Revelation

An Introduction and Commentary

Introduction

Revelation is a remarkable book. Many have ignored it as a mystical book that no one can understand (Summers, 1951, p. xiii). In contrast Harold Bloom (1988) complains, "The influence of Revelation is out of all proportion to its literary strength or spiritual value" (pp. 1-2).

In spite of conflicting opinions, the book is worthy of serious study. It is the only book of the Bible that promises a blessing to those who read or hear it with understanding (Rev. 1:3). Revelation gives the Christian courage in the face of opposition. This is true because we learn from it that although Christians may suffer (Rev. 2:10), God still reigns (Rev. 4), is aware of our plight, hears our prayers (Rev. 5:8), and--when the time is right--will destroy the forces of evil through the power of his son (Rev. 2:10; 3:10; 17:14).

Another reason for studying Revelation is the current eschatological frenzy. The various false systems of eschatology are, "Legion" (Mark 5:9) for they are many. This "Legion" of conflicting eschatologies share one common characteristic: their proponents all resort to the misuse of the imagery of Revelation to support their erroneous theories. So, a proper understanding of Revelation is important; that we might be ready to give an answer (1 Peter 3:15). Therefore, this paper is intended as a critical introduction to Revelation--with emphasis on introductory materials that would help us understand the book.

Discussion

Author

Several suggestions have been made concerning the identity of the author. Guthrie (1990, pp. 929-247) presents one of the more recent discussions of the various possibilities. He examines the claims for and against the authorship of: John the Apostle, John the elder, John the prophet, John Mark and intentional pseudonymity. Perhaps one of the more original suggestions has been set forth by J. Massyngberde Ford (1974, pp. 28-57) who posited the idea that the book was the product of John the Baptist's prophecies, a Baptist school and Christian redaction.

Much of the evidence set forth for the various suggested authors is highly subjective in nature. Writers holding to opposing views often use the same evidence to prove their opposing positions. Thus, one writer can insist that since the author never calls himself an apostle he cannot be the Apostle John, while another author uses the same evidence as proof that apostolic authorship was so obvious and secure that it could be assumed by the writer (Alford, 1880).

One writer may appeal to a linguistic analysis of Revelation as proof that it was not written by the Beloved Disciple while another writer uses linguistic tools to argue that it was. Poythress (1985) has conducted an exhaustive study of the intersentence conjunctions de, oun, kai, and Asyndeton in Revelation and demonstrated that their use consistently follows the pattern found the Gospel of John and 1, 2 & 3 John.

One is inclined to agree with Guthrie (1990),

To extract a conclusive or even satisfactory result from all this mass of conjecture seems impossible. The most certain line of evidence is the early tradition and there would seem to be some excuse for taking refuge in this for want of a better alternative. At least, if this is the true solution it at once explains the rise of the tradition, which none of the others satisfactorily does. (p. 947)

We will not conduct a close examination of the arguments for each of the positions as to authorship because the various views bring little of significance to a discussion of the meaning of Revelation. Since there are no conclusive arguments against the traditional position of apostolic authorship we will assume it for the purpose of this paper.

Date

Unlike the authorship question, the dating of Revelation can have a significant effect on one's understanding of the book. Three possibilities have been advanced:

1.A.D. 69: before the fall of the Temple in Jerusalem and during or shortly after the reign of Nero.

2.A.D. 69-79: during the reign of Vespasian after the destruction of the Temple. Convincing evidence for this middle date is lacking.

3.A.D. 95: during the reign of Domitian.

Evaluation of the early date.

The early date is advocated by Foy E. Wallace, Jr. (1966, pp. 14-46), Max King (1971) and the Pulpit Commentary (Spence and Exell, 1950). There are three major reasons given for accepting the early date:

First, John is told to, "Measure the temple" (Rev. 11:1). Some argue that the temple mentioned is the one in Jerusalem, and that this proves that the temple was still standing when John wrote.

There are two problems with such an argument. First, we are not told if the temple John is commanded to measure is material or spiritual; in heaven or on earth. Second, centuries before the New Testament was written, Ezekiel (an apocalyptic prophet) had also been told to measure the temple (Ezekiel 41:1-26) at a time when the physical temple was not standing in Jerusalem. So, if anything, Revelation 11:1 is an argument against the existence of the temple at the time the book was written.

Second, the book was written during a period of persecution, and Nero persecuted Christians. The problem with this proof lies in the fact that although Revelation was obviously written when the church in Asia Minor was enduring severe persecution, there is no evidence Nero's persecution ever extended beyond the boundaries of Rome.

