Zechariah 14:4); Jewish apocalyptic tradition added that the Messiah would stand atop Mount Zion when preparing to make war (4 Ezra 13:35). (Keener, Revelation (The NIV Application Commentary), 369)

Mount Zion itself becomes symbolic of redemption and victory. In spite of the previous chapter’s gloom and doom, the Lamb still reigns. In fact, some view Revelation 14:1-5 as the Lamb’s coronation as depicted in the second psalm (Psalm 2:6), a passage Revelation has already alluded to twice (Revelation 11:18, 12:5).

G.K. Beale (b. 1949) comments:

In the last days God will “install” his “Messiah” and “King on Zion, my [God’s] holy mountain.” Then the Messiah will judge the ungodly and will be a place of refuge for those who fear him (Psalm 2:6-12). On this Old Testament basis 4 Ezra 13:25-52 (cf. 4 Ezra 13:36) and II Baruch 40 speak of the “Son” and “Messiah” standing on “Mount Zion” at the end time judging the unrighteous and “defending” or “protecting” the remnant (those who “remain” or the “rest”). (Beale, The Book of Revelation (New International Greek Testament Commentary), 732)

The king installed on Zion will not be a lion but a lamb. And in spite of seemingly insurmountable obstacles, evil will be conquered by the Lamb, specifically by his death as opposed to the exercise of divine power (Revelation 13:8).

What is the most pronounced change in setting you have seen from one seen to the next? If you are experiencing difficult days, do you believe that there are better days ahead? What do you want restored? Are you confident in God’s ultimate victory?

In art, this scene is the basis for one of the most common depictions of the Lamb: with a nimbus standing upon a hill from which four streams flow (Revelation 14:1). It is noteworthy that the Lamb has the elevated position of standing on a mountain. In contrast, when last seen the beast stood on the sand of the seashore (Revelation 13:1). Even though the beast seems more imposing, the Lamb holds the high ground. As He has all along.

Where do you stand? Where does Jesus? Do you have confidence that the Lamb will slay the Dragon? Do you feel that Jesus is where He is supposed to be even if it does not feel that way?

“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” - Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)

There is No “I” in Heaven (II Corinthians 12:2)

Into what heaven was the man who Paul knew caught up? The third heaven (II Corinthians 12:2)

One of the many obstacles Paul faced in Corinth was responding to braggart preachers who arrived after he had departed (II Corinthians 11:16-18). In confronting these critics, Paul (almost playfully) boasts of his own accomplishments in Christ. After outlining his sufferings (II Corinthians 11:23-33), the apostle shifts to the third person for his most dramatic boast (II Corinthians 12:1-9). He famously writes of an ecstatic experience:

I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. (II Corinthians 12:2 NASB)

In stating that the incident occurred fourteen years ago, Paul is registering a definitive memorable experience, a happening that occurred nearly a decade before he entered Corinth. Paul may be sharing this episode for the first time as there appears to have been a gag order placed upon such visits (II Corinthians 12:4). The time marker serves as a reminder that this event was unique and not an everyday occurrence even for a spiritual guru like Paul.

Though Paul regularly experienced visions, many involving Jesus (Acts 9:3-6, 9:12, 16:9, 18:9, 22:17), the apostle does not classify this incident as a vision. In fact, he does not classify it at all. Paul asserts that God only knows how it happened conceding only that he was “caught up” (Ezekiel 8:1-3; Wisdom of Solomon 4:10-11; I Enoch 39:3, 52:1). Paul evidently asked the natural question that Talking Heads sang about in “Once in a Lifetime” - “you may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?”

In refusing to speculate as to whether he was abducted or underwent an out of body experience, Paul resisted the urge to categorize his experience. Some have suggested this ambiguity is a rebuttal of the Greek notion that one’s soul could ascend to God. This discussion fits with the Corinthians’ interest in the body/spirit dichotomy (I Corinthians 15:35-44; II Corinthians 5:6-8).

Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) comments:

Not knowing whether he was in the body or out of it (II Corinthians 12:2-3) might be rhetorical aporia (feigned uncertainty), but Paul has already contrasted being at home in the body with the afterlife of being away from the body and at home with the lord (II Corinthians 5:6-8). Although in some Jewish texts only the souls were caught up to see heaven (I Enoch 71:1-6), sometimes the experience sounds as if it involves the entire body (Ezekiel 2:2, 3:14, 24, 8:3, 11:1, 24; Wisdom of Solomon 4:11; I Enoch 39:3).” (Keener, 1-2 Corinthians (New Cambridge Bible Commentary), 238).”

The modern reader must resolve that if the details were important, Paul would have shared them.

