Revelation: Interpretation

Revelation: Interpretation

Genre:

When reading any work (and you’ll learn more about this next year in Principles of Interpretation) determining the genre of the work is incredibly important in understanding how to read it. Revelation, according to Duvall and Hays, falls into three categories. The book itself starts out as a typical NT letter and closes in a similar fashion to these works as well.

The book also claims to be a prophetic letter. Look at Revelation 1:3 real fast: “Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it; for the time is near.” With this we need to have some basic understanding of how to read prophecy and what it is in the first place. Duvall and Hays note: “Biblical prophecy includes both prediction of the future and proclamation of God’s truth for the present (usually the emphasis is on proclamation)” (286). Typically, I think when we hear about prophecy our minds go straight to that future component; however, in Biblical prophecy the main component is a proclamation of God’s truth (look for instance at the prophet Haggai).

Revelation also fits into the “apocalyptic” genre. Revelation starts out with this Gk word ἀποκάλυψις. It is quite literally the “Apocalypse of Jesus Christ.” The term means “reveal” or “uncover.” It is a “revelation” if you will. The writings within this group focus on a “divine revelation, typically through a heavenly mediator, in which God promises to intervene in human history and overthrow evil empires. It is believed that this form of literature grew out of Hebrew prophecy and presents something of an intensified version of it.

The primary reason why this form of literature is so foreign to us (though it would have been very familiar to the people living between 200 B.C. and 200 A.D.) is the frequent use of images. This in and of itself would not be too big of an issue. We recognize what Jesus means when he uses imagery like the “salt of the world” or the “yeast of the Pharisees.” The trouble with apocalyptic literature is the blending of fantastical images that creates the composite whole. We understand the meaning when Jesus talks about the yeast of the Pharisees, but what on earth is meant by: “a beast coming out of the sea that has ten horns and seven heads with ten crowns on its horns and each head having a blasphemous name. It resembles a leopard, has feet like a bear and a mouth like a lion”? These images, as we discussed last class period, shape the “prophetic-counter image” against the Roman propaganda of the time, which is why it is also so important to remember the historical context in which the work was written.

When was Revelation written? What was going on at that time? What did Domitian demand to be called? Rome had a set propaganda (Rome says she is…) and Revelation lays bare how God views Rome.

Methods of Interpretation:

This brings us to the different approaches to reading Revelation. We are not going to get caught up in the millennium discussion today (that’s a conversation for a different day). Instead, we are going to turn our attention to the four main approaches to the book.

The Preterist Approach

This approach has also been called the “contemporary-historical” approach, and according to Moo and Carson, it is the most common today. They write that this approach: “insists that the visions of John grow out of and describe events in John’s own day. The symbols in the visions all refer to people, countries, and events in the world of that day; and John’s purpose is to exhort his readers to remain faithful to Christ as they wait for God to deliver them into his eternal kingdom” (719-20). In the end, those who follow this approach suggest that most (many) of the events of Revelation have been fulfilled in the first century. The strength of this approach is that it takes the historical context very seriously and it would be easy to see how an interpretation of the text that follows this approach would apply to the original audience.

The Historicist (Historical) Approach

Duvall and Hays description of this approach is succinct enough: “(it) views Revelation as a map or outline of what has happened throughout church history from the first century until the return of Christ” (288). I am inclined to think that many of the somewhat odd interpretations of Revelation are born from this approach. It really began in earnest in the Middle Ages when there was a strong conviction that the millennium was impending. Moo and Carson note: “To buttress their beliefs, they found in the Revelation a sketch of history from the time of Christ to their own day” (720). This same approach was taken up during the time of the Reformers as well with several prominent voices identifying the beast in Revelation with the papacy (720).

The Futurist Approach

This approach takes seriously the notion that the Revelation is an eschatological work (a work describing the time of the end). According to this view, most of the book is related to still future events that will immediately precede the end of history (or of this age). When you think futurist approach think THE END. Essentially those who hold this view suggest that everything from chapter 4 onward finds its fulfillment in the Last Days. Moo and Carson point out that there is a moderate form of this approach that maintain that some of the events (specifically those in the earlier chapters) “take place in history before the end” (720). Those who hold to the Futurist Approach argue that it “comes closest to doing justice to the nature and purposes of Revelation” (720).

The Idealist Approach

This approach is quite different from the others. The argument from some scholars is that the previous approaches have gone on the wrong track altogether when trying to identify the events described in John’s visions. Moo and Carson write: “The symbolism is designed, they argue, to help us understand God’s person and ways with the world in a general way, not to enable us to map out a course of events” (720). Accordingly, Revelation is understood as not referring to any particular time but as describing the ongoing struggle between good and evil.

