Chris' intro to revelation
Intro: The book of Revelation has always been scary for me. In the past it was because it had to do with the end of the world and judgment and hell. Now it is a humble fear of realizing I am ill equipped to expound on such a special book. But if we take the name of the book seriously then we find comfort that spiritual things that have been hidden in the past, are now revealed. Did you know that we almost didn’t have the book of Revelation in our Bible? Can you imagine the Bible without Revelation? Much of the Bible shows Jesus’ glory and preeminence but without the book of Revelation we wouldn’t have such a clear picture of the future victory that our Savior owns!
Author: Was this a different “John” from the one who was beloved by Jesus? Did he disagree with the apostle Paul? If he were alive today would he not considered a Christian? These are Professor of Religion at Princeton University, Elaine Pagels assertions.
Pagels says, “The author of Revelation was like an activist crusading for traditional values. In his case, he was a devout Jew who saw Jesus as the messiah. But he didn’t like the message that the apostle Paul and other followers of Jesus were preaching. This new message insisted that gentiles could become followers of Jesus without adopting the requirements of the Torah. It accepted women leaders, and intermarriage with gentiles, Pagels says. The new message was a lot like what we call Christianity today” (Source 3).
She doesn’t know it but I would say it quite a compliment to call us so similar to the Christians of Paul and John’s day!
She continues, “‘There’s no indication that [John] read Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount or that he read the gospels or Paul’s letters,’” she says. “….He doesn’t even say Jesus died for your sins.” Pagels must have missed “Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood” (Rev. 1:4).
The truth is Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8). Early tradition unanimously identified him as John the apostle, author of the fourth Gospel and three epistles. For example, important second century witnesses to the Apostle John's authorship include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. Many of the book's original readers were still alive during the lifetimes of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus - both of whom held to apostolic authorship." Although there are differences between John's other books and Revelation, "they are insignificant." There are parallels: "only John's Gospel and Revelation refer to Jesus Christ as the Word (19:13; John 1:1). Revelation (1:7) and John's gospel (19:37) translate Zechariah. 12:10 differently from the Septuagint, but in agreement with each other. Only Revelation in the Gospel of John describe Jesus as the Lamb (5:6,8; John 1:29); both describe Jesus as a witness (cf. 1:5; John 5:31,32)" (Source 4).
Four kinds of interpretation
[1] "Preterist Interpretation regards the book as referring to its own day: Christianity's Struggle with the Roman Empire” (Source 1, p. 684). This idea is very much alive today. Elaine Pagels, a Professor of Religion at Princeton University, wrote a book called Revelations: Visions, Prophecy & Politics in the book of Revelation, newly reprint in February, 2013 (Source 2). A CNN article picks four of the biggest myths about Revelation that Pagels had “unearthed”: 1. “It’s about the end of world’, 2. “the numerals 666 stand for the devil”, 3. “the writer of Revelation was a Christian”, 4. “there is only one book of Revelation”* (Source 3). Pagels states that John (FYI: this wasn’t the disciple, but a “devout Jew and mystic”) hated Emperor Nero so the book of Revelation was “anti-Roman tract and a piece of war propaganda” about how God would overthrow Rome. (Apparently Pagels doesn’t know that by this time Nero was gone, Emperor Domitian was in power and Trajan was about to take over, see “Background of the Book” below). MacArthur says, "this view conflicts with the book's own often repeated claim to be prophecy (1:3; 22:7,10,18,19)" (Source 4). Also just from chapters 3 & 4 (as well as other places): after John has been prophesying about how the churches need to obey God because He is coming to judge, then he is told about things that must happen “after this.” If all God was concerned with was wiping out the Romans then we only need chapters 2 & 3.
*Pagels points 2-4: I deal with #2 (the 666 thing) under “Significance of Other Numbers” below. See the section above titled “Author” regarding #3 (the assertion that John wasn’t a Christian). Finally, #4 (this isn’t the only book of Revelation) says that there were tons of revelatory books, so why should we believe this one? Pagels says this book of Revelation is in the Bible primarily because Bishop Athanasius… saw Revelation as a useful political tool.” While it’s true that there were other apocalyptic books around the same time they weren’t inspired by the Holy Spirit and didn’t stand up to the test of time. For more on John’s contemporaries who acknowledged that this is true revelation of Jesus Christ see the list from Jamieson, Fausset and Brown at http://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/jfb/Rev/Rev_000.cfm?a=1168001 .
