The "Chief Resurrection" and the Second Death.
By R. F. Cottrell
I HEARD a man preach who denies the resurrection of the wicked dead. Speaking of the first resurrection, of Rev. xx, to evade a difficulty into which a false theory had led him, he called it the "chief anastasis." A first resurrection implies a second; but to avoid this idea, he called it the chief or principle resurrection, as the one in which the chief portion of the saints will arise, some having previously arisen, at the time of the resurrection of Christ. Well, thought I, but what about that "second death," mentioned in the same verse? Is it a death of secondary importance, and not the chief death? No; that is not the idea. The speaker said it was called the second death, because it was the second time in which God cleanses the earth by the death of his enemies. The text reads: "And they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power." Rev. xx, 4-6. This language is plain, and easy to be understood. The blessed and holy rise first. They live a thousand years with Christ, before "the rest of the dead" live again. And they are exempt from the second death. In the first resurrection the righteous only are raised; in the second, the rest of the dead, i. e., the wicked. The righteous are not subject to the second death, but the wicked, those who live not again until the thousand years are finished, will die a second time. The righteous die but once, the wicked twice. But the position of our speaker was, that when the wicked are once dead they will never rise. Therefore, to get around the idea of a second resurrection, he made the first resurrection first in importance, or chief; while the second death is second in the order of time, instead of inferior in importance. At the close of the thousand years, he said there would be a great revolt of those who had been in subjection to Christ during that time. That they would compass the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and that fire would come down from God out of heaven and devour them. This, said he, is the second death. It is the second time God cleanses the earth by death; the first time at the second advent, (from which, according to his theory, enough escape to lay the foundation of another great rebellion,) and the second at the close of the thousand years. It is true that the Greek word rendered first may, like the English word, mean first in the order of time, or first in importance or chief. But the sense of the text requires that we should understand it in the first sense. There is a first resurrection. Of course there will be a second, a resurrection of those over whom the second death will have power. Again, if it is only those who inhabit the earth during the thousand years that are subject to the second death, as the speaker taught, what means the promise to the overcomer in the Smyrna church, that he should "not be hurt of the second death." Rev. ii, 11. Whether this was addressed to a literal church in Asia, or to the second stage of the universal church under a symbolic name, its members are all, long since dead. Why the promise that they shall not be hurt of the second death, if no one is to die a second time? If any are to die a second time, then there is to be a resurrection of the wicked. And if there is to be a resurrection of the wicked, the first resurrection, that of the righteous, is first in the order of time; and those who do not rise at that time, will "live again" at the close of the thousand years, only to suffer their just deserts and die the second death. Then, is it not better to hold with the apostle, that "there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust?" Acts xxiv, 15.