The Purpose of This Class
It seems that Christians tend to hold one of two extreme positions concerning the book of Revelation: they either obsess about it, or disregard it. On the one hand, I’ve met some Christians who love the book of Revelation. They view the book as a complex puzzle to be solved, and spend great time and energy in striving to make sense of its most intricate details. They love to talk about “the signs of the time”, and often find themselves in passionate debate with others about the identity of the Beast, the meaning of the number 666, the coming of the Anti-Christ, the timing of the Rapture, etc. On the other hand, there are many more Christians who find themselves intimidated by the book. They find its contents strange and somewhat repelling, and may believe that they do not have what it takes to make sense of such a difficult book. The consequence is that they tend to avoid it altogether.
The purpose of this class is to offer a guide to Revelation that will help shed light on its meaning and message, hopefully drawing a path between the middle of these two positions. My prayer is that those who are apprehensive about the book will find that its message is not nearly as difficult to grasp as they may think, and to equip and encourage them to read the book with benefit regularly both privately and with others. For those in the other camp, I hope to help them approach the book not as a puzzle to be solved and debated, but as Scripture to be believed and obeyed. The ultimate aim of this class is one that can only be accomplished by God, namely, that He would glorify Himself by using this book to save and sanctify His people.
Author
Revelation 1:1 explains how the book came into existence:
“The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John…”
Let’s consider this verse one phrase at a time. First, we have the identification of the book: it is “the revelation of Jesus Christ”. This means that the chief subject of this book (like every other part of the Bible) is the person and work of Jesus. It is the revelation concerning Jesus Christ. Second, we are told that this revelation was given from God to His Son. This means that God is the ultimate author of the book. Third, we have the purpose of the book: to show the followers of Jesus “the things that must soon take place.” This emphasizes the prophetic nature of the book. Fourth, we learn that Jesus gave the revelation to “his servant John”, but not directly. Rather, “he made it known by sending his angel.”
So we can point to four distinct persons involved in the creation of this book: God the Father (its ultimate Author), Christ the Son, the angel who delivered it, and the Apostle John who wrote it down. We could also add to this list the Holy Spirit, the very breath of God who inspires all of Scripture (cf. 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:21).
Some people question whether the John who wrote Revelation is the same as the Apostle who walked with Christ and wrote the fourth Gospel. They point out that “John” was a very popular name in the first century (as it is today), and that the writer of Revelation could easily be another follower of Jesus by that name. However, there are two chief reasons to doubt that this is the case:
1. It seems unlikely that anyone but the Apostle John could have used his name without qualification and expected to be recognized. Any church receiving this letter would have immediately assumed from that it was from the apostle since there was no other John in early Christendom that shared his status, nor any other that shared his apostolic authority over the churches.
2. The early literature of the Christian church is unanimous in ascribing this book to the Apostle. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian seem all in agreement on this. Considering their closer chronological proximity to the writing of Revelation, it would be foolish for us to disregard their assessments unless their was a great deal of evidence to justify doing so.[1]
Date:
Revelation was probably written around 95 A.D. We arrive at this date by noting that Revelation (a) seems to assume that emperor worship is a current phenomenon, (b) recognizes a current persecution of Christians and anticipates its worsening, (c) speaks to conditions within the churches of Asia Minor that seem to point to a date later in the first century, (d) uses “Babylon” as a symbolic title for Rome (a not uncommon feature of Jewish Apocalyptic literature beginning in the last quarter of the first century), and (e) is dated during the reign of Emperor Domitian by the early church fathers (Irenaeus, Victorinus of Pettau, Eusebius, and others). There are some who argue for an earlier date (usually 65 A.D, during the reign of Nero), but the evidence above points best towards a later date.
Genre:
One of the first keys to understanding the book of Revelation is to recognize its genre. We would not read a poem the same way we would read a newspaper, nor would we read an essay in the same we way we would read the back of a cereal box. Once we understand what kind of book Revelation is, we will find that many of the difficulties in interpreting it begin to dissipate.
In considering the genre, we should first note that the book is a book of prophecy (cf. 1:3). In the Old Testament, prophecies were messages from God spoken through a prophet promising future blessings or curses for present obedience / disobedience. Prophecies also often remind people of God’s past acts of redemption or judgment. In Revelation, we encounter this past-present-future nature of prophecy in a unique way. It is as if the invisible world of spiritual warfare is unveiled to us through symbolism. We learn about the history of this warfare, the nature of this warfare during our age, and the future outcome. As in the Old Testament prophecies, Revelation does speak of future blessings and curses as well: future blessing for those who belong to Christ, and future judgment for the wicked (including particularly wicked powers, be they political or demonic.)
