What is Revelation all about?

[MW]

It is easy to lose sight of the aim of the Book of Revelation amidst the multitude of theories put forward about its visions. What needs to be borne in mind is the intended message or what it means to convey. The opening chapters provide a number of windows through which to see into heaven as it were. One of these is chapter 5, which immediately precedes the loosing of the seals. Patrick Fairbairn has captured the remarkable features of this scene. I quote from his book, The Interpretation of Prophecy (1865, pp. 401-403). He observes the redeemed church in a state of expectancy, not of defeat but of victory, looking to the cross and crown of King Jesus, as the pledge that she shall reign on earth. It is somewhat surprising, then, to see so many interpreters proceed to unfold the visions as if this scene were obscured from their eye. The message is clear -- victory belongs to the church, not in falling down and worshipping the beast of worldly power, but in living and sacrificing to our crucified Redeemer.

The first thing that presents itself to our notice is the account given in chap. 5 of the seven-sealed book, remarkable not only for the number of its seals, but also for the marvellous difficulty connected with the opening of them. After the {402} challenge had been thrown out to the wide universe for any one to attempt it, no one, it is said, was found capable of undertaking the task, but the Lion of the tribe of Judah, and the Root of David. It is clear from this, that by the opening of the book, something more must have been meant than the mere disclosure of its contents; it must have involved, besides, the personal appropriation of these, with a view to their actual accomplishment. Nothing else could have created so gigantic a difficulty. It is clear, also, from the designation of Christ on the occasion, as the Lion of the tribe of Judah, and the Root of David, that the book must have borne respect to a work of war and conquest – a work in which heroic energy and lion-like strength should require to be put forth, and that too for the purpose of vindicating the peculiar honour and blessing secured in covenant to the house of David. What, then, was this? No other than the universal possession and sovereignty of the earth, the right to reign over it, to its uttermost bounds, in the name of the Lord (Gen. 49:9, 10; Num. 24:9; Ps. 2, 22, etc.). The book, therefore, with which none but this royal personage could intermeddle, was, in other words, the book of the inheritance – laying open the way by which the possession must be made good. And it was a sealed book – seven times sealed – not only because there were to be successive stages in the course, such as might fitly be distributed into that number, but because the course itself was to be a hidden one – not patent to men’s view, nor one they could beforehand have anticipated, but a complicated mystery, lying under the secrecy of a sevenfold seal. Hence, as if to explain where peculiarly the mystery lay, it is in the character, not of a lion-like hero, or royal personage, but “of a lamb as it had been slain,” that Christ is seen approaching to take the book, and enter on the task of disclosing and fulfilling its burden. The songs of praise, also, that are presently afterwards ascribed to Him by the redeemed, celebrate His worth and goodness, especially on this account, that He had “redeemed them by His blood;” and they declared Him to be worthy to take the book, and open the seals thereof, because {403} of his having been slain, and redeemed to Himself a people, whom He has made kings and priests unto God. When they farther add, “And we shall reign on the earth,” they point, not only to the expected realisation of their hopes, but also to the assurance, which the action with the book had brought in respect to that expectation; they now see the end desired and looked for, clearly in prospect. Plainly, therefore, the mystery of this book is the mystery of Christ’s cross and crown: all that is wonderful and arduous in the working out of His claim to the conquest and dominion of the earth, has its explanation in the difficulty of getting men, within the professing church and without, to receive the doctrine of a crucified Redeemer, as the foundation of all blessing, and to carry out the spirit of humble, holy, self-sacrificing, and devoted love which it breathes. To bring this doctrine and this spirit to the ascendant in the affairs of men, is the mystery and the burden of the seven-sealed book.

 

[moral necessity]

Thank you, Rev. Winzer, for your thoughts.

I'm currently working through Matthew Poole's commentary on Revelation.
Do you foresee any major differences in interpretation from that of Patrick Fairbairn?

Blessings!

 

[MW]

Thank you, Rev. Winzer, for your thoughts.

I'm currently working through Matthew Poole's commentary on Revelation.
Do you foresee any major differences in interpretation from that of Patrick Fairbairn?

Blessings!