[2] “Historical Interpretation is that the book was designed to Forecast a General View of the Whole Period of Church History, from John's time on to the End of the World: a sort of Panorama, a series of Pictures, delineating the Successive Steps and Outstanding Features of the Churches Struggle to Final Victory: ‘A Vision of the Ages’; ‘Pictures of the Great Epochs and Crisis of the Church’” (Source 1, p. 684). MacArthur states, "this interpretive method robs Revelation of any meaning for those to whom it was written. It also ignores the time limitations the book itself places on the unfolding events (cf. 11:2; 12:6,14; 13:15). Historicism has produced many different – and often conflicting – interpretations of the actual historical events contained in Revelation" (Source 4).
[3] “Futurist Interpretation centers the book largely around the time of the Lord’s Coming and the End of the World” (Source 1, p. 684). MacArthur says, “Only this view does justice to Revelation's claim to be prophecy and interprets the book by the same grammatical – historical method as chaps. 1-3 and the rest of Scripture" (Source 4).
[4] The Idealist or “Spiritualist Interpretation separates the imagery of the book entirely from any reference to Historical Events – those of John’s day, or those at the time of the End, or those intervening – and deems it to be a Pictorial Representation, in highly figurative language, of the Great Principles of Divine Government applicable to all times” (Source 1, p. 684). MacArthur says, "This view...contains neither historical allusions nor predictive prophecy. This view also ignores Revelations prophetic character and, if carried to its logical conclusion, severs the book from any connection with actual historical events. Revelation then becomes merely a collection of stories designed to teach spiritual truth" (Source 4).
Background of the Book
These visions were given, and the book written, in the lurid light of burning martyrs. The Church was 66 years old. It had made enormous growth. It had suffered, and was suffering, terrific Persecutions. The First Imperial Persecution of Christians, 30 years before this book was written, was that of Nero, A.D. 64 -67... The Second Imperial Persecution was instituted by Emperor Domitian (A.D. 95). It was short, but extremely severe. Over 40,000 Christians were tortured and slain. This is the Persecution in which John was banished to the aisle of Patmos (1:9). The Third Persecution, that of Trajan, was soon to begin (A.D. 98)... And not only persecution from Without, but the Church itself, from Within, was beginning to show signs of Corruption and Apostasy. God gave these visions, evidently, to help steady the Church for the awful days ahead." (Source 1, p. 686).
The "Seven Beatitudes" of Revelation
There are Seven "Blessed's" in the book. Whether this was of design, or just so happened, we do not know.
"Blessed is he that reads this prophecy" (1:3).
"Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord" (14:13).
"Blessed is he that watches" (for the Lord's Coming) (16:15).
"Blessed are those bidden to Lamb's marriage supper" (19:19).
"Blessed is he that has part in the first resurrection" (20:6).
"Blessed is he that keeps the words of this book" (22:7).
"Blessed are they that wash their robes" (22:14).
(Source 1, pp. 688-689).
Significance of Other Numbers
Certain other numbers are used in such a way that they are thought to be in themselves a sort of language, with meanings beyond their numerical value. Here are some of them:
3: the numerical signature of God.
4: the numerical signature of Nature, Creation.
7: 3 plus 4: the signature of Totality.
12: 3 times 4: signature of God's People.
10: signature of Worldly Power.
(Source 1, p. 689).
Elaine Pagels, a Professor of religion at Princeton University says that 666 doesn’t stand for the devil. She says that the author of revelation was describing an “incarnation of evil: The Roman emperor, Nero…the author of Revelation couldn’t safely name Nero, so he used the Jewish numerology system to spell out Nero’s imperial name” (Source 3). While Pagels is right, 666 doesn’t stand for Satan, John does make it clear it stands for the Beast (NKJV, 13:18: “…calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666”). Even Irenaeus who lived about 80 years after John’s vision says, “We do not hazard a confident theory as to the name of Antichrist; for if it had been necessary that his name should be proclaimed openly at the present time, it would have been declared by him who saw the apocalyptic vision; for it was seen at no long time back, but almost in our generation, towards the end of Domitian's reign” (Source 5).
References:
Source 1: Halley's Bible Handbook.
