Unless otherwise stated, all citations are taken from the New American Standard Bible (NASB).
These are snapshots or previews of the rest of the book. Technically, theologians call these proleptic prophecies.[1] A prolepsis speaks of future events as though it has already been fulfilled. So, Revelation 14 speaks of how the Tribulation will end in judgment—even though we haven’t reached that far in the book. Perhaps John placed these prophecies here because we might be discouraged after reading Revelation 12-13. He wants to give a shot in the arm of encouragement, telling us how Jesus will be victorious in the end. So, before we finish the descriptions of the bowl judgments and the end of the world-system (Rev. 15-18), we get a glimpse of Jesus ruling and reigning.
Revelation 14:1-5 (Vision of Jesus Christ in the Millennium)
(14:1) “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.”
“Then I looked, and behold, the Lamb was standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand.”
The Lamb is no longer a slain Lamb (Rev. 5:6, 9, 12). He is a “militant victor with His feet solidly fixed on the Mount of Olives (cf. Zech. 14:3-4).”[2]
Is this a heavenly Zion or an earthly one—figurative or literal? The OT predicted that the Messiah would literally reign from Mount Zion (Joel 2:32; Ps. 48:2-11; Isa. 2:2; 24:23; Mic. 4:1-8; Zech. 14:3-4). On the other hand, the author of Hebrews writes that Christians have already come to “Mount Zion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem” (Heb. 12:22). That said, we favor the former view that this is a proleptic vision of Jesus beginning to rule the world from Mount Zion. Thomas[3] places this during the Millennium. The rest of the chapter supports this reading of the text.
Is this during or after the Tribulation? Osborne favors the view that this is before the Tribulation. He writes, “The idea of ‘standing’ is a military metaphor and pictures the Lamb as a divine warrior ready to annihilate his enemy.”[4] Walvoord, however, favors the view that this is after the Second Coming. He writes, “Preferable is the view that this is a prophetic vision of the ultimate triumph of the Lamb following His second coming, when He joins the 144,000 on Mount Zion at the beginning of His millennial reign.”[5] Who is correct? We’re unsure.
Why are the 144,000 brought up again? This is to show that God’s seal was effective, and “not one of them has been lost.”[6]
“Having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads.” The Father and the Son sealed their names on the foreheads of the 144,000. This doesn’t mean that they are sealed from persecution from the Beast. Rather, as Thomas notes, “The sealing they received protects them only from the wrath of God, not from the wrath of the dragon and the beast.”[7]
Alternate interpretations
Morris[8] doesn’t think this refers to the Millennial Reign of Christ. Rather, it is a picture of Jesus’ reign from Heaven. The imagery is more literary than literal: Jesus stands on a mountain, while the beast stands on the sea (Rev. 13:1).
Mounce thinks this is a heavenly scene as well, and he understands the 144,000 to refer to “the entire body of the redeemed.”[9]
(14:2) “And I heard a voice from heaven, like the sound of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder, and the voice which I heard was like the sound of harpists playing on their harps.”
The voice from heaven is both strong and soft—thunderous and yet musical. The description of a voice that sounds like “many waters” reminds us of Jesus’ voice (Rev. 1:15), but the “harps” add a beautiful quality. The perspective of this prophecy must be from Earth because John hears the “voice from heaven.”
(14:3) “And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the one hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the earth.”
The 144,000 are in Heaven (“before the throne… before the four living creatures and the elders”). Revelation 4 showed us a similar scene in Heaven—not Earth. The language also seems similar to Revelation 5:9 (“They sang a new song… You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation’”). This seems to be a fulfillment of that song. Only the 144,000 “could learn the song” because they are a special group that are devoted to God.
(14:4) “These are the ones who have not been defiled with women, for they have kept themselves chaste. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These have been purchased from among men as first fruits to God and to the Lamb.”
