How can we be confident in our theories about the Book of Revelation?

[YESLORDIWILL]

If one follows proper rules of interpretation and has some knowledge of Scripture I believe it's possible to understand the eschatological books of the Bible.

I agree. How would you interpret these verses?

Deut 18:20-22, But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

So how long does the prophet get for his words to come to pass? 2000 years? How could the prophet be put to death if he is predicting events that would happen hundreds or thousands of years later?

 

[Jack Terrence]

A big reason that people fail to understand the book of revelation is because they are confused about who Jesus is. another big reason is because most Christians don't realize that the bride of Christ isn't all Christians. Those two factors cause people not to have a clear picture of what Revelation is about.

No, the reason we don't understand the book of Revelation is because it was not written for us. It was written for the seven churches of Asia and the explanation was given to them only. An angel was appointed to each church to give the explanation of the visions. We do not have the luxury of an angelic messenger to give us explanation today.

 

[Jack Terrence]

If one follows proper rules of interpretation and has some knowledge of Scripture I believe it's possible to understand the eschatological books of the Bible. Just because the books are more challenging is no reason to abandon them.

The reason we don't understand the book of Revelation is because it was not written for us. It was written for the seven churches of Asia and the explanation was given to them only. An angel was appointed to each church to give the explanation of the visions. We do not have the luxury of an angelic messenger to give us explanation today.

 

[Der Alte]

I agree!

I think one of the reasons most modern interpreters continue to misunderstand Revelation is that they try to insert themselves into the story.

If we keep it in its first century context as it was written we realize it was not secret at all to his intended audience. Then, again, we can take his words at face value: "And he said to me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near" (Rev. 22:10).

The time of His coming was near for them!

The Preterist view is that all of Revelation was completed by 70 AD. All of the early church fathers viewed those events as yet future. See e.g.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book V
And He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, because the former things have passed away."

Tertullian On the Resurrection of the Flesh
from the same eyes indeed which had formerly wept, and which might weep again, if the loving-kindness of God did not dry up every fountain of tears. And again: "God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death,"[448]​

 

[A New World]

I agree. How would you interpret these verses?

Deut 18:20-22, But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

So how long does the prophet get for his words to come to pass? 2000 years? How could the prophet be put to death if he is predicting events that would happen hundreds or thousands of years later?

I read somewhere that a prophet who prophesied events in the distant future must have also made prophecies relevant to his own time. Then he could have been evaluated as either a prophet of God or a false prophet.

But, if a prophet declared an event to be near, shortly, or soon, and it did not come to pass in that time frame, he should be considered a false prophet.

 

[Ubuntu]

There are a few hermeneutic rules that makes the book of Revelation easier to understand:

a) Find Christ in Revelation and it becomes much easier to understand the rest of the passages. Try to understand how the passages relates to Christ and the gospel, directly or indirectly. The book isn't merely about beasts or terrible curses, it's first and foremost a Revelation of Christ!

b) The book in Revelation is the book where all other books in the Bible meet. There are allusions and echoes to the Old Testament in almost every single verse. Unless we learn to identify and understand these allusions it is not likely that we will understand much of Revelation.

c) We should acknowledge that the literary structures in the Book of Revelation carries meaning.

- - -

I'm not saying that this book is easy. On the other hand it is a very rewarding book to study once you grasp the basic principles behind it. It is certainly possible to understand this book!

 

[createdtoworship]

I see so many posts, and I'll admit I've even made one or two or so myself, explaining some elaborate theory about what the events/things/beings in this book represent. Now no one seems to really agree about all of it, though. You'd think at least some of us would read a person's theory and if it were the true one, we'd be convinced because we were trying to agree with the true theory. But it seems more as if we just use our theories to justify our worldview somehow--like if we have certain views about certain political and church groups, we mold our Book of Revelation model in accordance with those attitudes, so we don't have a reason to listen to anyone else's model. Doesn't that make our theories suspect?

a few things, expositional constancy, illigitimate totality transfer, and using a good literal version.

those are all keys to prophetic interpretation.

anyway, too much for this thread (I don't have the time to post it all)

but here a small quote from my favorite commentary on revelation which is available free online ironically:

"
7.2. The Art and Science of Interpretation

http://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...on/the-art-and-science-of-interpretation.html

The practice of interpretation is known as hermeneutics.

The word hermeneutics is ultimately derived from Hermes the Greek god who brought the messages of the gods to the mortals, and was the god of science, invention, eloquence, speech, writing, and art. As a theological discipline hermeneutics is the science of the correct interpretation of the Bible.1

Bible study consists of three primary steps: observation, interpretation, and application.2 . After observing the text, interpretation should yield the understanding of God’s Word which He intended resulting in its fruitful application in the life of the reader. If interpretation goes astray, then a proper understanding will not result and the application of God’s message to the life of the reader will not be what God intended.

