Resources for Paper on Revelation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed Roman

Puritan Board Freshman
Looking for some good resources for a paper I'm writing on Revelation.

I'm writing a paper on the different methods of interpreting Revelation. The idealist method, the historicist method, the preterist method, or the futurist method.

I am looking for any good resources if anyone knows any,

also, I'm looking for some good insights on old non-canonical apocalyptic literature that would be fairly well known in the time Revelation was written. So if you know of any good sources that would speak to this issue as well, I would love anything you know of.
 

greenbaggins

Administrator
Staff member
On Revelation, the research commentaries are by Beale, Aune, Smalley, Koester, and Osborne. These will all address the issue you raised. The Gregg book referenced will also be helpful. In addition, there is the Counterpoints book called Four Views on the Book of Revelation, edited by Gundry and Pate. You will want to get Poythress's take, which is concisely presented in The Returning King. Also make sure to check out Bauckham's book The Climax of Prophecy. Very helpful is Sam Storms's book Kingdom Come.
 

Reformed Roman

Puritan Board Freshman
Any helpful websites with information as well? Not looking to take an easy route but good websites with articles on the subject would be helpful.

Not in the way the other Zack was joking about lol. But articles on different viewpoints would be helpful
 

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
On Revelation, the research commentaries are by Beale, Aune, Smalley, Koester, and Osborne. These will all address the issue you raised. The Gregg book referenced will also be helpful. In addition, there is the Counterpoints book called Four Views on the Book of Revelation, edited by Gundry and Pate. You will want to get Poythress's take, which is concisely presented in The Returning King. Also make sure to check out Bauckham's book The Climax of Prophecy. Very helpful is Sam Storms's book Kingdom Come.
Would also add to those books listed the books done by Mounce and Boice.
 

Timotheos

Puritan Board Freshman
Wrote my ThM thesis in Rev., so I have some experience with these materials.

Found these sites to be helpful as well as the many resources mentioned already (especially the ones Lane listed).

https://www.revelation-resources.com/

also see

https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/revelation.php
(not sure when this was last updated... my 2014 article in Neotestamentica was not listed :( )

In addition, I felt like books from Kraybill and Friesen were very helpful to understand the what it takes to think in such pictorial and symoblic ways which we have lost in modern western thought.

Bauckham's short little book on the theology is quotable on every page. And Gorman's Reading Revelation Responsibly is very helpful as well.

I have so many pdf files on books, dissertations, articles, and book excerpts, I could hook you up if you email me.
 

yeutter

Puritan Board Senior
The most helpful commentaries on Revelation I have read are:
1. Leon Morris The Revelation of St. John Eerdmans
2. Herman Hoeksema Behold He Cometh Reformed Free Publishing Association
3 Wayne Mueller Revelation Northwest Publishing House

Canon Leon Morris treatment of Revelation might be especially helpful to you because he has a twenty-five page introduction that is of great value in understanding this kind of literary genre.

Also helpful regard to wrestling with this genre of literature are two books; that I ordinarily would not recommend.

1. Bruce Metzger Breaking the Code Abington
2. John Wick Bowman The First Christian Drama Westminster
 

Cymro

Puritan Board Junior
Best I have read is Rev C.D.Alexander on Revelation, available on line. The next Rev Hoeksema on Revelation.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Hello Zachary,

May I ask what is your own interpretive preference with respect to Revelation? Greg Beale's larger commentary on Rev does deal with "old non-canonical apocalyptic literature" a lot, particularly the Jewish around the time of John; he is "modified idealist" or eclectic, that is, drawing from the various interpretive schools while maintaining a basic idealist interpretive approach. Beale is perhaps the leading authority on Revelation from the amil view, although Dennis E. Johnson and Wm. Hendriksen are also excellent.

The beauty of Dean Davis', The High King of Heaven, is that his focus is on the hermeneutical (interpretive) approaches, and why some approaches violate Scripture and one —the Amillennial —does not. It is a large book, with in-depth examinations and critiques of all the schools.
 

Reformed Roman

Puritan Board Freshman
I purchased the smaller commentary on Revelation from Beale (smaller??? It was over 500 pages :p)

I also purchased the commentary on Revelation by Ladd. Since I am writing on the Millennium as well as interpreting Revelation I found it good to tackle two birds with one stone and get a couple of commentaries with different perspectives on the millennium.

Still working on my perspectives on certain issues. Haven't come to definite conclusions yet, some of these topics are no doubt very difficult to work through.
 