Hi Charles. Which Poole are you going through? The annotations or the synopsis? Poole was a chronological historicist. That means he taught the visions related to successive events which were to take place one after the other. However, in his Synopsis he also provides the interpretation of the preterists and some of the synchronists. (Also note the annotations are by one of his continuators.) Fairbairn's position was synchronic historicist/idealist. This is the one that I take -- idealist, synchronous, and revised historicist; but I also see the need of preterism to give historical context to the visions. This provides an internal "control" to properly apply the vision and restrain personal bias.

 

[moral necessity]

It's his 3-volume commentary published by Hendrickson. I assume it's the annotations. Thanks for the comparison of the two authors. So the difference is chronological historicist vs. synchronic historicist. The one is a straight line while the other is more of a repeating loop? Can you explain the idealist concept when you get a chance?

Thanks and blessings!

 

[MW]

The idealist concept is simply that what is described is not literally historical but ideally pervades history. The prophet is describing a state of things rather than events per se. Fairbairn expresses it well (p. 132): "the poetical elevation appears in the strongly idealistic or imaginative form, which the delineations and addresses of the prophets very commonly assume. Instead of speaking in the severe and exact style of history, they delight rather to throw around the actual world the life and lustre of a higher sphere; so that symbols to their view often take the place of realities; inanimate objects appear with the properties of sentient beings; the past seems to live again in the future; and, overleaping the gulph of ages, the dead of former generations are seen still prolonging their existence, and consciously intermingling in the affairs of men."

You have something similar in physics where instead of space and time the three dimensions of space are united with the single dimension of time to give you a space-time contiuum. It is perspectival rather than successive. It gives you a relative view of history from the standpoint of the observer.

 

[moral necessity]

The idealist concept is simply that what is described is not literally historical but ideally pervades history. The prophet is describing a state of things rather than events per se. Fairbairn expresses it well (p. 132): "the poetical elevation appears in the strongly idealistic or imaginative form, which the delineations and addresses of the prophets very commonly assume. Instead of speaking in the severe and exact style of history, they delight rather to throw around the actual world the life and lustre of a higher sphere; so that symbols to their view often take the place of realities; inanimate objects appear with the properties of sentient beings; the past seems to live again in the future; and, overleaping the gulph of ages, the dead of former generations are seen still prolonging their existence, and consciously intermingling in the affairs of men."

You have something similar in physics where instead of space and time the three dimensions of space are united with the single dimension of time to give you a space-time contiuum. It is perspectival rather than successive. It gives you a relative view of history from the standpoint of the observer.

Thanks for this...much appreciated!
Where do you think we are in history in terms of the seals and vials?
Or is that the linear view?
Have they all been opened, in your opinion?

Blessings!

 

[MW]

Thanks for this...much appreciated!
Where do you think we are in history in terms of the seals and vials?
Or is that the linear view?
Have they all been opened, in your opinion?

Blessings!

Yes, that's the linear view. The idealist view does not separate these but treats them as pervading history. This means we cannot locate ourselves on a timeline since they are descriptive of the whole of the gospel dispensation. However, it tends to be too general and makes it difficult to apply. I take a redemptive-historical approach which relates them to the old covenant. I am still working out the details, but the seals relate to the book of the covenant, trumpets to the inheritance of the land, and vials to the holy city. In the 7th of each series we see Christ triumphantly ruling by the gospel. This can then be applied historically because we see parallels under the gospel dispensation in connection with the church.

 

[arapahoepark]

Yes, that's the linear view. The idealist view does not separate these but treats them as pervading history. This means we cannot locate ourselves on a timeline since they are descriptive of the whole of the gospel dispensation. However, it tends to be too general and makes it difficult to apply. I take a redemptive-historical approach which relates them to the old covenant. I am still working out the details, but the seals relate to the book of the covenant, trumpets to the inheritance of the land, and vials to the holy city. In the 7th of each series we see Christ triumphantly ruling by the gospel. This can then be applied historically because we see parallels under the gospel dispensation in connection with the church.

Will you be writing a commentary?

 

[MW]

Will you be writing a commentary?

Possibly. I am very hard to please and am my own worst critic, so there is that to overcome. It depends on whether I can get the details to a point where I am satisfied. There is a little more time to spend in the Old Testament first. It would be good to see a commentary that is preterist, idealist, and historicist all in one. If I don't do it I am sure the Lord will raise up someone else.