Source 2: http://www.amazon.com/Revelations-Visions-Prophecy-Politics-Revelation/dp/0143121634
Source 3: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/31/four-big-myths-about-the-book-of-revelation
Source 4: John MacArthur, John MacArthur Study Bible, Revelation: Author and Date, p. 1989-1990.
Source 5: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, http://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/jfb/Rev/Rev_000.cfm?a=1168001.
Author: Was this a different “John” from the one who was beloved by Jesus? Did he disagree with the apostle Paul? If he were alive today would he not considered a Christian? These are Professor of Religion at Princeton University, Elaine Pagels assertions.
Pagels says, “The author of Revelation was like an activist crusading for traditional values. In his case, he was a devout Jew who saw Jesus as the messiah. But he didn’t like the message that the apostle Paul and other followers of Jesus were preaching. This new message insisted that gentiles could become followers of Jesus without adopting the requirements of the Torah. It accepted women leaders, and intermarriage with gentiles, Pagels says. The new message was a lot like what we call Christianity today” (Source 3).
She doesn’t know it but I would say it quite a compliment to call us so similar to the Christians of Paul and John’s day!
She continues, “‘There’s no indication that [John] read Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount or that he read the gospels or Paul’s letters,’” she says. “….He doesn’t even say Jesus died for your sins.” Pagels must have missed “Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood” (Rev. 1:4).
The truth is Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8). Early tradition unanimously identified him as John the apostle, author of the fourth Gospel and three epistles. For example, important second century witnesses to the Apostle John's authorship include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. Many of the book's original readers were still alive during the lifetimes of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus - both of whom held to apostolic authorship." Although there are differences between John's other books and Revelation, "they are insignificant." There are parallels: "only John's Gospel and Revelation refer to Jesus Christ as the Word (19:13; John 1:1). Revelation (1:7) and John's gospel (19:37) translate Zechariah. 12:10 differently from the Septuagint, but in agreement with each other. Only Revelation in the Gospel of John describe Jesus as the Lamb (5:6,8; John 1:29); both describe Jesus as a witness (cf. 1:5; John 5:31,32)" (Source 4).
Four kinds of interpretation
[1] "Preterist Interpretation regards the book as referring to its own day: Christianity's Struggle with the Roman Empire” (Source 1, p. 684). This idea is very much alive today. Elaine Pagels, a Professor of Religion at Princeton University, wrote a book called Revelations: Visions, Prophecy & Politics in the book of Revelation, newly reprint in February, 2013 (Source 2). A CNN article picks four of the biggest myths about Revelation that Pagels had “unearthed”: 1. “It’s about the end of world’, 2. “the numerals 666 stand for the devil”, 3. “the writer of Revelation was a Christian”, 4. “there is only one book of Revelation”* (Source 3). Pagels states that John (FYI: this wasn’t the disciple, but a “devout Jew and mystic”) hated Emperor Nero so the book of Revelation was “anti-Roman tract and a piece of war propaganda” about how God would overthrow Rome. (Apparently Pagels doesn’t know that by this time Nero was gone, Emperor Domitian was in power and Trajan was about to take over, see “Background of the Book” below). MacArthur says, "this view conflicts with the book's own often repeated claim to be prophecy (1:3; 22:7,10,18,19)" (Source 4). Also just from chapters 3 & 4 (as well as other places): after John has been prophesying about how the churches need to obey God because He is coming to judge, then he is told about things that must happen “after this.” If all God was concerned with was wiping out the Romans then we only need chapters 2 & 3.
*Pagels points 2-4: I deal with #2 (the 666 thing) under “Significance of Other Numbers” below. See the section above titled “Author” regarding #3 (the assertion that John wasn’t a Christian). Finally, #4 (this isn’t the only book of Revelation) says that there were tons of revelatory books, so why should we believe this one? Pagels says this book of Revelation is in the Bible primarily because Bishop Athanasius… saw Revelation as a useful political tool.” While it’s true that there were other apocalyptic books around the same time they weren’t inspired by the Holy Spirit and didn’t stand up to the test of time. For more on John’s contemporaries who acknowledged that this is true revelation of Jesus Christ see the list from Jamieson, Fausset and Brown at http://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/jfb/Rev/Rev_000.cfm?a=1168001 .
