Revelation as a History

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm of the opinion that we "know" much more about eschatology from tradition than we do from scripture.
Not in my experience, Revelations is a pretty easy book to do an exposition of if you take time to learn something about the Levitical system. The words are in Greek but the imagery is very reminiscent of the Temple worship and ceremonies. The Son of Man in the first chapter sounds a lot like a description of a High Priest and the seven candles are a menorah. The Lamb was a key sacrifice, the sacrifice of the sin offering and the sacrifice of the peace offering come to mind.
 
Upvote 0

Residential Bob

Active Member
Dec 24, 2018
351
274
58
Ormond Beach
✟18,113.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Not in my experience, Revelations is a pretty easy book to do an exposition of if you take time to learn something about the Levitical system. The words are in Greek but the imagery is very reminiscent of the Temple worship and ceremonies. The Son of Man in the first chapter sounds a lot like a description of a High Priest and the seven candles are a menorah. The Lamb was a key sacrifice, the sacrifice of the sin offering and the sacrifice of the peace offering come to mind.
I disagree. Even in Old Testament contexts, theories differ.

I think a good first step is familiarization with the Jewish Wars. This may be risky, but in a moment I'll give my exposition of this history as it relates to the two beasts.
 
Upvote 0

Residential Bob

Active Member
Dec 24, 2018
351
274
58
Ormond Beach
✟18,113.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
About the two beasts:

Were the horsemen of Chapter 9 a component of one of the beasts of Revelation 13? That chapter begins thus:

And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads. (Rv 13:1)​

This beast comes from the sea. A common assumption is that this is a sea monster (the only assumption possible from a literal perspective), but what is the sea? Is it water or is it something else? Like other nations, perhaps?

The sea, generically, refers to the Mediterranean Sea or Red Sea or generally any sea in the Middle East. In Isaiah 11:11, we read that a handful of Jews will reclaim their land from all their maritime oppressors. “In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the coastlands of the sea.” Also consider Isaiah 60:5 and note that wealth comes from the sea—not from fishing but from nations around the sea:

Then you shall see and be radiant;
your heart shall thrill and exult,
because the abundance of the sea shall be turned to you,
the wealth of the nations shall come to you.

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers says that the abundance of the sea is the riches of the Western isles. Other commentaries call this seaborne wealth a wealth of maritime nations. Earlier in Isaiah, these foreign nations are referred to as the wilderness of the sea (21:1), or specifically in this case, according to Ellicott, as the nations of Elam and Media. Certainly wealth literally could be derived from any body of water; even in Israel, lakes and streams could be fished. When a beast comes from the sea, however, it is a foreign aggressor.

The first beast, then, the beast rising out of the sea, is a foreign aggressor, and the foreign aggressor in John’s lifetime is Rome, specifically the Tenth Legion in Jerusalem. While the Jews are held captive in Jerusalem and stricken with scarcity and starvation, the Romans are free to engage in commerce. In the city, kings, merchants, and shippers mourn, since they can no longer luxuriate in the formerly wealthy capital and since no one buys their cargo anymore (Rv 18:9-19). Outside the city, Romans continue to supply their troops.

Some have ascribed the number of this beast to Nero, Rome’s mouthpiece (13:5) who was still emperor when the war started. Contemporary scholarship refutes this because the number of the beast is actually 616. Whatever the specifics, the ability to buy and sell remained the province and privilege of the Romans and to Jews who managed to escape their captors and find refuge with the other side. Allegiance to Rome was the hope of eating and surviving.

Israel, to the Israelites, of course, is their land, often referred to as the earth, remember. The second beast, then, the beast rising out of the land, is Israel. This two-horned beast (13:11), history informs us, is comprised of two factions: that enraged and impulsive lot among the Israelites, the Zealots, and their similarly dispositioned allies the Idumeans.

Rome exercised authority over Judea (13:7), whose inhabitants were made to obey, or “worship,” Rome (13:12). The fury of the Zealots must have been palatable.

Around the turn of the millennium, Judaism was divided into four major sects under the Great Sanhedrin: the Sadducees, the higher priesthood and nobility who centered their authority on the temple; the Pharisees, who derived their authority from the Torah and Mosaic Law; and the Essenes, a peaceful group of ascetics. The fourth sect formed much more recently and diverged sharply from the other three. This sect of Zealots was a militant, anti-Roman splinter group on a quest to expel and kill Romans,[ii] and also Christians and moderate Jews and anyone else who ventured into Jerusalem and sympathized with Rome.