 

[pilgrimmum]

Thanks for this...much appreciated!
Where do you think we are in history in terms of the seals and vials?
Or is that the linear view?
Have they all been opened, in your opinion?

Blessings!

As an Ammillenial Historicist I believe we are at the time of "Satan's loosing for a short season" (Rev 20:7-9) to go out to deceive the nations once more and to gather Gods enemies to surround the Camp of the Saints. This occurs just before Christs return and the Resurrection and Day of judgment Rev 20:10-15. We believe the Lords return is not that far away.

 

[MW]

We believe the Lords return is not that far away.

How do you come to this conclusion?

 

[TheInquirer]

I am still working out the details, but the seals relate to the book of the covenant, trumpets to the inheritance of the land, and vials to the holy city.

It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on how closely you believe the symbology of Revelation relates to the rest of Scripture - whether you see a tight correspondence in their function or if the symbols are operating in a related way but with some conceptual advancement. I ask because I am fascinated by hermeneutical methods used in interpreting the book and most interested by methods that try to adhere tightly to a “Scripture interprets Scripture” approach. One weakness I see with Beale is sometimes too much deference to extra-biblical sources in my amateur opinion.

 

[MW]

It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on how closely you believe the symbology of Revelation relates to the rest of Scripture - whether you see a tight correspondence in their function or if the symbols are operating in a related way but with some conceptual advancement. I ask because I am fascinated by hermeneutical methods used in interpreting the book and most interested by methods that try to adhere tightly to a “Scripture interprets Scripture” approach. One weakness I see with Beale is sometimes too much deference to extra-biblical sources in my amateur opinion.

Scripture interpreting Scripture is definitely the right way forward. I think we are all amateurs next to Beale, but I agree he tends to depend too heavily on other eschatological material. He does do a good job of drawing out Old Testament themes and allusions.

Revelation seems to me to provide "closure" on Old Testament expectations while opening up the fulness of New Testament revelation in Christ. This is clear when there is an interplay between what John hears and what he sees. What he hears is in keeping with OT hopes but what he sees is in terms of what Christ has accomplished. So there is a tight correspondence but also significant advancement. I think the advancement means we cannot confine the symbols to their OT fulfilment, as we see in preterism; but preterism gives us the historical context for understanding them and seeing the "idealist" development in the NT age. One classic example of this is the seven candlesticks, which is an evident expansion on the single candlestick of the tabernacle and directly related to the churches as ideal light-bearers in the world.

 

[earl40]

What I find interesting is that most of today's views of Revelation are looking forward to something other than the return of Jesus. Personally I can't wait to seeing Him when I die or He returns like he did at the ascension.

 

[Ed Walsh]

How do you come to this conclusion?

Good question!

 

[TheInquirer]

A few years ago when I did an intro to Revelation, this is what I came up with for a theme. I think its a conglomeration of Beale, Hendrickson, and numerous other authors along with my own reading (I have no originality):

The book of Revelation urges Christian readers to be faithful disciples and witnesses in light of Satanic attacks via government (beast from the sea), false religion (beast from the land), and worldly seduction (Babylon). Jesus, the faithful witness, has conquered and the saints conquer also through him and will be rewarded for their faithfulness.

 

[MW]

A few years ago when I did an intro to Revelation, this is what I came up with for a theme. I think its a conglomeration of Beale, Hendrickson, and numerous other authors along with my own reading (I have no originality):

The book of Revelation urges Christian readers to be faithful disciples and witnesses in light of Satanic attacks via government (beast from the sea), false religion (beast from the land), and worldly seduction (Babylon). Jesus, the faithful witness, has conquered and the saints conquer also through him and will be rewarded for their faithfulness.

That is good for application. We should never lose sight of the practical use of the book for Christians in all ages.

I suppose "Satanic attacks via government" does not suggest anything inherently evil in government and can be understood in a qualified sense as speaking of evil government.

 

[TheInquirer]

Yes, it can definitely be further modified. I used Jesus' examples in speaking to the 7 churches as a paradigm for what I believed to be the purpose of the entire book for all generations. I was also influenced by Graeme Goldsworthy's view of seeing the slain lamb on the throne as a major image and contributing theme for the book. But as with all theme statements, it is difficult to decide what to include and not include. For adult Sunday School (which is what the lesson was for), I wanted my audience to be encouraged to read the book and see it as a source for their personal edification rather than from a seemingly irrelevant dispensational futurist perspective that most of them had been taught.