Second we should note that Revelation has many things in common with apocalyptic literature. In fact, the word translated “revelation” (1:1) is actually the Greek word “apocalypse”, which is why you may have heard this book referred to as “The Book of the Apocalypse”. Apocalyptic literature was a unique genre that flourished during the first and second centuries. This kind of literature often used symbolic pictures and visions to reveal divine truths hidden to the majority of mankind. When Revelation is considered alongside other apocalyptic works from the same time period, we find that there are a number of similarities, but also a large number of differences. This recognition leads scholar Vern Poythress to say
“We must not expect too much from comparisons of Revelation with extrabiblical apocalyptic literature. We learn mainly one thing: the use of complex symbolism was ‘in the air’ at the time when John was writing. It would not have seemed as strange then as it does now.”
Poythress then applies the point:
“Some people today come to Revelation with the recipe, ‘Interpret everything literally, if possible.’ That recipe misunderstands what kind of book Revelation is. Of course, John literally saw what he says he saw. But what he saw was a vision. It was filled with symbols, like the Beast of 13:1-8 and the seven blazing lamps in 4:5. It never intended to be a direct, nonsymbolical description of the future. People living in John’s own time understood this matter instinctively, because they recognized that John was writing in an ‘apocalyptic’ manner, a manner already as familiar to them as a political cartoon is to us today.”
Third and finally, we should recognize that Revelation also fits into the genre of the epistle. The Revelation was not given to John solely for his own enlightenment and edification. Within the book are letters to seven different churches in Asia Minor, and the first verse makes clear that Jesus wanted its message to be heard and understood by all His servants. Thus, Revelation is a letter from Christ to all His followers – those alive when the book was written, and the millions who have come after them.
Interpretation:
Throughout Christian history, there have been four different approaches to interpreting Revelation:
1. The Preterist Approach. Preterists emphasize that the message of Revelation was a message intended to serve churches in the first century, and that the book reveals “things that must soon take place” (1:1) to those that lived during that time. Therefore, the Preterist argues that much of Revelation describes events that were in the future for the early church but are now in our distant past. These climactic events include that fall of Jerusalem and/or the fall of the Roman Empire (i.e., the Beast). Preterists acknowledge that Revelation has much to teach us today, but emphasize that the events pictured are past, not future events.
2. The Futurist Approach. Futurists take the opposite approach from Preterists. They argue that the events described in Revelation are almost entirely future events that will take place at the very end of the present age. While most scholars lean towards a Preterist approach, most popular authors (i.e., Tim Lahaye, Hal Lindsey, etc.) teach a Futurist understanding. They rightly point out that many events pictured in Revelation do not appear to have already taken place (i.e., the second coming, the marriage supper of the Lamb, the creation of a New Earth, etc.)
3. The Historicist Approach. Though popular in past centuries, this approach has proven to be unworkable, and therefore has few proponents today. Historicists taught that Revelation describes in chronological order the main events of history from the first century to the end of all things. They try and find in Revelation pictures that can describe the medieval period, the Renaissance, the establishment of the U.N., etc. Some historicists, for example, argue that the Pope is the anti-Christ and that the locusts in Revelation are a picture of the rise of the Islamic empire.
4. The Idealist Approach. Unlike the three previous approaches, the Idealist approach argues that the visions of Revelation do not necessarily find fulfillment in one event (past or future), but apply to every generation of Christians. So, for example, the Beast in Revelation refers not only to the Roman Empire, but to every government throughout the church age that seeks to harm God’s people.
So which approach is best? Having previously considered the three primary genres of Revelation, (prophecy, apocalypse, and epistle) I think we can say with confidence that a combination of these approaches is appropriate. Consider:
Since Revelation is an epistle intended for real churches in the first century, it makes sense that we should approach the book asking what the visions in this book were intended to teach them. And since Jesus says that Revelation reveals things “that must soon take place” (1:1), we should expect at least a partial fulfillment of John’s visions during that time.
Since Revelation is a book of prophecy intended for all Christians at all times, we should expect that a future fulfillment of many of these prophecies is a legitimate expectation. When we look to the Old Testament book of Isaiah, for example, we see that many of the prophecies in that book had more than one fulfillment. Many of the prophecies that spoke about the coming of Christ actually spoke more immediately about the rise of Cyrus of Persia. The Biblical pattern is that prophecies have more than one fulfillment, and so we should approach Revelation with a similar expectation.