The Apostle Paul encounters some of these Zealots in Ephesus when they chase him out of a synagogue, leaving him to preach in a schoolhouse (Acts 19:9-11). A former Pharisee and not afraid to speak his mind, Paul was not loathe to refer to them as beasts (1 Cor 15:32). For indeed these people were so driven by madness that they would have done anything to torment and expel the Romans, even if it meant persecuting their own people and allowing their own temple to burn down.

Rome, seeking order in its domain (to maintain the Pax Romana of the era), and Israel, motivated largely by Zealot hatred of Rome, are the two principal players in the Jewish-Roman Wars. The beast from the sea and the beast from the land would engage each other in three major struggles that would last well into the second century. The first of the three major confrontations lasted from AD 67 to AD 70. For these three and a half years, Christians fled while Zealots slaughtered moderate Jews and Roman soldiers.


Charles John Ellicott, ed., Ellicott’s Bible Commentary for English Readers, Vol. 2 (Delmarva Publications, Inc., 2015), Kindle eBook.

[ii] The Editors at Charles River Editors, The Ancient Roman Sieges of Jerusalem and Masada: The History of the first Jewish-Roman War’s Most Famous Battles (Charles River Editors Publishing Company) Kindle eBook.
 
Upvote 0

devin553344

I believe in the Resurrection
Nov 10, 2015
3,607
2,249
Unkown
✟93,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I suppose this thread belongs in the Christian Scriptures forum. It’s about certain passages of the Scriptures.

As I was questioning the inconsistencies of futurism and recognizing the truth of fulfilled prophecy, I heard some advice to consider the larger implications of the Olivet Discourse and the Revelation, and then the details will fall into place (Don K. Preston, I believe, said it).

But let’s start elsewhere (for after all, eschatology is ninety percent of the Gospels and the New Testament canon). Jesus says that the Law and the Prophets were until John the Baptist (Lk 16:16). John the Baptist says that the Messiah has come with his axe to topple the temple hierarchy, a fruitless junta (Lk 3:9), and to baptize in fire (3:16). Jesus, of course, does this in AD 70 when a fire consumes the temple and consequently the cult of temple and the Mosaic traditions. After this, nothing else needs to be said. The Jewish Age – the age of the prophets and the law – ends.

Malachi may have foretold these events from a distant past, but John announced their imminence. The Law and the Prophets were until John.

Could John the Revelator, then, have foretold anything else? Absolutely not; the Prophetic Age had ended. Yet this John claims to be writing a prophecy (Rv 1:3). What? How can that be?

Easy. Read what St. Paul says in various missives about prophecy at the close of the age. About how it ranks among other gifts of the Spirit, about its usefulness for encouragement and edification for the church. John the Revelator is encouraging the fledgling church through the tribulation it had just endured in Jerusalem and Judea.

But but but, what about all the fantastic events that John the Revelator writes about in Revelation? How do you explain those? Easy. The larger implications first, then the details fall into place.

We know from history, for example, that as armies surrounded Jerusalem, the church in that city fled and took up residence in Decapolis, largely the village of Pella. Three and a half years later, after the First Jewish War, these Christians began to return. This church, the bride of Christ, was in exile for three and a half years. Reference Revelation 12:6.

We also know from history that during this 3 ½-year conflict, wrought with famine and pestilence, the last five months were especially trying. The Romans had breached Jerusalem’s defensive wall and beat the Zealots back, and in five months, the temple burned down. Now reference Revelation 9:5.

Futurists may be completely lost by this OP, but as to Preterists, do you really think that John the Revelator was foretelling the future?

Okay, let the assault begin . . .

Are you expecting to be assaulted on? LOL I think I would also if I posted that OP and knowing this forum. All in good fun and humor of course.

Seriously though, I've often wondered about Revelation on how much has happened. Maybe we're half way thru it or most of the way? I do believe some of the seals are opened now. But not all I think. I think we're ending the martyrs seal or the 5th seal Revelation 6:9, and getting into the 6th seal Revelation 6:12. But that's just my opinion :) Which is fueled by global warming probably.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Residential Bob

Active Member
Dec 24, 2018
351
274
58
Ormond Beach
✟18,113.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Are you expecting to be assaulted on? LOL I think I would also if I posted that OP and knowing this forum. All in good fun and humor of course.