The OT pictures Israel as “the virgin daughter of Zion” (Lam. 2:13; cf. 2 Kings 19:21; Isa. 37:22), and the “virgin of Israel” (Jer. 18:13; 31:4, 21; Amos 5:2). The Church is also called a “pure virgin” (2 Cor. 11:2), who has “no spot or wrinkle or any such thing” (Eph. 5:27). These men are faithful to God, and they are the first fruits that guarantee an eventual harvest.
Are they literal virgins? The term “chaste” (parthenos) is also the term translated as “virgin.” Some understand this to be figurative language that describes the moral character of these men (2 Cor. 11:2). Since there is nothing wrong with sex in the context of marriage, it would be odd to take this literally. Therefore, when John writes that they have “not been defiled with women,” this implies sexual immorality. Mounce understands this to mean that these men have “kept themselves pure from all defiling relationships with the pagan world system.” He continues, “They have resisted the seductions of the great harlot Rome with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication (17:2).”[10]
That being said, we favor the literal view—namely, these men refused to get married. Jesus and Paul were both celibate for the purpose of ministry, and Jesus spoke positively of those who “made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom” (Mt. 19:12). Paul also spoke highly of those who chose a life of singleness in order to be “concerned about the things of the Lord” and “how [they] may please the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:32). Regarding marriage, Paul wrote, “Because of the present crisis, I think it is best to remain as you are” (1 Cor. 7:26 NLT). Paul’s argument hinges on the fact that it would be harmful for someone to take a wife when they know that they could likely face martyrdom or severe persecution. The Tribulation will be hell on Earth. So, Paul’s argument is only magnified in view of the persecution of the Beast. Thomas writes, “The Tribulation will be a very special time in history, requiring an especially high degree of dedication… The single can best render undistracted service for the Lord. So, in the future Great Tribulation, virginity will be requisite for this special group. Marriage is the norm for the Christian life during relative tranquil times, but this future reign of the beast will be anything but tranquil for the faithful.”[11] Out of love, these men most likely refused their right to marry so that they wouldn’t widow their wives or orphan their children or otherwise put them in harm’s way.
The biggest difficulty with the literal view is the language of being “defiled” (molunō) by women. The word means “to cause something to become dirty or soiled, stain, soil” (BDAG, p.657; Rev. 3:4). However, it can also be used to describe something that is “ritually impure” (BDAG, p.657). This would fit with the notion that there are certain times where men should avoid marriage or even sex for the sake of ministry (Ex. 19:14-15; Lev. 15:18; 1 Sam. 21:4; 2 Sam. 11:11).
(14:5) “And no lie was found in their mouth; they are blameless.”
Is this positional righteousness or conditional righteousness? It’s hard to believe that a person never lied in their entire life, or that they were “blameless” (Rom. 3:10-19). Indeed, anyone who makes such a claim is likely lying! In our view, this is probably hyperbole to describe the conditional righteousness of these people.
Conclusion
All 144,000 are accounted for. Satan’s efforts to destroy the Jewish people failed.
First Angel: Turn to God!
(14:6) “And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, having an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people.”
The revelation of the “eternal gospel” seems universal in scope (“every nation and tribe and tongue and people”). Some interpreters take this angel to refer symbolically to the Church, which brings the gospel to all people. Others think this is symbolic for “natural theology”[12] in general. While the text uses similar language to passages on natural theology (Rom. 1:18ff), in our estimation, this seems like a literal angel. It’s unclear why the text would specify this angel flying in the air (“flying in midheaven”) if it was referring to believers spreading the gospel on the ground. Also, there is no language of simile to describe the angel. If this is a literal angel, then it implies that God is pulling out all the stops so that people can come to know him before the time is up. This angel speaks universally to all nations (cf. Mt. 24:14?).
(14:7) “And he said with a loud voice, ‘Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters.’”