Paul further complicates the incident by mentioning “paradise” in the same breath as “third heaven” (II Corinthians 12:4). Paradise is a loan word from Persia and appears only three times in the New Testament (Luke 23:43; II Corinthians 12:4; Revelation 2:7). In the intertestamental literature it had come to mean the realm entered upon death or the dimension where God dwells. As Paul incorporates two distinct terms, some have suggested a two step progression in which the third heaven was merely a step on the stairway to paradise.

This view is unlikely. Jewish literature often equates the third heaven with paradise (II Enoch 8:1; Apocalypse of Moses 37:5, 40:1). The fact that Paul uses the same verb for “caught up” (harpazo) in describing both places also underscores a singular experience (II Corinthians 12:1, 4). Most tellingly, as Paul is discussing the pinnacle of ecstatic phenomenons, there would be no need to reference the third heaven if it were not a watershed event. The very nature of the text screams for a single event.

The passage is also problematic to modern readers as Paul assumes a subtext that is no longer common - the third heaven itself (II Corinthians 12:2). This marks the only time the third heaven appears in Scripture and there was no consensus in Jewish literature as to how meany “heavens” existed.

Craig S. Keener (b. 1960) explains:

“Because the Persian loan word ‘paradise’ meant ‘garden,’ it applied well to the garden in Eden (Genesis 2:8-3:24 LXX; Josephus [37-100]Antiquities 137). Jewish people spoke of paradise as in heaven (T. Ab. 20:14; 3 Baruch 4:6) and expected a new paradise or Eden in the future (4 Ezra 7:36, 8:52; 2 Baruch 51:11). Jewish texts placed paradise, the new Eden, on earth in the coming age, but heaven in at the present. Jewish texts ranged from 3 to 365 in the number of heavens they imagined; the most common numbers were three (Testament of Levi 2-3) and seven. Texts often placed paradise in one of these (in the third in 2 Enoch 8:1; Apocalypse of Moses 37:5, 40:1); the lowest of ‘heavens’ was the lower atmosphere. Paul presumably envisions paradise as in the third of three heavens .” (Keener, 1-2 Corinthians (New Cambridge Bible Commentary), 239)

Thomas D. Stegman (b. 1963) concurs:

“Paul declares that he was transported to the third heaven, a place he then identifies as Paradise. He thus intimates that he was temporarily taken up by God to the highest place in heaven, where the divine glory dwells. Given that Paul referred to ‘visions and revelations’ of the Lord Jesus, does he suggest here that he was set in the presence of the glorified Christ? Perhaps, although he does not register what he saw. Instead, he reports that he heard ineffable things, which no one may utter. These ‘unutterable utterances’–surmised by some commentators to be angelic praises or revelations of divine mysteries–were beyond what human language could convey. What is more, even if he were able, the Apostle states, he is not permitted to do so.” (Stegman, Second Corinthians (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture), 268)

Robert H. Gundry (b. 1932) describes this cosmology succinctly, “The third heaven probably means ‘right up to the highest heaven,’ the heaven of the Lord’s abode as distinct from the starry heavens (the second heaven) and the earth’s atmosphere (the first heaven [compare I Kings 8:27]) (Gundry, Commentary on Second Corinthians).”

Paul is discussing a single event, rare even for him, that represented the apex of spiritual encounters. The number and terminology are insignificant as whether one names that abode as the third heaven, paradise or something else, Paul was transported into the very presence of God.

Do you have any spiritual experiences too sacred to discuss? Did this episode in Paul’s life occur before, during or after his profound experience on the Damascus Road (Acts 9:1-9)? How did Paul get to the third heaven? What was the apostle doing when he was transported? How would you explain this incident?

In its simplest form, this passage answers Paul’s bragging detractors and the message is clear - you can’t top this. Paul’s visit to the third heaven means that if the criteria is ecstatic, supernatural experience, Paul wins. Hands down.

Throughout his diatribe, Paul is aware of the foolishness of his own boasting, the same complaint he has against his detractors (II Corinthians 11:16-18, 21, 23, 12:1). He readily admits, “I am speaking as a fool (II Corinthians 11:21 NASB).” Even amidst his own “boasting”, Paul does all he can to deprecate himself. He also uses the passive voice of “caught up” to describe the happening (II Corinthians 12:1, 4), meaning it was done to him not by him. He did nothing.

Thomas D. Stegman (b. 1963) expounds:

“There is a certain playfulness with which Paul recounts his journey to the third heaven: he is not certain how he was taken up, he does not report what he saw, and he cannot repeat what he heard. He thereby suggests that, while this mysterious experience was important to him personally, it did not provide him with information he could use in his ministry. It is certainly not reason to boast about himself. Rather, he implies a critique of the intruding missionaries: ‘If their experience was the same as Paul’s, it contributed nothing to their ministry. If it was something about which they talk, it was less ineffable than his.’” (Stegman, Second Corinthians (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture), 268)

In speaking of visions, Paul also reverts to the third person, refusing the word “I”. (The modern equivalent might be someone who instead of admittedly speaking on their own behalf instead says, “I have this friend....”) For Paul, there is no “I” in heaven as the apostle realizes he did nothing to generate or merit the experience.