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
I purchased the smaller commentary on Revelation from Beale (smaller??? It was over 500 pages :p)

I also purchased the commentary on Revelation by Ladd. Since I am writing on the Millennium as well as interpreting Revelation I found it good to tackle two birds with one stone and get a couple of commentaries with different perspectives on the millennium.

Still working on my perspectives on certain issues. Haven't come to definite conclusions yet, some of these topics are no doubt very difficult to work through.
GE Ladd was outstanding in some regards, especially in his NT Theology book.
 

Andrew P.C.

Puritan Board Junior
Two classic free commentaries online for the Reformed Historicist position are:

James Durham's Commentary on Revelation

Thomas Goodwin, Works, Vol. 3

There is also Brakel's commentary that can be bought for cheap online.

A website as wel can be found here - http://www.historicism.net/
 

Reformed Roman

Puritan Board Freshman
Question for some of you. This might seem extremely basic but I am a little puzzled.

Partial preterist, partial futurist, or a historicist.

If your only a partial preterist, wouldn't you also be a partial futurist?

And what would be some distinctions between a partial preterist and a historicist? If only some prophecy has been fulfilled in the past, and some will still be fulfilled in the future, what is the difference between either one of those positions and a historicist viewpoint?

Very elementary questions, but I am very elementary on these things if I'm honest. Avoided these studies much in the past in the Christian life.
 

Timotheos

Puritan Board Freshman
Question for some of you. This might seem extremely basic but I am a little puzzled.

Partial preterist, partial futurist, or a historicist.

If your only a partial preterist, wouldn't you also be a partial futurist?

And what would be some distinctions between a partial preterist and a historicist? If only some prophecy has been fulfilled in the past, and some will still be fulfilled in the future, what is the difference between either one of those positions and a historicist viewpoint?

Very elementary questions, but I am very elementary on these things if I'm honest. Avoided these studies much in the past in the Christian life.
Want to know a secret? Preterism and futurism are almost the same. They both use the same hermeneutic and interpret the text to take place in a literal manner in the future at some point. The only difference is how far into the future (and when the writer actually wrote). The preterist would say that it was forecasting events that took place circa 70. The futurist would say that it was forecasting events... about whatever the current newspaper is reporting in the middle east.

Honestly, as you have pointed out, the historicist is the same, except they forecast into church history, although that is a silly thing since they always think they are the final generation (church of Laodicea). That means that view can't actually be interpreted correctly by the church until the end.

This leaves the idealist view. If you follow Beale, he takes the good features of the preterist view (apocalyptic must be interpreted in its historical setting to have any relevance to the audience), of the futurist view (new creation, return of Jesus, etc.), and the genre of apocalyptic which is idealism if it is going to have any meaningful sense for the church throughout every generation. Stick with Beale for Rev. I didn't use his smaller commentary in my thesis, but his fuller treatment was a gold mine of resources. If you can get it, his other book on Rev, John's Use of the OT in Revelation, is a home run as well.
 

Dachaser

Puritan Board Doctor
Want to know a secret? Preterism and futurism are almost the same. They both use the same hermeneutic and interpret the text to take place in a literal manner in the future at some point. The only difference is how far into the future (and when the writer actually wrote). The preterist would say that it was forecasting events that took place circa 70. The futurist would say that it was forecasting events... about whatever the current newspaper is reporting in the middle east.

Honestly, as you have pointed out, the historicist is the same, except they forecast into church history, although that is a silly thing since they always think they are the final generation (church of Laodicea). That means that view can't actually be interpreted correctly by the church until the end.

This leaves the idealist view. If you follow Beale, he takes the good features of the preterist view (apocalyptic must be interpreted in its historical setting to have any relevance to the audience), of the futurist view (new creation, return of Jesus, etc.), and the genre of apocalyptic which is idealism if it is going to have any meaningful sense for the church throughout every generation. Stick with Beale for Rev. I didn't use his smaller commentary in my thesis, but his fuller treatment was a gold mine of resources. If you can get it, his other book on Rev, John's Use of the OT in Revelation, is a home run as well.
Except for full blown Preterists, are we not all Futurists to some degree?
 

Stephen L Smith

Administrator
Staff member
I would also argue for Beale, but one serious dispensational work, not yet mentioned, is Robert Thomas' two vol commentary on Revelation. Beale has helpful critiques of Thomas, but it is worth reading.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top