I might see Babylon differently if I become fully convinced of the papacy as the antichrist (very close, need more study).

 

[moral necessity]

Yes, that's the linear view. The idealist view does not separate these but treats them as pervading history. This means we cannot locate ourselves on a timeline since they are descriptive of the whole of the gospel dispensation. However, it tends to be too general and makes it difficult to apply. I take a redemptive-historical approach which relates them to the old covenant. I am still working out the details, but the seals relate to the book of the covenant, trumpets to the inheritance of the land, and vials to the holy city. In the 7th of each series we see Christ triumphantly ruling by the gospel. This can then be applied historically because we see parallels under the gospel dispensation in connection with the church.

So, it wouldn't really apply to world events at all, but be more about the process of Christ redeeming the church?
Do you know of others who have taken this approach and wrote a book on this view?

Thanks and blessings!

 

[MW]

So, it wouldn't really apply to world events at all, but be more about the process of Christ redeeming the church?
Do you know of others who have taken this approach and wrote a book on this view?

It is not so much "Christ redeeming the church," although it includes that. It is more about how Christ fulfils the eschatology of the OT with its ramifications for the churches as distinct from Israel. Because the OT eschatology is concerned with Israel's mission to "the nations," there is an application to world events, but now the churches are the light-bearers to the world.

For the idealist view I recommend Milligan's commentary in the Expositor series: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/42251/42251-h/42251-h.htm

As I have noted there are problems with this view when it is not contextualised within the history of redemption. It needs the help of preterism to ground it historically. The problem with preterism is that it is preoccupied with the events surrounding the destruction of the temple in AD 70.

For application to world events your standard historicist commentary (Poole or Henry) will be a good guide to see the relevance in terms of "the churches." Here, again, I do not hold to their chronology or the event focused interpretation; but they show a good instinct for application.

 

[Alive in Christ]

I honestly believe that the book of Revelation is the conclusion of the Christian life. There are those who go on unto perfection, those who go into tribulation and overcome, and those who go into tribulation, apostatize and are themselves overcome. Remember, Jesus warned the churches that those whose works were evil would face a terrible wrath, while those who endured faithfully would be kept from tribulation. To live in sin is to deny that you know Christ, as it is written, "he who sins has never known Him". Peter denied Christ, and was sifted as wheat. The man of Corinth was also handed over to Satan, that his spirit might be saved "in the day of the Lord". The Bible says that the son of perdition will be brought to nothing by the glory of Christ's coming. Even though chapter divisions are not inspired, I don't think it's a coincidence what John 6:66 says. And in 1 John, antichrists are identified as those who "went out from among us". Furthermore, the going out was for the purpose of establishing "that they are not all of us". This is the tribulation that comes upon the wicked.

The man of sin is the old man. The deadly head wound is the power of sin that was broken. The apostate is the man of sin revived. The mark of the beast is spiritual - here is "wisdom" (wisdom is associated with Solomon). It is the number "of a man". His mark is 666. That was the number associated with the son of David's apostasy. It was the price of his betrayal. God had commanded Solomon not to multiply horses, wives, or gold for himself, lest his heart turn away from God. Solomon disobeyed God, and received 666 talents of gold. Buying and selling is spiritual. Jesus talked about selling everything and buying Him. Yet the apostate sells Jesus and buys the world, such as when Judas sold Jesus and bought a field. This is the exchanging of the truth for a lie. Only those who take the mark make such an exchange.

As a former backslider, I had a terrible battle with the man of sin. But he is destroyed by the glorious appearing of the Lord Jesus. It is by looking at Jesus that the man of sin is destroyed. If I were to reject Jesus, I would become an antichrist. But that is not something that can ever happen to the elect of God. The elect can go into tribulation (i.e be handed over to Satan), but they will never be lost.

Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, “Who are these, clothed in white robes, and from where have they come?” I said to him, “Sir, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Revelation 7:13-14

And I saw what appeared to be a sea of glass mingled with fire—and also those who had conquered the beast and its image and the number of its name, standing beside the sea of glass with harps of God in their hands. And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying,

“Great and amazing are your deeds,
O Lord God the Almighty!
Just and true are your ways,
O King of the nations!
Revelation 15:2-3