REVELATION: INTRODUCTION

Revelation 1:1-2

“The” Note that this is not in the plural. It is one unified revelation.

“Revelation” = apocalypse. It is placed usually with the Jewish apocalyptic literature of 200 BC-100AD characterized by: divine revelation through a celestial being to the author or supposed author using symbolic language and bizarre imagery to describe how God will be intervening in human history to defeat the forces of evil that rule the world.

Rowley: “Speaking generally, the prophets foretold the future that should arise out of the present, while the apocalyptists foretold the future that should break into the present.”

“must soon take place” The beginning of the fulfillment is in mind here, not necessarily its final completion. This phrase certainly presents a problem for those who think that all of the book is about the distant future.

“of Jesus Christ” It is not only by Him, but also a revelation about who He is.

“to his servant John” There have been several proposals concerning his identity.

a. The Apostle John is a pseudonym (a common apocalyptic characteristic) but not to be considered as a fraud as we would consider it today. But there is no shred of evidence to support this idea.

b. John the Elder: This personage was known from some fragments of writing by Papias quoted by Eusebius to be a leader in Ephesus during the same time period. However, there is nothing concrete to connect that particular John with this book.

c. John the Baptist and his followers: This was proposed by J. M. Ford, but it seems unlikely that early Christians would adopt a Jewish apocalyptic book and make Christian additions to it.

d. John the Apostle: There are some definite differences in style between Revelation and John's Gospel, but this may be due to the different time period in the author's life or different subject matter. It fits the obvious authority the author had in Asia, and the fact that there was no need for him to further identify himself. Iraeneus and Justin Martyr give very early evidence that the apostle was the author.

Revelation 1:3

“the time is near” is similar to Mark 1:15 concerning Christ instituting God's kingdom at that time.

“Hear and keep” shows that the emphasis of the whole book is not on digesting details of future events, but on demanding an ethical response on the part of the hearer / reader.

Revelation 1:9-10

The questions regarding the time of writing and authorship are interrelated. Dates from 41-117 AD have been proposed. The two most probable time periods are at the end of Nero's reign (about 70 AD) or during the reign of Domitian (81-96 AD). Both were times of heavy persecution of Christians by Rome.

Literary characteristics

Rev. 1:11 indicates that it may be apocalyptic literature, but it is also an epistle, just like Paul's epistles, sent to real churches existing at the time of writing. Therefore it is important to look for historical allusions to what was going on at the time to fully understand it.

Rev. 1:12-16 provides one small demonstration that the book is firmly rooted in Old Testament language and allusions.

Old Testament Parallels to Revelation 1

Revelation 1                                  Old Testament Parallels

v. 12 seven lampstands (churches)                Zechariah 4:2, 10b (eyes of the Lord)

vv. 13-15 one like the son of man                 Ezekiel 1:26-28; Daniel 7:13

v. 16 mouth like a sharp sword (Christ)        Isaiah 49:2 (Isaiah)

One controversial area of discussion: If Revelation uses the same language as an OT text, does that mean it refers to (a) the same event, (b) a similar event foreshadowed by the OT event, or (c) just utilizes symbolic language that the audience would be familiar with (definitely the last option for the first and last examples above).

This is just the first of many basic disagreements regarding the way Revelation is to be read, and each different reading affects how one pictures future events. We need to have humility regarding our own understanding when dealing with Christians who have a diametrically opposed view.

Revelation 1:20 brings up a second area of disagreement: how to interpret its language. Are the visions literal, physical sightings by John that he could not understand because he didn't know modern technology? It is highly doubtful. Symbolic language, including numbers, characterizes the book. Use this verse as a guide for understanding symbols elsewhere in the book. Note that the image has no physical characteristics in common with what it refers to, only thematic and spiritual similarities. It is figurative rather than literal language.

The third valid difference of opinion relates to the basic nature of the body of the book (chapters 4-22):

a. Preterist View: reflects the first century AD situation only. Many details can be best understood in these terms and also the reason for the veiled symbolism, but it is probably going too far to state, as they do, that all events in the book were fulfilled by the fall of Jerusalem (70 AD) or the fall of Rome (476 AD)

b. Historicist View: covers the scope of history from the 1^st century AD through the Reformation period mainly. However, it is doubtful that such a book would be in the Bible if it meant little to the original audience or to us today.

c. Futurist View: concerned with end-time events only and could not be understood at all by its original audience or by anyone before relatively modern times.

d. Idealist View:stresses general principles and ideas in the book, usually expressed in symbols, that are applicable to Christians living in any age. This is why just about every generation since it was written has felt that it applied mainly to them. One commentator has dismissed this view as seeing Revelation as only a set of “pretty pictures.” In fact, some very devout Christian scholars have held to this view over the years.

e. Eclectic View: uses all of the above approaches as appropriate to any given text (G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation)

Revelation 1:19 IF Revelation contains future events, some see a threefold division of past, present and future. By this interpretation, the divisions of the book might be Rev. 1, Rev. 2-4, and Rev. 5-22, respectively. But more properly, this verse should read, “the things you are about to see, that is, present and future.” According to this understanding, chapters 1-4 may constitute the first division. However, the letters in chapters 2-3 each contain past, present, and future events.

There will be a more detailed analysis of structure of the book given later, but the discussion of the book in this set of lessons will be organized around generally accepted literary divisions.

A fourth area of major disagreement is related somewhat to the above options, and that is the various ways that chronology is handled by commentators. Beginning with the 3^rd cent. AD (Victorinus), the recapitulation view was propounded in which the visions (usually counted as seven, but some only see two) recap history from the first to second coming of Christ (as in the letters of Revelation 2-3. Starting in the year 1340, a strictly chronological understanding of Revelation was proposed by a French theologian (Nicolas of Lyra). The third option, which I personally prefer, is that of progressive recapitulation. According to this view, each of the sections in the book cover the period between Christ's coming to earth and his Second Coming. However, each succeeding section concentrates more and more on the end of the story and less and less on Christ's Incarnation.