Our position is that the book of Revelation is to be interpreted normally, like any other writing, and especially like the rest of the Scriptures. We part company here from those who seek to classify the book as being representative of the apocalyptic genre so they can apply a mystical or spiritual “spin” to the text and make it mean all manner of things.

D.L. Cooper gives a reasonable definition of normal interpretation in his Golden Rule of Interpretation:

When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense, therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.—The Golden Rule of Interpretation, D.L. Cooper3"

-quote from Biblestudytool.com

 

[A New World]

The Preterist view is that all of Revelation was completed by 70 AD. All of the early church fathers viewed those events as yet future. See e.g.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book V
And He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, because the former things have passed away."

Tertullian On the Resurrection of the Flesh
from the same eyes indeed which had formerly wept, and which might weep again, if the loving-kindness of God did not dry up every fountain of tears. And again: "God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death,"[448]​

The testimony of Revelation itself is an imminent fulfillment of the events described therein. I choose to rely on Scripture.

 

[createdtoworship]

The testimony of Revelation itself is an imminent fulfillment of the events described therein. I choose to rely on Scripture.

when one makes a mistake in literal interpretation, and the wall is breached......

then there is no longer any rational barrier stopping us from interpreting the Bible in all our minds, as we will, all different and all unique.

in which there would be no organization, no harmony, no anything.

because the Bible would be reduced to mush, and to foggy poetry, nothing more.

we must use the same rules we apply to civil law, and mathmatics, and chemistry and apply them as well to other literal works....

such as the Bible.

there is no honesty with interpreting the prior with literalism, but not the Bible.

if society can't run on laws that are metaphorical and allegorical, how should we expect the maker of the universe to do so?

 

[Der Alte]

The testimony of Revelation itself is an imminent fulfillment of the events described therein. I choose to rely on Scripture.

Nonsense! Many of the events in Revelation are still future. I suppose the entire early church, 70 AD-300 AD, who were native Greek speakers, was wrong but modern Bible readers 2000+ years later somehow got it right?

 

[A New World]

Nonsense! Many of the events in Revelation are still future. I suppose the entire early church, 70 AD-300 AD, who were native Greek speakers, was wrong but modern Bible readers 2000+ years later somehow got it right?

You say the events of Revelation are in our future, John explicitly wrote of events that must be fulfilled in his imminent future. In fact, every NT writer posited the end of the age as about to be, near, shortly, or soon. Jesus Himself said it would occur in their generation. The evidence is so plentiful, it doesn't matter who denied, or denies, it. I must stand on truth as Scripture presents it.

 

[Der Alte]

You say the events of Revelation are in our future, John explicitly wrote of events that must be fulfilled in his imminent future. In fact, every NT writer posited the end of the age as about to be, near, shortly, or soon. Jesus Himself said it would occur in their generation. The evidence is so plentiful, it doesn't matter who denied, or denies, it. I must stand on truth as Scripture presents it.

There were some events in Revelation which were to happen in the near future from John's time, there were other events which were prophesied in the distant future. Appears to me you stand on the truth of what some pastor(s) or teacher(s) has told you. As I have shown above the early church, late 1st to the early 3rd centuries, believed that some events were yet future from their times. For example Irenaeus, a native Greek speaker, who was a student of Polycarp who had studied under John. If these events had already happened they would have known it.

Irenaeus [A.D. 120-202.] Against Heresies. Book V Chap. XXXVI
Then, when all things are made new, he shall truly dwell in the city of God. For it is said, “He that sitteth on the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And the Lord says, Write all this; for these words are faithful and true. And He said to me, They are done.” (Rev_21:5, Rev_21:6) And this is the truth of the matter.

Tertullian [a.d. 145-220] The Five Books Against Marcion. Book III Chap. XXIV
At present, too, it would be superfluous250 for this reason, that our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem,251 “let down from heaven,” (Rev_21:2) which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;” (Gal_4:26) and, while declaring that our πολίτευμα, or citizenship, is in heaven, (Phi_3:20, “our conversation,” KJV) he predicates of it252 that it is really a city in heaven.​

 

[4x4toy]

Elisha saw Elijah carried up to Heaven and no one knows Moses grave site ..
At the transfiguration they appeared .. The Kingdom of God is now .. Every eye shall see Him when He returns .. What was the day and hour every eye saw Him and who claims they did ? Six days after He stated some would see the Kingdom come , some did ..