Finally, since Revelation is an apocalyptic book, there is real validity to the Idealist approach. It is highly unlikely that John wanted us to interpret many of the visions in this book literally. Rather, they are intended to teach real truths and speak of real events in a symbolic way.
But what about the historical approach? Of all the possible approaches, this one is the weakest. It is correct in noting that the visions in Revelation cover the period between the first and second comings of Christ, but it is incorrect in seeking to read the book as a chronological picture of history. Approaching the book this way leads to all sorts of fanciful speculation. In Revelation, consecutive visions often describe the same events, though from different perspectives. The historical approach fails to take this into account.
When we approach the book with these things in mind, we will see that the message of Revelation is that Jesus is coming again, evil will be defeated, and Christ and His people will reign victorious. The purpose of the book is to call Christians to endure till the end, holding fast to Christ and His commands even through periods of difficult persecution. I trust that this message and exhortation will be heard time and time again as we study Revelation.
Encouragement to Read
Before we end this lesson, I’d like to draw our attention to two points from the first three verses that should encourage us to take up and read Revelation. First, note that in 1:1 this book is called “the revelation of Jesus Christ”. In this title we see that this book is intended to reveal truth, not hide it. So be encouraged – Revelation has not been written as a puzzle to be figured out, but as a message to be understood. Despite what some have said, when we accept the book on its own terms, understanding the message of Revelation is easier than you may think.
Second, note that Revelation is the only book in Scripture that begins with a blessing on those who read it. “Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it…” [2] Those who consider what this book says and take it to heart will be blessed by God. So let’s ask God for His help, and read with an expectation to understand and to benefit.
It seems that Christians tend to hold one of two extreme positions concerning the book of Revelation: they either obsess about it, or disregard it. On the one hand, I’ve met some Christians who love the book of Revelation. They view the book as a complex puzzle to be solved, and spend great time and energy in striving to make sense of its most intricate details. They love to talk about “the signs of the time”, and often find themselves in passionate debate with others about the identity of the Beast, the meaning of the number 666, the coming of the Anti-Christ, the timing of the Rapture, etc. On the other hand, there are many more Christians who find themselves intimidated by the book. They find its contents strange and somewhat repelling, and may believe that they do not have what it takes to make sense of such a difficult book. The consequence is that they tend to avoid it altogether.
The purpose of this class is to offer a guide to Revelation that will help shed light on its meaning and message, hopefully drawing a path between the middle of these two positions. My prayer is that those who are apprehensive about the book will find that its message is not nearly as difficult to grasp as they may think, and to equip and encourage them to read the book with benefit regularly both privately and with others. For those in the other camp, I hope to help them approach the book not as a puzzle to be solved and debated, but as Scripture to be believed and obeyed. The ultimate aim of this class is one that can only be accomplished by God, namely, that He would glorify Himself by using this book to save and sanctify His people.
Author
Revelation 1:1 explains how the book came into existence:
“The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John…”
Let’s consider this verse one phrase at a time. First, we have the identification of the book: it is “the revelation of Jesus Christ”. This means that the chief subject of this book (like every other part of the Bible) is the person and work of Jesus. It is the revelation concerning Jesus Christ. Second, we are told that this revelation was given from God to His Son. This means that God is the ultimate author of the book. Third, we have the purpose of the book: to show the followers of Jesus “the things that must soon take place.” This emphasizes the prophetic nature of the book. Fourth, we learn that Jesus gave the revelation to “his servant John”, but not directly. Rather, “he made it known by sending his angel.”
So we can point to four distinct persons involved in the creation of this book: God the Father (its ultimate Author), Christ the Son, the angel who delivered it, and the Apostle John who wrote it down. We could also add to this list the Holy Spirit, the very breath of God who inspires all of Scripture (cf. 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:21).
Some people question whether the John who wrote Revelation is the same as the Apostle who walked with Christ and wrote the fourth Gospel. They point out that “John” was a very popular name in the first century (as it is today), and that the writer of Revelation could easily be another follower of Jesus by that name. However, there are two chief reasons to doubt that this is the case:
1. It seems unlikely that anyone but the Apostle John could have used his name without qualification and expected to be recognized. Any church receiving this letter would have immediately assumed from that it was from the apostle since there was no other John in early Christendom that shared his status, nor any other that shared his apostolic authority over the churches.