Paul recognizes that it is the height of folly to brag of revelations from God. Only an idiot boasts of something so clearly the work of Another.

What was the purpose of Paul’s visit to the third heaven? In what ways, if any, did it benefit him? Do people still visit the third heaven? What is your most dramatic spiritual/supernatural experience? When have you taken credit for God’s handiwork?

“The less you speak of your greatness, the more shall I think of it.” - attributed to William Shakespeare (1564-1616)

Elijah’s Exit (II Kings 2:11)

Who went to heaven in a chariot of fire? Elijah (II Kings 2:11).

The prophet Elijah knew the day that he was making his final exit from the earth (II Kings 12:3, 5). On that day, he along with his protégé, Elisha, made one last circuit, revisiting places of importance in Israel’s history. They traveled from Gilgal to Bethel (II Kings 12:2) to Jericho (II Kings 12:4) back to the east side of the Jordan River (II Kings 12:6) where they crossed to the other side (II Kings 12:8). The journey encompassed 50+ miles. At each stop, Elijah appears to attempt to do as he had done previously in the desert and leave his servant so that he could die alone (I Kings 19:3). At each site, Elijah ordered Elisha to stay behind and each time his apprentice refused to leave his master (II Kings 12:2, 12:4, 12:6). After crossing the Jordan, Elijah and Elisha were separated by a chariot and horsemen of fire (II Kings 2:11). Elijah “went up by a whirlwind to heaven” (II Kings 2:11 NASB) departing the earth and leaving his successor with only his mantle (II Kings 2:13).

The heaven to which Elijah ascended is not the ethereal place the modern word evokes. Jesus said, “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man (John 3:13 NASB).” The Hebrew, shamayim, indicates the sky. This is evidenced by the fact that the fifty prophets who witnessed Elijah’s exit (II Kings 2:7) assumed that the prophet was taken elsewhere and searched for him for three days (II Kings 2:15-18). Regardless of his destination, Elijah went out in style.

Elijah’s end in a fiery blaze of glory was fitting. His greatest triumph was calling down fire to defeat the prophets of Ba’al (I Kings 18:38) and in one of his finals acts, he again called down fire to consume the soldiers of the rebelling king Ahaziah (II Kings 1:10, 12, 14). The horse and the chariot were symbols of battle. The fiery prophet who had spent his life battling for God was given an honorary military procession.

Tradition, reenforced through hymns (“Swing Low, Sweet Chariot”) and paintings, has evoked Ben Hur images of the chariot carrying the prophet away. Elijah was actually taken by a whirlwind, not a chariot of fire (II Kings 2:11). The fiery chariot served to separate the two ministry partners (II Kings 2:11). The horses may not have even been drawing the chariots as Elisha describes them distinctively (II Kings 12:12). Perhaps the fiery horses and chariot were merely Elijah’s escorts.

Elijah knowingly spent his last day on earth traveling Israel, presumably saying his goodbyes. Missionary Jim Elliott (1927-1956) who was martyred at age 28 in Ecuador, wrote in his journal on March 25th, 1951, “When it comes time to die, make sure that all you have to do is die (Elliot, The Journals of Jim Elliott, 324).”

If you could, would you want to know the exact day on which you would die? If you did know that today was your last day, where would you go? Why does Elijah exit the earth in this manner? For whose benefit were the “chariots for fire”?

“Chariots of fire” is now part of the cultural lexicon. Chariots of fire later come to Elisha’s rescue (II Kings 6:17) and similar imagery is used in Isaiah (Isaiah 66:15-16). Though it has numerous religious overtones, the 1981 Academy Award winning film Chariots of Fire is not actually named for this Biblical passage. Rather the title is taken from a line from a hymn sung in the movie, “Jerusalem”. The hymn, written by C. Hubert H. Parry (1848-1918) in 1916, was based upon a William Blake (1757-1827) poem. Blake’s poem was inspired by the apocryphal story of a young Jesus, accompanied by Joseph of Arimathea (Matthew 27:57; Mark 15:43; John 19:38), visiting Glastonbury, England.

It is said that only two Biblical characters did not die: Enoch (Genesis 5:21-24) and Elijah (II Kings 2:1-11). Not surprisingly many legends have arisen around the two figures. Elijah did not die in the sense that his body never decayed but he died like everyone else in the sense that he moved from this life to the next.

What, if anything, do you fear most about death? Do you more dread the transition to the next life or the destruction of the body?

But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “Death is swallowed up in victory. O Death, where is your victory? O Death, where is your sting? (I Corinthians 15:54-55, NASB)