Revelation perspective question....

[Hazelelponi]

Which was why I provided the third.

For me I would have chosen both the second and the third choice.. but with only 1 choice I chose the second, even though I believe without proficiency in the OT you'll never properly understand the symbolism of revelation.

 

[BobRyan]

For me I would have chosen both the second and the third choice.. but with only 1 choice I chose the second, even though I believe without proficiency in the OT you'll never properly understand the symbolism of revelation.

yep ... that's it. 2nd and 3rd.

 

[Matt5]

I can't specifically place this in one of the subgroups, because it pertains to a general theme or perspective of Revelation.

who here views Revelation as solely figurative?

Who here views as a combination of figurative, and literal?

Has anyone here ever heard that Revelation has over 800 allusions to the Old Testament (there are only 404 verses in Rev)?

I.e., everything in Revelation is based on something which has its origins in the OT.
eg, Parallel Passages in New Testament Quoted from Old Testament :: Part V - Study Resources

Thank you.

As we continually see over and over, interpretations of Revelation are basically as follows: things happen, people die. These generally violate the following verse from Revelation 1:

3 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.

In other words, Revelation is suppose to be helpful. It's not of course. Generally it's useless because the interpretations are mostly wrong. So almost every Christian on the planet ignores it entirely or doesn't actually take it to heart.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The Apocalypse or Revelation of St. John is an example of an apocalypse, apocalyptic literature was a literary genre that was actually pretty common among Jews of the 2nd Temple period, and it remained popular at least for a short time after that, also among Christians.

Apocalyptic literature is figurative, it is intentionally full of big, loud, symbolic and graphic imagery and language. Because the point of an apocalypse is, as the name itself means, unveil something, to lift the veil and say something important.

Focusing too hard on the trappings of an apocalyptic text is a bit like getting distracted by the colors on a street sign, rather than on what the sign is trying to communicate.

The Revelation borrows heavily from the language of the Old Testament, this is intentional. It is highly figurative and symbolic, rather than literal. Though it does contain literal things--the seven churches to whom it is addressed really are seven literal churches. But the apocalyptic, visionary writing is intentionally graphic and very symbolic. Jesus, when He returns, is not going to have a literal white horse; neither are their literal man-faced locust monsters in some hellish pit somewhere. There is no literal prostitute riding a literal multi-headed monster, and the text makes that very clear.

Understanding what kind of literature the Apocalypse itself is is really important. It's a specific kind of writing that is meant to be read a certain way.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Joyous Song]

For us, my husband and myself, we believe Revelation needs to be viewed Juridically or through Jewish eyes as John was Jewish! We see Kaballah within it but Kaballah is not symbolic but is the language of Creation and Revelation is about a New Creation coming.

As for everything found in Revelation being also in the Hebrew Scriptures, this is true. Zechariah holds many of the same teaching for that same time. Thus by reading and understanding the Hebrew Testaments, which is also written almost exclusively by Jewish writers, you can better understand Revelation.