Seriously though, I've often wondered about Revelation on how much has happened. Maybe we're half way thru it or most of the way? I do believe some of the seals are opened now. But not all I think. I think we're ending the martyrs seal or the 5th seal Revelation 6:9, and getting into the 6th seal Revelation 6:12. But that's just my opinion :) Which is fueled by global warming probably.
You present conjecture to the sacred text. Not to offend, because I myself was once a futurist, but an eschatology based on theory rather than on scripture and the attendant historical and cultural context is dangerous territory. How do you know you're not adding to the text?

Speaking of the seals: can we not place them in historical and cultural context (and of course scriptural context) to derive an interpretation that's at least as plausible as any futurist theory? With context, we would at least have some foundation.

Let's look at the four horsemen of the apocalypse, for example. Of particular interest to me is the white horse on which Christ presumably sits (6:1-3). Textual and historical context should inform us that this is not the horse that Jesus is riding. In Chapter 19 we also read of a rider on a white horse (19:11-12). This is the victorious Christ, but does the rider of the white horse in Chapter 6 also represent Christ? In Chapter 19, John calls the rider Faithful and True, and he is accompanied by his armies, also riding white horses. In Chapter 6, the rider on the white horse has no such designation, and he is accompanied not by righteous armies but by horsemen who deliver to the land woe upon woe. Even to a layman, a horseman who is supposed to represent righteousness must seem out of place among three horsemen who represent bloodshed, famine, and pestilence.

Barclay compares these four horsemen to the four chariots pulled by four teams of horses of Zechariah 6 that represent God’s judgment on Israel’s enemies. The white horses in Zechariah 6 and Revelation 6, like all the horses in those chapters, paint not a picture of the victorious Christ but of the terrors of the wrath of God. The white horse merely represents conquest in combat, as Revelation 6:2 implies. War, famine, and disease reign supreme in the Great Revolt, perpetrated more on the Judeans than on the Romans. The Romans emerged victorious, and when a Roman general celebrated a triumph, he paraded through the streets of the imperial city with his armies, captives, and spoils while drawn in his chariot by white horses (https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dsb/revelation-6.html).

In short, the horses and their riders represent the civil war in Judea. They connote the triumph of the victorious and the misery of the losers.

The white horse signifies the Roman armies who came to conquer Judea. Rome defeated her adversaries, and so wears the crown.

The red horse signifies bloodshed, its rider instigating the civil war in which Jews slew one another. The horseman’s sword is an instrument of persecution that exacerbated the inability of the Jews to engage in commerce and sustain themselves.

The black horse signifies distress. Its rider bore a scale for rationing provisions. Scarcity debilitated the livelihood of Jerusalem’s inhabitants, but the store of wine and oil, if not depleted, may mitigate some of their suffering.

The pale horse signifies death, and with it came hades. These partners in the grim and ghastly task of annihilation wreaked finality to large segments of the population (a fourth of it, as John relates it) by whatever means—combat, starvation, disease. Even wild animals devoured some of the dead.
 
Upvote 0

devin553344

I believe in the Resurrection
Nov 10, 2015
3,607
2,249
Unkown
✟93,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
You present conjecture to the sacred text. Not to offend, because I myself was once a futurist, but an eschatology based on theory rather than on scripture and the attendant historical and cultural context is dangerous territory. How do you know you're not adding to the text?

Speaking of the seals: can we not place them in historical and cultural context (and of course scriptural context) to derive an interpretation that's at least as plausible as any futurist theory? With context, we would at least have some foundation.

Let's look at the four horsemen of the apocalypse, for example. Of particular interest to me is the white horse on which Christ presumably sits (6:1-3). Textual and historical context should inform us that this is not the horse that Jesus is riding. In Chapter 19 we also read of a rider on a white horse (19:11-12). This is the victorious Christ, but does the rider of the white horse in Chapter 6 also represent Christ? In Chapter 19, John calls the rider Faithful and True, and he is accompanied by his armies, also riding white horses. In Chapter 6, the rider on the white horse has no such designation, and he is accompanied not by righteous armies but by horsemen who deliver to the land woe upon woe. Even to a layman, a horseman who is supposed to represent righteousness must seem out of place among three horsemen who represent bloodshed, famine, and pestilence.

