About the author

Ken Mafli

Ken Mafli

is passionate about Theological Anthropology and has been studying the Bible, humanity, and how we relate to God for over 20 years.

Related Articles


  1. 1

    Matthew Abate

    Hi Ken,

    I stumbled across this article on your blog by pure happenstance. I’ve been working through the various views on Revelation. One thing that I must confess is a general reticence on dogmatic assertions. Your article seems to take the same approach, which I appreciate quite a bit.

    To answer a few of your questions, I believe that scripture teaches that the Great Tribulation is only three and a half years long, and that it’s synonymous with the 2nd half of Daniel’s 70th week. The church will be present on the earth while it takes place; however, we’ll be sealed for preservation according to Rev. 7:3-4 and 9:4. In all honesty, I go back and forth on the 2nd half of Daniel’s week either being still future or symbolic for the entire present, church age.

    When it comes to interpreting prophecy, I believe that a distinction needs to be made between literal and literalistic. For example, I don’t believe that there will be an actual army of locusts on the earth. Instead, I believe that the locust army of Revelation is a symbolic referent for Satan’s demonic forces exerting their force during the Great Tribulation.

    Here’s another example about interpreting prophecy. I see Ezekiel 37 as depicting the spiritual restoration (or salvation) of Israel as symbolized by the dry bones coming to life. In one sense, this could be applied to the resurrection of the just; however, I think the context of Ezekiel 37 requires that one interpret the chapter as pointing to the end time restoration of Israel as a people, a nation.

    Keep blogging,


    1. 1.1
      Ken Mafli

      Ken Mafli


      Thanks for reading and the comment! You raise some interesting points – ones that I will mull over. I appreciate it!

  2. 2


    So why a non-literal thousand (Gr. chilioi) when it modifies the word ‘year’ and not ‘days’ (Rev 11:3; 12:6)? Why a non-literal in the first place? Even in 2 Pet 3:8 the thousand years is still literal. Even if the doctrine of the millennium is based on one passage, Rev 20, that passage uses the term 6 times with no indication that a symbolic meaning is in view.

    And does not a ‘very loose binding’ fly in the face of the term ‘bind’? The terminology used and the length to which the text goes to describe the plight of our adversary makes it impossible to take a ‘long leash’ view. Satan is bound (in chains capable of binding a supernatural entity), thrown into an abyss which is shut (opened only by the key in v.1) and sealed–for the express purpose of preventing him from deceiving the nations for a thousand years. And nowhere here to we get the notion that “Satan is bound in the life of those living according to the will of God.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

2014 Powered By Wordpress, Goodnews Theme By Momizat Team