(14:6-7) Is this a message of forgiveness or judgment? Some commentators think that this angel is preaching a message of judgment. Mounce writes, “It is not the gospel of God’s redeeming grace in Christ Jesus but, as the following verse shows, a summons to fear, honor, and worship the Creator.”[13]
We disagree. The term “gospel” (euaggelion) should be taken at face value. Osborne writes, “Everywhere that euaggelion is found in the NT, it implies the gracious offer of salvation.”[14] In fact, Osborne speculates that this could actually be a fulfillment of Matthew 24:14 (“This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come”). Moreover, the same language is used to describe the redeemed elsewhere in the book (Rev. 5:9; 7:9). All of this means that God is still extending his love and forgiveness to a rebellious world, even up until the very end.
Second Angel: Babylon is fallen!
(14:8) “And another angel, a second one, followed, saying, ‘Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who has made all the nations drink of the wine of the passion of her immorality.’”
This passage looks ahead to the end of Babylon in chapters 17-18, speaking about the fall of Babylon as though it has already happened (i.e. prolepsis). Osborne writes, “Although the destruction of the evil empire lies in the future, it is presented via the doublet Epesan, epesan (Fallen, fallen), a proleptic aorist… that stresses the absolute certainty of the coming destruction (cf. 10:7).”[15]
Third Angel: Judgment is coming!
(14:9-10) “Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, ‘If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.’”
The reference to taking the mark of the beast harkens back to Revelation 13:16-18. It stands in contrast to the believers being marked by God on their foreheads (v.1). In this case, those who receive the mark also “worship the beast and his image.” Taking the mark of the beast isn’t an accidental endeavor; it is a committed decision to reject God and worship a man.
“He also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger.” Johnson writes, “For those who drink Babylon’s cup (v. 8), the Lord will give his own cup of wrath.”[16]
(14:11) “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”
Annihilationists argue that only the “smoke” rises up forever, but this doesn’t imply that the people in hell are perpetually conscious. Yet, the subsequent clause states: “They have no rest day and night.” This is the same language used to describe the angels who worship God “day and night” (Rev. 4:8). By contrast, believers will find “rest” (v.13).
(14:12) “Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.”
Keeping God’s commandments is parallel with faith in Jesus.
(14:13) “And I heard a voice from heaven, saying, ‘Write, ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on!’’ ‘Yes,’ says the Spirit, ‘so that they may rest from their labors, for their deeds follow with them.’”
“From now on.” It seems that this persecution is so awful that this is a special promise to the believers in this future day. Johnson writes, “John expects the imminent intensification of persecution associated with the beast, and the beatitude indicates that those who remain loyal to Jesus when this occurs will be blessed indeed.”[17] Put simply, if you are faithful to Jesus during the horrors of the Tribulation, then you will receive a special blessing.
“So that they may rest from their labors.” This stands in stark contrast to those who worship the Beast: “They have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name” (Rev. 14:11).
Armageddon and the judgment of the end of the Tribulation
Hitchcock holds that this is a preview of Armageddon because Jesus himself is engaging in judgment. Again, this is a case of proleptic prophecy: speaking of these future events as though they have already happened.
(14:14-15) “Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and sitting on the cloud was one like a son of man, having a golden crown on His head and a sharp sickle in His hand. 15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying out with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, ‘Put in your sickle and reap, for the hour to reap has come, because the harvest of the earth is ripe.’”
Does this refer to Jesus or an angel? Morris[18] argues that this refers to an angel. For one, John describes “a son of man,” rather than “the son of man.” However, need we state the obvious? How does the language of a “son of man” better describe an angel?[19] Moreover, even the original citation in Daniel refers to “One like a Son of Man” (Dan. 7:13).
Second, Morris argues that an angel tells this figure to execute judgment (v.15). This is a good argument. However, this could refer to prayer of some kind, rather than a command. Indeed, even the Lord’s Prayer (Mt. 6:9ff) is in the vocative case (i.e. calling on God to act). It’s also possible that this is simply an angelic message given from God the Father. Thomas writes, “He does not respond to angelic authority in thrusting in His sickle, but receives divine notification through an angel that the proper time to do so has arrived (Acts 1:7; cf. Matt. 24:36; Mark 13:32).”[20] Therefore, we hold that this describes Jesus (cf. Rev. 1:13) who will personally come to execute judgment (Mt. 13:24-30), along with his angels (Mt. 13:39).