 

[A New World]

There were some events in Revelation which were to happen in the near future from John's time, there were other events which were prophesied in the distant future. Appears to me you stand on the truth of what some pastor(s) or teacher(s) has told you. As I have shown above the early church, late 1st to the early 3rd centuries, believed that some events were yet future from their times. For example Irenaeus, a native Greek speaker, who was a student of Polycarp who had studied under John. If these events had already happened they would have known it.

Irenaeus [A.D. 120-202.] Against Heresies. Book V Chap. XXXVI
Then, when all things are made new, he shall truly dwell in the city of God. For it is said, “He that sitteth on the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And the Lord says, Write all this; for these words are faithful and true. And He said to me, They are done.” (Rev_21:5, Rev_21:6) And this is the truth of the matter.

Tertullian [a.d. 145-220] The Five Books Against Marcion. Book III Chap. XXIV
At present, too, it would be superfluous250 for this reason, that our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem,251 “let down from heaven,” (Rev_21:2) which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;” (Gal_4:26) and, while declaring that our πολίτευμα, or citizenship, is in heaven, (Phi_3:20, “our conversation,” KJV) he predicates of it252 that it is really a city in heaven.​

I don't believe God requires me to agree with, know, or even understand the opinions of men. I do believe I'm responsible to read, study, and do my best to understand His Word. If the opinions of men line up with the Word, I will incorporate those opinions into my understanding.

None of the so-called church fathers are around for us to ask them how they interpret various passages or if their opinions have changed over the course of time. All we have is what they've written and trust that it's been preserved accurately by well meaning groups or individuals.

When I go to Scripture and read the Words of Jesus:
"Then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. "Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender, and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. "So you also, when you see these things happening, know that it is near--at the doors!" (Mark 13:26,28,29)

And then I read the words of James:
"Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, waiting patiently for it until it receives the early and latter rain. You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near. Do not grumble against one another, brethren, lest you be condemned. Behold, the Judge is standing at the door!" (Jam. 5:7-9)

The context of both Jesus' and James words was the coming of the Lord. Jesus said when those of that generation saw certain things happening, they would know that it was near, at the door.

Then James, writing during that generation, told the twelve tribes scattered abroad to be patient, to establish their hearts. Why? Because the coming of the Lord was near! And, the Judge was, at that time, standing at the door!

I'm compelled to accept the inevitable intelligent, logical, reasonable conclusion. Jesus said there would be signs of His coming and that they would know when it was near. James told his contemporary audiences that the coming of the Lord was near.

If Irenaeus and/or Tertullian were alive today and on this forum interacting with me I'd ask them what I'm asking you...What do you believe the apostle James was teaching his audiences?

 

[Der Alte]

I don't believe God requires me to agree with, know, or even understand the opinions of men. I do believe I'm responsible to read, study, and do my best to understand His Word. If the opinions of men line up with the Word, I will incorporate those opinions into my understanding.

Cop-out! Without those early Christians you would not have a Bible to read and study.

None of the so-called church fathers are around for us to ask them how they interpret various passages or if their opinions have changed over the course of time. All we have is what they've written and trust that it's been preserved accurately by well meaning groups or individuals.

See previous response. Were you to read a Greek lexicon you would know that we know the meaning of many Greek words based on how the ECF used them.

When I go to Scripture and read the Words of Jesus:
"Then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. "Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender, and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. "So you also, when you see these things happening, know that it is near--at the doors!" (Mark 13:26,28,29)

"They will see" Someone other than Jesus' immediate audience "will see." When did they see "the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory?" Where is that recorded in the Bible or history? When did God "send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven?" When did the world "see these things happening?"

And then I read the words of James:

"Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, waiting patiently for it until it receives the early and latter rain. You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near. Do not grumble against one another, brethren, lest you be condemned. Behold, the Judge is standing at the door!" (Jam. 5:7-9)

James 5:7-9 is a reference to Matt 24:33. And all the signs of Matthew 24 have yet to appear.

The context of both Jesus' and James words was the coming of the Lord. Jesus said when those of that generation saw certain things happening, they would know that it was near, at the door.

Then James, writing during that generation, told the twelve tribes scattered abroad to be patient, to establish their hearts. Why? Because the coming of the Lord was near! And, the Judge was, at that time, standing at the door!

Which generation? The generation which will see all the signs of Matthew 25 has not yet been revealed.

I'm compelled to accept the inevitable intelligent, logical, reasonable conclusion. Jesus said there would be signs of His coming and that they would know when it was near. James told his contemporary audiences that the coming of the Lord was near.

Good for you. All the signs of Matthew 24 have not yet appeared.

If Irenaeus and/or Tertullian were alive today and on this forum interacting with me I'd ask them what I'm asking you...What do you believe the apostle James was teaching his audiences?