[2] “Historical Interpretation is that the book was designed to Forecast a General View of the Whole Period of Church History, from John's time on to the End of the World: a sort of Panorama, a series of Pictures, delineating the Successive Steps and Outstanding Features of the Churches Struggle to Final Victory: ‘A Vision of the Ages’; ‘Pictures of the Great Epochs and Crisis of the Church’” (Source 1, p. 684). MacArthur states, "this interpretive method robs Revelation of any meaning for those to whom it was written. It also ignores the time limitations the book itself places on the unfolding events (cf. 11:2; 12:6,14; 13:15). Historicism has produced many different – and often conflicting – interpretations of the actual historical events contained in Revelation" (Source 4).
[3] “Futurist Interpretation centers the book largely around the time of the Lord’s Coming and the End of the World” (Source 1, p. 684). MacArthur says, “Only this view does justice to Revelation's claim to be prophecy and interprets the book by the same grammatical – historical method as chaps. 1-3 and the rest of Scripture" (Source 4).
[4] The Idealist or “Spiritualist Interpretation separates the imagery of the book entirely from any reference to Historical Events – those of John’s day, or those at the time of the End, or those intervening – and deems it to be a Pictorial Representation, in highly figurative language, of the Great Principles of Divine Government applicable to all times” (Source 1, p. 684). MacArthur says, "This view...contains neither historical allusions nor predictive prophecy. This view also ignores Revelations prophetic character and, if carried to its logical conclusion, severs the book from any connection with actual historical events. Revelation then becomes merely a collection of stories designed to teach spiritual truth" (Source 4).
Background of the Book
These visions were given, and the book written, in the lurid light of burning martyrs. The Church was 66 years old. It had made enormous growth. It had suffered, and was suffering, terrific Persecutions. The First Imperial Persecution of Christians, 30 years before this book was written, was that of Nero, A.D. 64 -67... The Second Imperial Persecution was instituted by Emperor Domitian (A.D. 95). It was short, but extremely severe. Over 40,000 Christians were tortured and slain. This is the Persecution in which John was banished to the aisle of Patmos (1:9). The Third Persecution, that of Trajan, was soon to begin (A.D. 98)... And not only persecution from Without, but the Church itself, from Within, was beginning to show signs of Corruption and Apostasy. God gave these visions, evidently, to help steady the Church for the awful days ahead." (Source 1, p. 686).
The "Seven Beatitudes" of Revelation
There are Seven "Blessed's" in the book. Whether this was of design, or just so happened, we do not know.
"Blessed is he that reads this prophecy" (1:3).
"Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord" (14:13).
"Blessed is he that watches" (for the Lord's Coming) (16:15).
"Blessed are those bidden to Lamb's marriage supper" (19:19).
"Blessed is he that has part in the first resurrection" (20:6).
"Blessed is he that keeps the words of this book" (22:7).
"Blessed are they that wash their robes" (22:14).
(Source 1, pp. 688-689).
Significance of Other Numbers
Certain other numbers are used in such a way that they are thought to be in themselves a sort of language, with meanings beyond their numerical value. Here are some of them:
3: the numerical signature of God.
4: the numerical signature of Nature, Creation.
7: 3 plus 4: the signature of Totality.
12: 3 times 4: signature of God's People.
10: signature of Worldly Power.
(Source 1, p. 689).
Elaine Pagels, a Professor of religion at Princeton University says that 666 doesn’t stand for the devil. She says that the author of revelation was describing an “incarnation of evil: The Roman emperor, Nero…the author of Revelation couldn’t safely name Nero, so he used the Jewish numerology system to spell out Nero’s imperial name” (Source 3). While Pagels is right, 666 doesn’t stand for Satan, John does make it clear it stands for the Beast (NKJV, 13:18: “…calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666”). Even Irenaeus who lived about 80 years after John’s vision says, “We do not hazard a confident theory as to the name of Antichrist; for if it had been necessary that his name should be proclaimed openly at the present time, it would have been declared by him who saw the apocalyptic vision; for it was seen at no long time back, but almost in our generation, towards the end of Domitian's reign” (Source 5).
References:
Source 1: Halley's Bible Handbook.
Source 2: http://www.amazon.com/Revelations-Visions-Prophecy-Politics-Revelation/dp/0143121634
Source 3: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/31/four-big-myths-about-the-book-of-revelation
Source 4: John MacArthur, John MacArthur Study Bible, Revelation: Author and Date, p. 1989-1990.
Source 5: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, http://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/jfb/Rev/Rev_000.cfm?a=1168001.