(14:16-18) “Then He who sat on the cloud swung His sickle over the earth, and the earth was reaped. 17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, and he also had a sharp sickle. 18 Then another angel, the one who has power over fire, came out from the altar; and he called with a loud voice to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, ‘Put in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters from the vine of the earth, because her grapes are ripe.’”
Angels are involved with the judgment as well. This shouldn’t surprise us. Jesus taught, “The harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels” (Mt. 13:39).
(14:19) “So the angel swung his sickle to the earth and gathered the clusters from the vine of the earth, and threw them into the great wine press of the wrath of God.”
Picture the crushed and oozing grapes that fill a winepress. This is the vivid imagery associated with the divine judgment of the human race.
(14:20) “And the wine press was trodden outside the city, and blood came out from the wine press, up to the horses’ bridles, for a distance of two hundred miles.”
Is this describing 200 square miles of blood that is five-feet-deep? Thomas states that this is “possibly a hyperbole,” but he goes on to writes that “a literal meaning is not out of the question.”[21] With all due respect to Thomas, a literal reading is indeed out of the question. This requires more blood than exists in every human on Planet Earth. The average human only has 10 pints of blood (1.25 gallons). To fill just one cubic foot would require ~7.5 gallons of liquid. To cover one square mile that is one foot deep would require a flood of 334.5 million gallons. To cover 200 square miles up to five feet? This would require 1.6 trillion gallons of blood!
Consequently, Hitchcock doesn’t take this as literal. For one, this is physically impossible. Moreover, since the winepress isn’t literal, we aren’t required to take this bloodbath as literal. Instead, the image of a winepress is that the grape juice sprays high into the air (4-5 feet?), and this could be the picture here. Regardless, this symbol describes a massive judgment at the end of history.
Alternate interpretation?
Regarding the 1,600 stadia (i.e. 200 miles), Mounce understands this to refer to the squaring of four, which could refer to the whole earth (Rev. 7:1; 20:8). He writes, “The judgment of God, portrayed ideally as taking place outside the holy city, extends to all people everywhere who find themselves beyond the pale of divine protection.”[22]
Another view is that the blood splashes up to the height of the horse’s bridle—not that a sea of blood fills to that depth. The imagery would, therefore, refer to a bloodbath, but not a literal bath of blood.
Questions for Reflection
Why does John include this chapter right after he describes the horrific rule of Satan and the Antichrist in chapters 12-13?
Read verse 1. John depicts Jesus as standing on Mount Zion (v.1), and he depicted Satan as standing on the “sand” (Rev. 13:1). Is there any significance to the contrast between the two?
Read verses 1-5 and 8. Compare the 144,000 with those who follow Babylon.
[1] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 188–189.
[2] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 189.
[3] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 190.
[4] Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 525.
[5] John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Galaxie Software, 2008), 28.
[6] Leon Morris, Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 20, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 169.
[7] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 192.
[8] Leon Morris, Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 20, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 169.
[9] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 265.
[10] To be clear, Mounce understands the 144,000 to refer to the entire Church—not a special subset. Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 267.
[11] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 195.
[12] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 271.
[13] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 270.
[14] Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 535.
[15] Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 537.
[16] Alan F. Johnson, “Revelation,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews through Revelation, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 12 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 541.
[17] Alan F. Johnson, “Revelation,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews through Revelation, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 12 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 542.
[18] Leon Morris, Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 20, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 177.
[19] Morris counters, “We should also bear in mind that, whereas to modern Christian ears, ‘one like a son of man’ sounds like a reference to Christ, it is not a strange designation in apocalyptic. There it is a normal way of referring to an angelic being, men being usually symbolized by animals of some sort.” Leon Morris, Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 20, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 177.
[20] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 218.
[21] Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1995), 224.
[22] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 281.