James must be understood in agreement with the totality of scripture. Correct doctrine cannot be based on 1 or 2 out-of-context proof texts.

 

[A New World]

Without those early Christians you would not have a Bible to read and study.

I agree. I am thankful to God that He used men to preserve His Word. That doesn't change the fact that these men were fallible and their opinions uninspired.

"They will see" Someone other than Jesus' immediate audience "will see." When did they see "the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory?" Where is that recorded in the Bible or history? When did God "send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven?" When did the world "see these things happening?"

If you notice, there are at least two groups spoken of here by the Lord. There were the unbelievers facing imminent judgment at the end of the age and the believers of that generation who would see the gospel vindicated at the revelation of Jesus Christ. "They will see" refers to unbelieving Israel, the harlot, mystery Babylon who is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt (Rev. 11:8)

James 5:7-9 is a reference to Matt 24:33. And all the signs of Matthew 24 have yet to appear.

James must be understood in agreement with the totality of scripture. Correct doctrine cannot be based on 1 or 2 out-of-context proof texts.

OK let's examine James statement of the imminent coming of the Lord and the accompanying judgment. If I want to know what the New Testament says regarding the time of the end of the age I not only read James but every other inspired NT writer.

Peter knew he was living in the last time and he told his audience, those of the Dispersion in the first century:

"who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you" (1 Pet. 1:5,20)

"But the end of all things is near; therefore be serious and watchful in your prayers...For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?" (1 Pet. 4:7,17)

Peter told his audiences that their salvation was "ready (an expression of imminence) to be revealed in the last time." What did Peter mean by the present tense expression, "the end of all things IS NEAR"?

Did John teach that he was living in the time of fulfillment and the imminent end?
"Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour." (1 John 2:18)

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants--things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John...Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near." (Rev. 1:1,3)

"Then he said to me, "These words are faithful and true." And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which must shortly take place...And he said to me, "Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near." (Rev. 22:6,10)

John gave his audiences faithful and true words. His words were, these "things must shortly take place" "for the time is near." He used these identical phrases at the beginning and the end of the book of the Revelation.

Paul also taught the imminent arrival of the Day of the Lord:

"And do this, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. The night is far spent, the day is near. Therefore let us cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light." (Rom. 13:11,12)

The totality of the New Testament Scripture presents the imminent end of the Old Covenant age. Again, I must stand with the overwhelming scriptural evidence and reject any attempt to deny the truths presented there.

 

[A New World]

James must be understood in agreement with the totality of scripture. Correct doctrine cannot be based on 1 or 2 out-of-context proof texts.

It's very easy to find many more than 1 or 2 references of the imminent end of the age. It would be much more of a challenge to find NT authors predicting a long delay before the coming of the Lord as the futurist view embraces. I can't think of even 1 or 2 out-of-context or in-context proof texts used by futurists to show that any first century believer expected the end to be thousands of years, or even hundreds of years, in their future.

The reason they expected an imminent return is obvious. Jesus taught that their generation would witness the end of the age. Then every NT writer taught the end was about to be, or that it was near, shortly or soon.

 

[A New World]

Extra-biblical sources should inform but never determine our views. Scripture alone is the standard of truth. I agree with the Reformers that the church is reformed but always reforming.

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

I read somewhere that a prophet who prophesied events in the distant future must have also made prophecies relevant to his own time. Then he could have been evaluated as either a prophet of God or a false prophet.

But, if a prophet declared an event to be near, shortly, or soon, and it did not come to pass in that time frame, he should be considered a false prophet.

Extra-biblical sources should inform but never determine our views. Scripture alone is the standard of truth.

Deut 18:20-22

 

[Chicken Little]

I see so many posts, and I'll admit I've even made one or two or so myself, explaining some elaborate theory about what the events/things/beings in this book represent. Now no one seems to really agree about all of it, though. You'd think at least some of us would read a person's theory and if it were the true one, we'd be convinced because we were trying to agree with the true theory. But it seems more as if we just use our theories to justify our worldview somehow--like if we have certain views about certain political and church groups, we mold our Book of Revelation model in accordance with those attitudes, so we don't have a reason to listen to anyone else's model. Doesn't that make our theories suspect?

well speak for yourself I guess.
so far my theories about revelations are so weird I don't even believe it and don't want to tell anyone about either. and couldn't if I tried too. maybe because it is still baking or maybe because he only gives us pieces so that we only know our part and thus can't
make anything happen in our own strength somehow because we don't know the whole plan. but for now I will just say I don't believe my own theories and don't want to tell any one and couldn't even if I wanted too tell them to anyone .