Doctrinal Positions on Book of Revelation?

[Duvduv]

Do Christian denominations have explicit doctrines of how to interpret the content of the Book of Revelation, or is interpretation just left up in the air for personal interpretations? Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

 

[Thedictator]

Do Christian denominations have explicit doctrines of how to interpret the content of the Book of Revelation, or is interpretation just left up in the air for personal interpretations? Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

Restoration Churches for the most part see the Book of Revelation as historical and symbolic.

 

[The7thColporteur]

Do Christian denominations have explicit doctrines of how to interpret the content of the Book of Revelation, or is interpretation just left up in the air for personal interpretations? Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

Yes, since the Book of Revelation is simply all previous books of the Bible [Genesis to Jude] meeting and ending therein.

As a Seventh-day Adventist, we are historicist, which means that the Bible, including Revelation, speaks of the time from Eternity past to Eternity future, and the events between those two things, with the events upon the earth.

According to scripture [KJB] we are not to have private interpretations of our own, since it is God who actually interprets His own word therein:

Genesis 40:8 KJB - And they said unto him, We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you.

2 Peter 1:20 KJB - Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
​

Examples may be given upon request of God doing this in the scripture [KJB].

For instance, see the following materials:

The entire Structure of Daniel and Revelation, along with the Prophecies was given:

Structure [Psalms 77:13 KJB]: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=02188528893778979904

Michael/Jesus Will Stand Up [Daniel 12:1 KJB]: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=10930346204581685709​

Prophecies and their timelines [short summary]:

GOD'S LAW AND JUDGEMENT TIME - ARE YOU READY?​

Structure of Daniel and Revelation and Feast short material summary -

GOD'S LAW AND JUDGEMENT TIME - ARE YOU READY?
​

One of the "keys" to all of scripture is found in the understanding of Psalms 77:13 KJB. See:

The Out of the Cities message and lifestyle & Country Living & Everlasting Gospel​

Also see:

The ARK of the Covenant HAS BEEN FOUND since AD 1844! The Sabbath Commandment [Ex. 20:8-11] is seen!​

 

[Duvduv]

Which doctrine and denomination do you represent?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Do Christian denominations have explicit doctrines of how to interpret the content of the Book of Revelation, or is interpretation just left up in the air for personal interpretations? Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

I probably wouldn't reduce apocalyptic viewpoints down to how any one specific denomination tends to interpret the book of Revelation. Rather, the issue is more along the line of our recognizing various movements within the historical totality of Eschatology and Apocalyptic Studies which have also been adopted, and maybe sometimes begun, by some denominational personages in the complex of the Christian faith. It's more than just about how one denomination interprets Revelation, although I'll grant you that denominational interpretation of this book can and does play some part in how people express their faith and in what they expect to see in the world.

 

[devolved]

Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

Most of the denominations are careful not to make specific claims when it comes to Revelation mainly because it's a very ambiguous piece of literature. Most agree that Revalation describes some future Second Coming event. Some spend more time and view it with more importance to know what they think these are.

The problem is that any denomination that bases their Christian narrative on their specific view and interpretation of Revelation is pending extinction if such views are incorrect.

For example, with Adventism... they are very specific and exceptionally certain about what they think the Mark of the Beast is, and who the Beast is. Naturally, the interpretation drives their model of Christianity and they actually think that USA will enforce political Sunday Law observance as the Mark of the beast.

Every day the likelihood of that happening is diminishing in US, which is every day more and more secular. Catholicism is in decline, and fundamentalist Christianity that's supposed to enforce political view is likewise in decline. Any remote suggestions of Sunday law are generally met with scorn and laughter.

So, the only way for Adventist to be correct if in the future there's a crisis that dismantles USA as we know it, and some factions of fundamentalist Christians are running around forcing people to worship on Sunday. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely. Not right now.

Hence, what would happen to Adventist and other eschatology-driven denominations in 20-30 years when the cultural landscape is nothing like the interpretations of Revelation? It would either die, reform, or in part die and in part reform. I think the generic tendency of the new generation of Christians is to run from specifics like that and instead being open to Christianity as a principle-driven religion.

 

[Silmarien]

Do Christian denominations have explicit doctrines of how to interpret the content of the Book of Revelation, or is interpretation just left up in the air for personal interpretations? Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

I am more familiar with Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and you're not going to find too much of a consensus on how Revelation should be treated amongst the Church Fathers. The closest you're going to get is, "This makes no sense, but there's a chance that John the Apostle wrote it so we better keep it in the canon." There was a great deal of ambivalence towards it, however.