2. The early literature of the Christian church is unanimous in ascribing this book to the Apostle. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian seem all in agreement on this. Considering their closer chronological proximity to the writing of Revelation, it would be foolish for us to disregard their assessments unless their was a great deal of evidence to justify doing so.[1]
Date:
Revelation was probably written around 95 A.D. We arrive at this date by noting that Revelation (a) seems to assume that emperor worship is a current phenomenon, (b) recognizes a current persecution of Christians and anticipates its worsening, (c) speaks to conditions within the churches of Asia Minor that seem to point to a date later in the first century, (d) uses “Babylon” as a symbolic title for Rome (a not uncommon feature of Jewish Apocalyptic literature beginning in the last quarter of the first century), and (e) is dated during the reign of Emperor Domitian by the early church fathers (Irenaeus, Victorinus of Pettau, Eusebius, and others). There are some who argue for an earlier date (usually 65 A.D, during the reign of Nero), but the evidence above points best towards a later date.
Genre:
One of the first keys to understanding the book of Revelation is to recognize its genre. We would not read a poem the same way we would read a newspaper, nor would we read an essay in the same we way we would read the back of a cereal box. Once we understand what kind of book Revelation is, we will find that many of the difficulties in interpreting it begin to dissipate.
In considering the genre, we should first note that the book is a book of prophecy (cf. 1:3). In the Old Testament, prophecies were messages from God spoken through a prophet promising future blessings or curses for present obedience / disobedience. Prophecies also often remind people of God’s past acts of redemption or judgment. In Revelation, we encounter this past-present-future nature of prophecy in a unique way. It is as if the invisible world of spiritual warfare is unveiled to us through symbolism. We learn about the history of this warfare, the nature of this warfare during our age, and the future outcome. As in the Old Testament prophecies, Revelation does speak of future blessings and curses as well: future blessing for those who belong to Christ, and future judgment for the wicked (including particularly wicked powers, be they political or demonic.)
Second we should note that Revelation has many things in common with apocalyptic literature. In fact, the word translated “revelation” (1:1) is actually the Greek word “apocalypse”, which is why you may have heard this book referred to as “The Book of the Apocalypse”. Apocalyptic literature was a unique genre that flourished during the first and second centuries. This kind of literature often used symbolic pictures and visions to reveal divine truths hidden to the majority of mankind. When Revelation is considered alongside other apocalyptic works from the same time period, we find that there are a number of similarities, but also a large number of differences. This recognition leads scholar Vern Poythress to say
“We must not expect too much from comparisons of Revelation with extrabiblical apocalyptic literature. We learn mainly one thing: the use of complex symbolism was ‘in the air’ at the time when John was writing. It would not have seemed as strange then as it does now.”
Poythress then applies the point:
“Some people today come to Revelation with the recipe, ‘Interpret everything literally, if possible.’ That recipe misunderstands what kind of book Revelation is. Of course, John literally saw what he says he saw. But what he saw was a vision. It was filled with symbols, like the Beast of 13:1-8 and the seven blazing lamps in 4:5. It never intended to be a direct, nonsymbolical description of the future. People living in John’s own time understood this matter instinctively, because they recognized that John was writing in an ‘apocalyptic’ manner, a manner already as familiar to them as a political cartoon is to us today.”
Third and finally, we should recognize that Revelation also fits into the genre of the epistle. The Revelation was not given to John solely for his own enlightenment and edification. Within the book are letters to seven different churches in Asia Minor, and the first verse makes clear that Jesus wanted its message to be heard and understood by all His servants. Thus, Revelation is a letter from Christ to all His followers – those alive when the book was written, and the millions who have come after them.
Interpretation:
Throughout Christian history, there have been four different approaches to interpreting Revelation:
1. The Preterist Approach. Preterists emphasize that the message of Revelation was a message intended to serve churches in the first century, and that the book reveals “things that must soon take place” (1:1) to those that lived during that time. Therefore, the Preterist argues that much of Revelation describes events that were in the future for the early church but are now in our distant past. These climactic events include that fall of Jerusalem and/or the fall of the Roman Empire (i.e., the Beast). Preterists acknowledge that Revelation has much to teach us today, but emphasize that the events pictured are past, not future events.