What you will find in most commentaries on Revelation is that no one strictly adheres to anyone of these approaches. Instead, (at least from what I have found) most scholars take a more “eclectic approach” since there is quite apparently some truth within each of these. For instance, we would all fullheartedly contend that we ought to take the historical context very seriously. We would also contend that the NT is God’s word to his people, first to the original audience, but containing theological principles that are true throughout all time. Thus, we may be intrigued by both the preterist view and the idealist view.

However, we would also acknowledge that in other prophetic works of Scripture, the author described future events against the backdrop of the current circumstances that the original audience was living in (consider the prophecy concerning the virgin birth in Isaiah). Advocates of the futurist view would argue that John does the same: “It is likely, for instance, that John’s depiction of the “great prostitute,” “Babylon,” that is doomed to fall (18:1–4), has some reference to the Roman Empire of his own day, and that the terrible persecution described in Revelation would remind John’s readers of their own oppression. To some extent, then, John, while describing the end, describes it against the background of his first-century situation. But this is typical of biblical prophecy in both Old and New Testaments” (720–721).

Millennial Views

Aside from these interpretive approaches, you will also have to deal with different views concerning the so-called “millennium” evidenced in Rev 20:1-6. Let’s read that text. There has not been a consensus on what John meant by this from the earliest readings of the text, and there are three camps that scholars generally fall into.

1. Premillennialism

This view holds that Christ will return BEFORE (pre) the thousand years to defeat and destroy the beast. Carson writes: “Then Satan will be ‘bound’ for a thousand years (20:2), during which time some believers (martyrs and perhaps others) will receive resurrection bodies and will reign with Christ on the earth over the descendants of those surviving the battle of Armageddon. In this view, Satan will be released after the thousand years to deceive the nations and assemble an army for battle; he will then be finally defeated and judged. Many premillennialists interpret the millennium to be precisely one thousand years, though some hold that the millennium symbolizes a long period of time” (ZSB 2584-85). (SHOW THE CHART).

2. Postmillennialism

This view holds that Christ will return AFTER (post) a literal or symbolic thousand-year period in which God’s kingdom has been established and his rule on earth is evident. The BIBD notes that: “Here the idea is that God will gradually build his church over a millennium prior to Christ’s return” (THE BAKER ILLUSTRATED BIBLE DICTIONARY). This is a golden age of “unprecedented advances of the gospel throughout the world” (BIBD). Those who hold to this view today typically understand that thousand-year period in Revelation to be a symbolic number. Here the church enjoys a period of evangelistic abundance, but after that period Satan will be released, and then Christ will return and defeat him totally.

3. Amillennialism

The basic notion behind this view is that there is no literal reign of Christ on earth for a thousand-year period. Donald Campbell notes: “The prefix “a” means “no” or “none,” and thus amillennialism is the view that there will be no literal reign of Christ on earth for 1,000 years” (231). This interpretation was popularized by Saint Augustine.

Campbell records sufficiently the basic teachings associated with this reading: “1. The kingdom is in existence now between Christ’s two advents. Since Christ is ruling now from heaven, He will not reign on the earth for 1,000 years. “We are in the Millennium now.” 2. The kingdom is either the church on earth (Augustine’s view now perpetuated by the Roman Catholic Church) or the saints in heaven (the view of Benjamin Warfield). Thus there will be no future reign of Christ on the earth, and 1,000 is a symbolic number indicating a long period of time. 3. The promises to Israel about a land, nationality, and throne are being fulfilled now in a spiritual way among believers in the church. 4. God’s promises to Israel were conditional and have been transferred to the church because the nation did not meet the condition of obedience to God. 5. Christ is ruling now in heaven where He is seated on the throne of David, and Satan is now bound between Christ’s two advents” (231).

Reading Revelation

The following recommendations come from Duvall and Hays in Grasping God’s Word.

1. Read Revelation with humility. If you find a “Revelation-made-easy” approach, you should be very cautious about this, for as Duvall and Hays point out: “Revelation is not easy!” There seems to be something within us that wants to be able to reduce everything down to this digestible little morsel that’s quick and easy to comprehend. Revelation does not lend itself to this way of thinking. We have to be willing to admit that there will be a certain amount of uncertainty. Duvall and Hays state: “People who must satisfy their curiosity or people who are unwilling to live with any uncertainty are those most likely to read into Revelation things that are not there. Beware of interpreters who appear to have all the answers to even the smallest of questions” (289). While reading the text do not pass up the opportunity to be humble.