Actually, here's what an Orthodox bishop has to say about the book: What an Orthodox bishop thinks you should know about the Book of Revelation

 

[mark kennedy]

Teaching Revelations doesnt reflect formal doctrine most of the time, it does often contain views fron Dispensational and Covenant theology.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Do Christian denominations have explicit doctrines of how to interpret the content of the Book of Revelation, or is interpretation just left up in the air for personal interpretations? Presumably a lack of official doctrine on it could have a major impact on how denominations view Christianity and other doctrines.

Most mainstream Christian churches don't have anything resembling a formal interpretation of the Revelation of St. John. The text has been influential in various ways, and there have been diverse opinions and interpretations.

The book is the most controversial in the New Testament Canon; that is probably somewhat obvious. But this is also simply the case historically. Its general acceptance took a very long time, especially in the East where even as late as the 7th and 8th centuries it still was contested. In fact, the Revelation doesn't have a place in the regular proscribed lectionary readings in the East even today.

The influence of the text can be seen far more in Christian art and liturgy, rather than theology proper. That is, the images and imagery within the text have influenced elements of Christian worship and devotion, without anything resembling an established interpretation of the text. And private interpretations, especially of the Revelation, have generally been frowned upon because it is incredibly easy to get lost into all kinds of kooky ideas reading the text without any real background in the history of the text or biblical exegesis in general.

Churches with a more vested interest in having a more formal or definitive interpretation of the text generally have only come into existence recently in a post-Protestant Reformation world.

Over emphasis, or obsession, with the book is very dangerous; and my general recommendation for most people who are generally unfamiliar with the Bible, perhaps reading the Bible for the first time, or simply don't have much knowledge (especially about this particular book) to not concern themselves with it. I think there is value in reading the text, but it's extremely easy to get confused, or get some pretty bizarre ideas (I recently saw someone try and argue that since the text mentions Jesus on a white horse that there must, then, be white horses in heaven)--or at least get a really big headache.

For all intents and purposes, I'd say it's one of the least important books in the Bible, I would recommend someone read nearly any other book of the Bible a thousand times before I'd ever recommend someone just dive head first and blindfolded into the wild and wacky world of the Revelation.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Most mainstream Christian churches don't have anything resembling a formal interpretation of the Revelation of St. John. The text has been influential in various ways, and there have been diverse opinions and interpretations.

The book is the most controversial in the New Testament Canon; that is probably somewhat obvious. But this is also simply the case historically. Its general acceptance took a very long time, especially in the East where even as late as the 7th and 8th centuries it still was contested. In fact, the Revelation doesn't have a place in the regular proscribed lectionary readings in the East even today.

The influence of the text can be seen far more in Christian art and liturgy, rather than theology proper. That is, the images and imagery within the text have influenced elements of Christian worship and devotion, without anything resembling an established interpretation of the text. And private interpretations, especially of the Revelation, have generally been frowned upon because it is incredibly easy to get lost into all kinds of kooky ideas reading the text without any real background in the history of the text or biblical exegesis in general.

Churches with a more vested interest in having a more formal or definitive interpretation of the text generally have only come into existence recently in a post-Protestant Reformation world.

Over emphasis, or obsession, with the book is very dangerous; and my general recommendation for most people who are generally unfamiliar with the Bible, perhaps reading the Bible for the first time, or simply don't have much knowledge (especially about this particular book) to not concern themselves with it. I think there is value in reading the text, but it's extremely easy to get confused, or get some pretty bizarre ideas (I recently saw someone try and argue that since the text mentions Jesus on a white horse that there must, then, be white horses in heaven)--or at least get a really big headache.

For all intents and purposes, I'd say it's one of the least important books in the Bible, I would recommend someone read nearly any other book of the Bible a thousand times before I'd ever recommend someone just dive head first and blindfolded into the wild and wacky world of the Revelation.

-CryptoLutheran

While I agree with much of what you say here, for me, Revelation is one of the most important books we have in the New Testament, even if we can only see its meaning "through a glass, darkly."

 

[Paidiske]

I've outlined here an understanding of apocalyptic literature in general which I think would be broadly embraced by what Americans would call "mainline" denominations.

Understanding Revelation Chapter Four

 

[98cwitr]

MOD HAT ON

Thread moved from Christian Apologetics to Christianity and World Religion

MOD HAT OFF​