In Revelation 20, the Spirit of God shows John just what He had shown Daniel centuries before. After world crises are quelled and brought into order by the returning King of Kings Jesus Christ, thrones are set up. Plural. We know that the Father and the Son are the only ones originally worthy. But through acts of His grace He will confer on Adam's line the honor of kingship also. Christians have prided themselves in these king-to-be passages through the years, announcing to all who will hear, "Hey, I'm bound for the throne! I'm a priest of God, a king who will reign with Jesus for a thousand years!"

I will not deny what God has said. Such a thing is dangerous business. But I will affirm the whole truth of what He said, and see how many of the boasts dry up or at least calm down. John seems to put some other qualifications to kingship that we don't hear about so often.

The people John saw (in the Spirit) "had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus." Further, they had not worshiped the beast or received his mark. What would that mean in this generation before the beast and the mark have arisen? Would it mean staying away from ungodly yoking? Would it mean honoring our God with our time and treasure, to the point where we ignore the world and the flesh?

These ones identified by John clearly were allowed to live and reign with Jesus for that 1000 years. They are part of the first resurrection. And those who did not reign were raised later, to the resurrection of damnation.

Is it that cut and dried? Will no others reign with Jesus, from all the ages before the last one? Let's hear Jesus and Paul, but again I say, the indications are a bit troublesome.

Paul told the Phillipians that they were privileged to be able to suffer for Jesus. So let us put to rest the modern theory that says Jesus takes His folks out just before mankind's greatest Tribulation, and the rest of the saints are left behind to deal with antichrist because for the most part they are second class backsliders.

No, those who suffer with Jesus are the blessed ones. We got it backwards.

To the Roman Christians Paul goes on to say that if saints suffer with Christ, they shall reign with Him. That's saints in every generation, I presume. He repeats these sentiments to son Timothy, "all who desire to live godly will suffer persecution," and " if we suffer with Him, we will also reign with Him."

So Paul widens the door, and seems to allow for saints of all ages being among the reigning throng . But he quickly narrows the options too, by suggesting that it is only those saints who suffer who will be there. In fact, the very definition that Paul seems to be giving for sainthood - the Biblical sort, as opposed to that promoted in Rome - is a life made holy by persecution. So what says Jesus?

Jesus' words are the most familiar of all, and perhaps that is why we have set them aside in our thinking. May they be real to us as we contemplate our place around the Heavenly Throne:

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven..."

I have said often that we need North Korean Christians more than they need us. We need them to teach us what the cross means again. They are living what Jesus and Paul taught. Serving Christ means persecution. But then, they shall experience what Paul and John taught: if we suffer, we will reign with him.

In the light of this blinding truth, I ask you, who should we pity most? Christians who sit in concentration camps but who will sit around the Throne of God, or Christians who never learned to carry the cross at all?