Try to discover the message to the original readers

Here is a principle that we have been seeing repeated throughout our studies: “If our interpretation makes no sense for the original readers, then we have probably missed the meaning of the passage.” See, the tendency in reading Revelation is to jump right over the original audience and start trying to find the beast with ten horns and ten crowns in our own situation. I like the questions that Duvall and Hays pose here because they get at the heart of this interpretive mistake: “It also implies that in Revelation God was not really speaking to the very first Christians. Doesn’t that seem arrogant on our part as contemporary interpreters? What if Christ does not return until A.D. 4000? Would Revelation still have a message for us since we would not be the last generation?” (289). God’s word is God’s word to his people, but it is his word first to those who are the original recipients. It was not given to them just to leap frog over them and be spoken to us. Therefore, it would have to mean something to them. As Stuart writes: “As with the Epistles, the primary meaning of the Revelation is what John intended it to mean, which in turn must also have been something his readers could have understood it to mean” (289–290).

Don’t try to discover a strict chronological map of future events

Revelation does not even pretend to unfold in a neat chronological fashion. The example your textbook gives is exactly the one I would have given. In chapter 6 the Apostle is given a vision of seven seals that are all opened with each bringing calamities and judgments upon the earth culminating in the opening of the sixth seal being opened. With the opening of the sixth seal the Apostle sees a vision of the very end of the age. Reading in verse 17 of chapter 6 we find: “For the great day of their wrath (the wrath of the one who sits on the throne and the Lamb) has come, and who can stand?” It is not until chapter 8 when the seventh seal is opened, and once this one is opened we have seven trumpets blown in succession and again, this takes us to the end of the age. In 11:15 we hear the loud voices in heaven saying: “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever.” Twice we’ve caught a glimpse of the end of the age and we are only halfway through the book! So your textbook gives this sound advice: “Rather than searching for a chronological map of future events in Revelation, we encourage you to grasp the main message in each vision about living in the here and now” (291).

Take Revelation seriously, but don’t always take it literally

This is not to suggest that what is written is not true. What we’re saying here is that genre should be taken into consideration as we are reading a text. If I were to use a figure of speech like: “My daughter has the longest hair of any four year old”, then if you went and found a four year old with longer hair would you conclude that I was lying to you? No, you would understand that I was speaking hyperbolically to get across the point that she has very long hair. “One of the ground rules of interpretation is that our method of interpretation should always match the literary genre used by the author” (291). John states that what he records has been “signified” which is to say that God communicated truths to John through the vehicle of signs or symbols. Thus, unlike other works in which we are suppose to read it as literal unless the context clearly requires a symbolic reading, the genre of Revelation suggests that this rule is to be reversed. “The word “signify” in Revelation 1:1 suggests that when we come to this book, the general rule is just the reverse: Interpret symbolically unless the context calls for a literal reading” (291).

Pay Attention when John Identifies an Image

One of the best clues for interpreting an image within a passage is when John tells us exactly what it is. This in turn helps us identify the other images that he does not as clearly define within the passage. For instance, looking at Rev 12, John identifies the red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads as Satan in 12:9. This provides a helpful clue for who the woman clothed with the sun is, for at the very least we have discovered that she is hated by Satan.

Look to the OT and Historical Context when interpreting images and symbols

Because of the complex manner in which John conveys the message in Revelation we find ourselves knowing what he has said but being at a complete loss for what he means by what he said. I found translating Revelation to be a rather easy task in comparison to the Pauline works, yet in certain ways it was more difficult to exegete. So, when we understand the words yet fail to understand what was meant by them, we have two places that we should turn to: the OT and the Historical context. Revelation is chalked full of OT references and allusions. Your textbook states that the OT makes an appearance in almost 70 percent of Revelation’s verses. So, if we go back to the books from which John is alluding to, we can better grasp what he means in Revelation.

Above all, focus on the main idea and don’t press all the details

When working with Revelation it is important to allow the images to have the impact that they are intended to. When you look at a painting you take in the whole before you examine the details. This is what you need to do when interpreting Revelation. Allow the painting to be observed as a whole before examining the details that way you get a sense of the main idea before analyzing how the individual elements contribute to that idea.

For instance, in Rev 12 we find intense imagery. A woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head is about to give birth. The red dragon who is so monstrously huge that his tail swipes away a third of the stars positions himself before her to devour the child, but once she gives birth to the male child who will rule with an iron scepter, God snatches him up to the throne. The woman flees from the dragon to a place God has prepared for her. Then a war breaks out in heaven between the dragon and Michael and his angels. The dragon is cast out of heaven, and he (who is identified here as Satan) in his great fury (knowing that his time is short) pursues the woman who gave birth. Yet, God continues to protect the woman, even giving her the two wings of the great eagle to escape. As the dragon spews water like a river at the woman, the earth opens up and swallows the river. He then goes and wages war with the rest of her offspring who are identified as “those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.” What is the main idea within this image? What details would it be easy to get lost in?