The Binding of Satan- Dominionism’s Self Inflicted Defeat!
Without any question, Revelation 20 posits the binding of Satan at the initiation of the millennium. No one, to my knowledge, denies this obvious truth. What few seem to catch is how devastating the binding of Satan is to the Postmillennial doctrine (i.e. Reconstructionism, Dominionism), and that destruction comes from the pens of Dominionists themselves.
Dominionists and the Binding of Satan
Let me set the stage a bit. In the Postmillennial world, it is all but unanimous to affirm that Satan was bound in the first century. Some say during Jesus’ ministry, at the cross, etc.. There are others who are not necessarily Reconstructionists, such as Reformed Amillennialist James Jordan, in my debate with him in 2003, claimed the millennium, and thus, the binding of Satan, began in AD 70. Others agree that the millennium began in AD 70. This view is untenable, but, my focus here is on the self inflicted fatal blow that Dominionists have dealt themselves. Let me establish that Dominionists affirm the binding of Satan in the first century.
In his mostly excellent work, End Times Fiction, Gary DeMar affirms that Satan has already been:
Defeated, disarmed, and spoiled by God (Col. 2:15; Rev. 12:7-17; Mark 3:27).
Fallen (Luke 10:18)
“Thrown down: – (Revelation 12:9)
Crushed (Romans 16:20)
Lost all authority (Colossians 1:13)
Judged (John 16:11)
His works destroyed (1 John 3:8)
He has nothing (John 14:30)
He flees when resisted (James 4:7)
Is bound Mark 3:27; Luke 11:20; Revelation 20:2. (DeMar, End Times Fiction, (Nashville, Nelson, 2001)212.
Likewise, Gentry holds that Satan was bound in the first century (Kenneth Gentry, Thine Is The Kingdom, (Valliceto, CA., Chalcedon, 2003)126f). Gentry also wrote: “Satan’s binding begins in the first century. Christ initiates it during his earthly ministry (Matthew 12:24-29), secures it in legal fact at his death and resurrection (Luke 10:17; Jhn 12:31-32; Col. 2:15; Heb. 2:14f), and dramatically demonstrates it in the collapse of Christianity’s greatest foe, Judaism (Rev. 12; 17-18) (Kenneth Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion, (Draper, VA, Apologetic Group, 2009)414f).
And among others that could be cited, Joel McDurmon, with whom I had a formal debate in July 2012, says, commenting on Luke 11:15-26, and Jesus’ binding of the “strong man”: “Some people may find it difficult to believe that this ‘binding the strong man’ passage has primary if not only interpretation in the first century context of unbelieving Israel. But the parallel account in Matthew makes this context and application explicit. (My emphasis, DKP) After this version of the story where the wicked spirit is cast out, Matthew records Jesus concluding with this statement (he then inserts Matthew 12:45). McDurmon continues: “The last sentence in this verse proves the context: Jesus was applying this parable of judgment to “this generation”– the generation to whom He was speaking. And that generation Jesus considered ‘evil’ and thus deserving of the judgment that was to come.” (Joel McDurmon, Jesus V Jerusalem, A Commentary on Luke 9:51-20:26, Jesus’ Lawsuit Against Israel, (Powder Springs, GA., American Vision, 2011)11.
Very clearly then, Dominionists affirm that Satan was bound– the millennium began- in the first century. But, take note especially of McDurmon’s comments.
Jesus’ “binding of the strong man” refers to the binding of Satan. and “this ‘binding the strong man’ passage has primary if not only interpretation in the first century context of unbelieving Israel. But the parallel account in Matthew makes this context and application explicit.”
In our debate, McDurmon affirmed that Bible prophecy is fulfilled over and over again. He even affirmed that 1 Corinthians 15 and Revelation 20 had a fulfillment in AD 70, but, we are awaiting the final fulfillment. So, since Bible prophecy is fulfilled over and over again, why will there not be another binding of Satan?
Dominionists and the End
By the way, notice that McDurmon says the first century application of the binding of Satan is the “primary if not only interpretation” of the parable. On a similar note, in his comments on the parable of the harvest (Matthew 13) he says Jesus’ prediction of the Abomination, along with the separation of the wheat and tares (Matthew 13): “describes the then soon coming end of that old age and the destruction of its children, and the beginning of the gathering in of the true children of God’s kingdom. It should not be understood as teaching anything beyond this.” (Jesus V Jerusalem: A Commentary on Luke 9:51- 20:26, Jesus Lawsuit Against Jerusalem, (Atlanta, Ga., American Vision, 2011)49). My emphasis. This book is excellent in many ways, and I have had any number of readers tell me that it has aided them in their journey to the full preterist view.
So, McDurmon tells us the Abomination of Desolation, Jesus’ coming for the harvest, at the end of the age, and the binding of Satan occurred in the first century events consummating in AD 70, and those texts do not teach “anything beyond this”; that is its “primary if not only interpretation.” Yet, he nonetheless tells us prophecy is fulfilled over and over again! If prophecy is fulfilled over and over, and over again, then why is there not another Abomination of Desolation, another Great Tribulation, another Man of Sin, another Great Apostasy (and another Elijah, by the way)? Yet, I am unaware of a Dominionist that affirms that any of these things are in the future! Reader, this is unmitigated double talk that is completely self destructive.
Dominionists and Double Talk
Now, the Dominionists, including McDurmon, like to seek shelter from their self defeating comments by affirming that AD 70 was indeed important, but, it was merely typological of the real end. I thoroughly debunk this fabricated theology in my new book AD 70: A Shadow of the “Real” End? So be sure to get a copy of that. This book is being called the definitive refutation of Dominionism by its readers! You will be astounded at how unwarranted and unscriptural the Dominionist claims really are!
According to Scripture, Satan was indeed bound in the first century. But, Scripture is also equally clear that the destruction of Satan was near in the first century (Romans 16:20)! The “end of all things”, the time of the judgment of the living and the dead” had drawn near in the first century (1 Peter 4:5-17) a text that Joel consistently ignored in our debate, even though I argued from it repeatedly). If the binding of Satan was a first century, primary and only application, then there is clearly no scriptural warrant for positing another, further application of the destruction of Satan that was at hand. A book of that debate is available on Kindle, DVDs, or in paper form.
So, Dominionists affirm the binding of Satan in the first century. They affirm the defeat of Satan in AD 70, at the coming of the Lord, at the harvest– and say those events had no further application! Well, that is, unless they want them to, and then, they just say it to claim it! Yet, they have no scriptural support for other further application, and their own words impale them. The first century binding of Satan– and the impending, imminent destruction of the great enemy– does in fact constitute Dominionism’s Self Inflicted Defeat!