Third, Revelation is written in a style of Greek supposedly "less learned" than that of John's other four books. From this it is supposed that Revelation was the first of John's books.

Yet, it must be pointed out that there are other explanations for the differences in style. Perhaps the most significant objection to this point is the view that the grammar of the apocalypse is a different style, not a less educated Greek. To some writers the mixture of correct and incorrect forms is intentional (Guthrie, 1990, p. 939). It is also possible that the fourth gospel was written with the help of a scribe or was refined by a "Johannine community" while Revelation was written on a barren prison isle without the literary assistance of others. Porter (1989) writes,

If the author were a prisoner and especially if he were old, he may very well have been limited in his resources, including access to scribal help. There appears to be no compelling reason to see the language of the Apocalypse as anything other than in many places vulgar Greek of the 1st century. (p. 600)2

William Hendriksen (1960) makes the following remarks concerning arguments in support of the early date:

We have not found a single, really cogent argument in support of the earlier date. The arguments put forth seek their strength in late and shaky testimonies, in the wholly imaginary idea that John did not yet know his Greek when he wrote the Apocalypse, and in a very questionable, literal interpretation of certain passages which most certainly have a symbolical meaning. Thus, for example, we are told that the temple at Jerusalem was still standing when the Apocalypse was written. (pp. 19-20)

Reasons for accepting the late date.

First, the earliest post apostolic witness supports the late date. Irenaeus states that it was written, "No very long time since, but almost in our day, toward the end of Domitian's reign" (Hailey, 1979, p. 31). Irenaeus was reputed to be an acquaintance of Polycarp who was an acquaintance of John. Thus the testimony of Irenaeus would appear to be authoritative and reliable testimony. The testimony of Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Hippolytus, Hegesippus and Jerome supports the late date.

Second, John was in exile on Patmos when the book was written (Rev. 1:9). Such a sentence would be more in harmony with the practice of Domitian who exiled his niece to the island of Pandateria for religious reasons (Bruce, 1980, p. 413). Nero, on the other hand, sentenced Christians to death in the Circus, crucified them, or used them as human torches to illuminate his garden (Tacitus, 1963, p. 354).

Third, the book was written at a time when Christians in Asia Minor were enduring terrible persecution because they had refused to worship the emperor. Suetonius gives evidence that Domitian insisted on being addressed as divine (Tranquillus, 1957, p. 304). According to F. F. Bruce (1980, p. 412) Domitian was the first to order that he be called, "the Lord our God." Although Guthrie (1990) cannot find, conclusive evidence that the, "persecution situation fits best into the Domitic period," he does admit, "the majority of scholars" do (p. 951).

Edwin A. Judge (1991) states that there was a large temple erected in Ephesus with a colossal statue of Domitian. It was located to the west of the upper market. Travelers and traders entering the city from the harbor would have passed by it. He suggests that it is possible that travelers were required to make sacrifice in the temple and receive a mark as evidence of sacrifice before entering the market (Rev. 13:16). Judge (1991) concludes,

There is no evidence that such a test was actually applied at this time. But there is just enough miscellaneous information on comparable practices for us to say that this is what might have sprung to mind for those listening to Revelation, when they heard that to enter the market you had first to receive the mark of the beast. (p. 160)

Fourth, the spiritual situation of the seven churches suggests a late date. The Ephesian church had lost its first love and needed to repent or be removed (Rev. 2:4-5). The church in Pergamos was tolerating immorality that would have made the Corinthians blush (Rev. 2:14-16). The Laodiceans were lukewarm (Rev. 3:16). Although Guthrie (1990) admits that this argument is not conclusive he does state,

It is significant that this has happened in the two churches known to be Pauline and it is thought, therefore, to indicate a considerable interval since the foundation of the churches. All the letters, in fact, give the impression that the churches have a history behind them. (p. 954)

Fifth, the references to the activity of the Nicolaitans in Ephesus (2:6) and Pergamum (2:15) also could be more easily understood in light of the later date.

To Whom Was the Book Written?

The book was sent to the seven churches of Asia Minor (Rev. 1:4): Ephesus (2:1), Smyrna (2:8), Pergamos (2:12), Thyatira (2:18), Sardis (3:1), Philadelphia (3:7) and Laodicea (3:14).

These seven cities were strategically positioned on a circular road in Western Asia Minor not far from where John was exiled. From here the book could spread in all directions.