Barclay compares these four horsemen to the four chariots pulled by four teams of horses of Zechariah 6 that represent God’s judgment on Israel’s enemies. The white horses in Zechariah 6 and Revelation 6, like all the horses in those chapters, paint not a picture of the victorious Christ but of the terrors of the wrath of God. The white horse merely represents conquest in combat, as Revelation 6:2 implies. War, famine, and disease reign supreme in the Great Revolt, perpetrated more on the Judeans than on the Romans. The Romans emerged victorious, and when a Roman general celebrated a triumph, he paraded through the streets of the imperial city with his armies, captives, and spoils while drawn in his chariot by white horses (https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dsb/revelation-6.html).

In short, the horses and their riders represent the civil war in Judea. They connote the triumph of the victorious and the misery of the losers.

The white horse signifies the Roman armies who came to conquer Judea. Rome defeated her adversaries, and so wears the crown.

The red horse signifies bloodshed, its rider instigating the civil war in which Jews slew one another. The horseman’s sword is an instrument of persecution that exacerbated the inability of the Jews to engage in commerce and sustain themselves.

The black horse signifies distress. Its rider bore a scale for rationing provisions. Scarcity debilitated the livelihood of Jerusalem’s inhabitants, but the store of wine and oil, if not depleted, may mitigate some of their suffering.

The pale horse signifies death, and with it came hades. These partners in the grim and ghastly task of annihilation wreaked finality to large segments of the population (a fourth of it, as John relates it) by whatever means—combat, starvation, disease. Even wild animals devoured some of the dead.

Wow, you're really into Revelation! Me, not so much. I guess I'll leave it up to you to decipher revelation. As far as adding to everyone's bible, I clearly am not guilty :) I once thought the same way so I can understand.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,720
6,139
Massachusetts
✟586,675.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Jesus is both here and not here. Does that idea have biblical support?
Now, what you mean by your question could be different than what I understand. So, I will offer some scriptures for what I mean >

Among other scriptures, I offer >

Jesus is not here but at the right hand of God > Hebrews 12:2 says Jesus "has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." (in Hebrews 12:2)

Jesus is here with us > Matthew 28:20 > "I am with you always" (in Matthew 28:20).

And Jesus is here because He lives in us who are His > Galatians 2:20.

I think of how Paul says that he was absent in body, but present in spirit > 1 Corinthians 5:3, and Colossians 2:5. Like this, I consider, Jesus can mean that by means of the Holy Spirit He is with us.

It might be like how you can be in New York, and by means of a phone call you can be with a friend who is in a hospital in New Mexico, being there to encourage your friend, though physically your body is absent. Plus, by means of our prayer we can be with people we care for in prayer, though physically we are not there with them.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Site Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,419
6,800
✟916,702.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
You present conjecture to the sacred text. Not to offend, because I myself was once a futurist, but an eschatology based on theory rather than on scripture and the attendant historical and cultural context is dangerous territory.


Were the events of the 6th seal fulfilled in the past?
 
Upvote 0

Residential Bob

Active Member
Dec 24, 2018
351
274
58
Ormond Beach
✟18,113.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Were the events of the 6th seal fulfilled in the past?
Some of the events that John describes parallel historical events.

Don't sweat the details. Or just let them fall into place.

It's over. It's history.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hazelelponi

:sighing:
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
9,377
8,788
55
USA
✟691,735.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Who cares what preterists think? It is forbidden on some forums I've been on, if not all "Christian" forums. (Just curious what purpose there was in mentioning them in your post).....

As for what Yahweh revealed through His Angel to John, we will see....

there's preterism and then there is hyper-preterism. Only hyper-preterism is seen as heresy and not allowed to be discussed on most Christian forums. (There is a difference)

You can talk about preterism on this forum all day long, it is only hyper-preterism that gets relegated to controversial according to the rules.

This forum, and apparently the OP, believes this topic is about hyper-preterism.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
there's preterism and then there is hyper-preterism. Only hyper-preterism is seen as heresy and not allowed to be discussed on most Christian forums. (There is a difference)

You can talk about preterism on this forum all day long, it is only hyper-preterism that gets relegated to controversial according to the rules.