2. The Futurist Approach. Futurists take the opposite approach from Preterists. They argue that the events described in Revelation are almost entirely future events that will take place at the very end of the present age. While most scholars lean towards a Preterist approach, most popular authors (i.e., Tim Lahaye, Hal Lindsey, etc.) teach a Futurist understanding. They rightly point out that many events pictured in Revelation do not appear to have already taken place (i.e., the second coming, the marriage supper of the Lamb, the creation of a New Earth, etc.)
3. The Historicist Approach. Though popular in past centuries, this approach has proven to be unworkable, and therefore has few proponents today. Historicists taught that Revelation describes in chronological order the main events of history from the first century to the end of all things. They try and find in Revelation pictures that can describe the medieval period, the Renaissance, the establishment of the U.N., etc. Some historicists, for example, argue that the Pope is the anti-Christ and that the locusts in Revelation are a picture of the rise of the Islamic empire.
4. The Idealist Approach. Unlike the three previous approaches, the Idealist approach argues that the visions of Revelation do not necessarily find fulfillment in one event (past or future), but apply to every generation of Christians. So, for example, the Beast in Revelation refers not only to the Roman Empire, but to every government throughout the church age that seeks to harm God’s people.
So which approach is best? Having previously considered the three primary genres of Revelation, (prophecy, apocalypse, and epistle) I think we can say with confidence that a combination of these approaches is appropriate. Consider:
Since Revelation is an epistle intended for real churches in the first century, it makes sense that we should approach the book asking what the visions in this book were intended to teach them. And since Jesus says that Revelation reveals things “that must soon take place” (1:1), we should expect at least a partial fulfillment of John’s visions during that time.
Since Revelation is a book of prophecy intended for all Christians at all times, we should expect that a future fulfillment of many of these prophecies is a legitimate expectation. When we look to the Old Testament book of Isaiah, for example, we see that many of the prophecies in that book had more than one fulfillment. Many of the prophecies that spoke about the coming of Christ actually spoke more immediately about the rise of Cyrus of Persia. The Biblical pattern is that prophecies have more than one fulfillment, and so we should approach Revelation with a similar expectation.
Finally, since Revelation is an apocalyptic book, there is real validity to the Idealist approach. It is highly unlikely that John wanted us to interpret many of the visions in this book literally. Rather, they are intended to teach real truths and speak of real events in a symbolic way.
But what about the historical approach? Of all the possible approaches, this one is the weakest. It is correct in noting that the visions in Revelation cover the period between the first and second comings of Christ, but it is incorrect in seeking to read the book as a chronological picture of history. Approaching the book this way leads to all sorts of fanciful speculation. In Revelation, consecutive visions often describe the same events, though from different perspectives. The historical approach fails to take this into account.
When we approach the book with these things in mind, we will see that the message of Revelation is that Jesus is coming again, evil will be defeated, and Christ and His people will reign victorious. The purpose of the book is to call Christians to endure till the end, holding fast to Christ and His commands even through periods of difficult persecution. I trust that this message and exhortation will be heard time and time again as we study Revelation.
Encouragement to Read
Before we end this lesson, I’d like to draw our attention to two points from the first three verses that should encourage us to take up and read Revelation. First, note that in 1:1 this book is called “the revelation of Jesus Christ”. In this title we see that this book is intended to reveal truth, not hide it. So be encouraged – Revelation has not been written as a puzzle to be figured out, but as a message to be understood. Despite what some have said, when we accept the book on its own terms, understanding the message of Revelation is easier than you may think.
Second, note that Revelation is the only book in Scripture that begins with a blessing on those who read it. “Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it…” [2] Those who consider what this book says and take it to heart will be blessed by God. So let’s ask God for His help, and read with an expectation to understand and to benefit.
[1] Some would argue that the difference in style between the Greek of Revelation the Greek of John’s Gospel and Epistles is so vast that this alone constitutes reason to second-guess the assessments of these early church fathers. Dionysius (an Egyptian bishop of the third century) was the earliest figure known to have made this argument. The point is that the Greek of the Gospel / Epistles is very polished, whereas the Greek of Revelation seems rough and unusual. However, there are several satisfying arguments that have been made to explain the difference in style, certainly enough to say that the stylistic differences are not convincing enough to reject the Apostle as the writer of Revelation. For a summary of these arguments, see Morris, 29-32.
[2] The practice of reading a book silently did not exist in the first century. Rather, this letter would have been read aloud at gatherings of the seven churches it was sent to (and perhaps others), and the people would have listened intently.
Comments / Questions / Criticisms appreciated.
1 comment:
Post a Comment