According to the usual premillennial view the first resurrection is interpreted as consisting of all believers who have died previous to that time, and not of those only who share in it by reason of special service and testimony; and the millennial reign of those who rise from their graves in this resurrection is held to be upon the earth, and is to be ushered in by the second coming of Christ who will establish a new dispensation in which he will be personally manifest, and will rule in the world, either from an earthly capital as Jerusalem, or from heaven in close communication with the saints.(545) This view, it will be seen, rests upon Jewish conceptions, and derives its support from a sternly literal interpretation of Old Testament prophecies. But, notwithstanding its natural attractiveness to the minds of men, it fails of adequate confirmation in the text. Upon the other hand most of the symbolical school interpret the first resurrection figuratively, as a resurrection to spiritual life, and regard the millennium as now in progress. The prevalence of this view seems to be largely due to the early influence of Augustine,(546) who identified the millennium with the period of the Christian church on earth, and held that for those who belong to the true church the first resurrection is past already, making it the equivalent of the resurrection to spiritual life spoken of in John’s Gospel (Jn. 5:25),—a passage which, though showing that a spiritual resurrection is a distinct Johannine conception, does not serve to break the natural force of these words in their present connection. The usual interpretation of the thousand years given by the symbolical school cannot be considered as satisfactory,(547) viz. that the phrase expresses a quality, i. e. completeness, and not a period of time; and that the meaning of the phrase “bound him for a thousand years” is that Satan was completely bound. The symbolical use of the number one thousand is evident, but that does not deprive it of all quantitative value, it only affects its literal significance; and the denial that the word “years” has any reference to time is without proper exegetical support and must be rejected.(548) According to the current symbolical interpretation the entire passage (ch. 20:1‐10) is regarded as an episode which is descriptive of the complete safety and spiritual deliverance of Christ’s people throughout the whole period of the age‐long conflict;(549) and thus the millennium as a period of triumph and blessedness for the saints on earth, preceding and distinct from the final blessedness of the world to come, fades away into a figure of speech, while the triumph of the gospel is obscured. But this view cannot be sustained except by a sacrifice of the natural, if we may not certainly say the correct exegesis; for the paragraph will not fit a purely figurative interpretation.(550) This view would dispose of the question of a pre‐ or post‐millennial coming by denying that there is any millennium, in the historic sense of the term, taught in the Revelation. But the expedient is a fallacious one, if John spoke as a prophet by the inspiration of the Spirit, for his words incorporated the thought of his time in which the millennium had a definite meaning; and that he foresaw and described it as such is fairly evident, though he manifestly modified its extravagances. The idea of a triumphal period of the Messiah’s reign is too deeply inwrought in the Apocalyptic literature which preceded the present Apocalypse to be put aside lightly as a symbol of completeness.(551) The duration of this time was a frequent and favorite subject of Jewish speculation;(552) and according to the general laws of language, the phrase used in the text, “a thousand years”, necessarily carries with it the conception of a period of time, but in accordance with the usage of the author, it loses its definite numerical significance and indicates a period of long but unmeasured duration; it becomes the symbol of a period that is complete.