This forum, and apparently the OP, believes this topic is about hyper-preterism.
I think it's a bit more complicated than that.

Under the umbrella of preterism, there are also Israel Only preterists (as the OP has recently posted about). I believe that's the variety that most are [wrongly] thinking of whenever "preterism" is brought up. Ironically....if you pay close attention to posts on this forum - there are a lot of posters that are very vocal about being against preterism - yet hold to the belief that a lot of the Bible is for Israel ONLY.... in a geopolitical/physical way....not in a spiritual sense (writing most of us right out of God's plan and excluding us from Abraham's family). To me....that seems more offensive to Christianity than believing that prophecies related to Jesus have been fulfilled as promised.

Preterism merely means "fulfilled prophecies".

The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning past, since this view deems certain biblical prophecies as past, or already fulfilled. ~ Theopedia​

I'd hope that ALL Christians are at least in agreement that Christ has fulfilled most - if not all - that He's promised that's written in the Bible (that doesn't mean He's "done", though - just that He's shown His faithfulness). Even in this graphic there can be overlap. For instance: a person can be an "amillenialial preterist". Most spiritual beliefs are not easily put in a labeled box.

differences-in-eschatology.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Hazelelponi
Upvote 0

Residential Bob

Active Member
Dec 24, 2018
351
274
58
Ormond Beach
✟18,113.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I think it's a bit more complicated than that.

Under the umbrella of preterism, there are also Israel Only preterists (as the OP has recently posted about). I believe that's the variety that most are [wrongly] thinking of whenever "preterism" is brought up. Ironically....if you pay close attention to posts on this forum - there are a lot of posters that are very vocal about being against preterism - yet hold to the belief that a lot of the Bible is for Israel ONLY.... in a geopolitical/physical way....not in a spiritual sense (writing most of us right out of God's plan and excluding us from Abraham's family). To me....that seems more offensive to Christianity than believing that prophecies related to Jesus have been fulfilled as promised.

Preterism merely means "fulfilled prophecies".

The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning past, since this view deems certain biblical prophecies as past, or already fulfilled. ~ Theopedia​

I'd hope that ALL Christians are at least in agreement that Christ has fulfilled most - if not all - that He's promised that's written in the Bible (that doesn't mean He's "done", though - just that He's shown His faithfulness). Even in this graphic there can be overlap. For instance: a person can be an "amillenialial preterist". Most spiritual beliefs are not easily put in a labeled box.

differences-in-eschatology.jpg
Israel Only is consistent Preterism. Too consistent, really. But very logical and even more seductive. I know from experience of Preterists who have despaired of it. For although Futurists may become Preterists, Preterists do not become Futurists (except perhaps on rare occasions for emotional peace). This is because Preterism does not cotton to theory.

And there’s some irony for you. Futurists add to the Scriptures, yet Preterists are the black sheep.

Futurists debate, ponder, and quibble over a broad range of theories – a comically broad range over extra-biblical ideas just as fantastic. They debate on the nature of a corporeal return of Christ (which the Scriptures do not promise) and on the inclusion of the United States, Russia, or China in the Scriptures (which is false), and on myriad ideas in between.

Preterists, on the other hand, also debate among themselves, though over relatively few differences by comparison. And their differences are entirely scriptural and not inspired by the latest headlines.

Hence the I/O hole that some fall into.

As for me, although I know Christ came for Israel, I also believe that Israel came for the world. And I must say, it took all the faith I could muster to step away from that hole.
 
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,339
7,349
California
✟551,233.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
And there’s some irony for you. Futurists add to the Scriptures, yet Preterists are the black sheep.
I've noticed that - and scratched my head in confusion for sure.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Residential Bob

Active Member
Dec 24, 2018
351
274
58
Ormond Beach
✟18,113.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I/Oers have numerous arguments based simply on scripture. For example, a full number of converted Gentiles makes no sense unless the Gospel story ended at the coming of the Lord. It makes no sense if the Gospel story continues today. If the Gospel were to continue to go to the nations for the purpose of gathering in Gentiles, then we would still have no full number of Gentiles.

Preterists have difficulty answering these kinds of questions.
 
Upvote 0