It should be pointed out that there were more than seven churches in Asia Minor (Beasley-Murray, 1978, p. 53). Since the number seven is normally used, in the Apocalypse, to suggest perfection (cf. discussion of numerology on page ), it is possible that these seven churches were chosen to suggest that the message could apply directly to the entire church in Asia Minor and secondarily to the church in every age in which it is being coerced to conform to the standards of the world (Romans 12:1-2) (Hailey, 1979, P. 93; Summers, 1951, p. 56, 86).

Conditions That Occasioned Revelation

A review of Ray Summers' outstanding commentary Worthy is the Lamb (1951, pp. 87-88) suggests a number of conditions pertinent to the production of Revelation. Christianity was an illegal religion. Rome tolerated the religions of those whom they conquered if they did not proselyte. Christians, of course, existed to save others (Matt. 28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16).

Christianity was universal in scope. With the Romans the state was pre-eminent; with the Christians the Kingdom of God throughout the world was the principal concern.

Christianity was exclusive. Rome said that all gods were to be worshipped. Christians refused to participate in the heathen feasts. Their refusal to have idols in their homes caused them to be looked upon as enemies of the gods and atheists. Nothing was too vile to be believed of such people. Because of their attitudes toward the Roman gods, the Christians were blamed for all the calamities that befell the empire.

They were accused of gross immorality. They were known to hold secret services at night, and they were observed to be very friendly toward each other. The Romans thought these facts indicated that the meetings were for the gratification of lust. When they heard Christians refer to eating flesh and drinking blood (the Lord's Supper), they accused them of cannibalism-- eating the bodies and drinking the blood of their offspring in their orgies. Most of the persecution that the Christians received grew out of this popular hatred and misunderstanding.

Christians refused to go to war. According to Tertullian, there were two reasons for this. First, a part of the oath of the state and the initiation of the soldiers included service to the idols of the state and wearing idolatrous insignia on their uniforms. Second, Christ had taken their sword from them and had given them the way of peace. The populace hated them and accused them of being traitors.

Christians came chiefly from the poor and outcast. Thus they were looked down on by the "respectable."

Christians were looked upon as wild fanatics because of their enthusiasm. They shocked the sensibilities of the passive philosophers of the day.

Christianity conflicted with the temporal interests of Rome's merchants of religion--priests, idol makers, vendors of sacrificial animals, etc.

Christians refused to worship the emperor. Had they worshipped the emperor as the chief deity of the empire, they might have been tolerated. But they could not say the Kurios Caesar was superior to their Kurios Christ. Therefore, persecution and martyrdom became their lot. Domitian tried to annihilate this recalcitrant and traitorous faith.

Christians were being tempted to compromise their faith. In Jon Paulien's (1988) review of Schussler Fiorenza's Book, The Book of Revelation: Justice and Judgment he comments,

Schussler Fiorenza identifies John's opponents in Revelation with the enthusiasts of Corinth rather than with the Judaizers of Galatia or Colossae. These "Nicolaitans" practiced some form of libertine gnosticism which enabled them to participate in pagan society while professing Christianity. . . . Many Christians (Characterized as Nicolaitans, Balaam, and Jezebel) were advocating theological compromise which would enable them to participate actively in the commercial, political and social life of their cities. (p.161)

The Problem of Emperor Worship

Much of Revelation is affected by the problem of emperor worship. So, more on the subject is in order. From Worthy Is the Lamb we quote:

At the period of the empire in which we are interested there was being fostered a new emphasis on this old idea. Domitian delighted in being looked upon as divine and in being so worshipped. To the Christian such homage was idolatry and an utter denial of faith in Christ. To the Romans, the refusal to worship the emperor was a sign of disloyalty to the State and an act of treason. Emperor worship was forced upon the Christians as a test of their loyalty to the State. At first Christians were called upon to perform the ceremonies of loyal service and worship to the emperor--the placing of a pinch of incense upon the altar. To refuse was disloyalty; to agree was to prove that one was not a Christian. There were many who saw in this meaningless act no harm done to their Christian faith. . . . As the demand for emperor worship grew, Christians were outlawed as a body when their adherence to the sect became known. Detailed methods were worked out to enforce the state religion and to punish the Christians . . .. Many Christians were beheaded, some were exiled, and others had all their property confiscated and were reduced to poverty. All this is perhaps reflected in Revelation 13:5. (pp. 92-93)

Characteristics of Apocalyptic Literature

Although there were variations, apocalyptic literature is a genre of literature that manifests certain characteristics. According to Collins (1977),

The writings in question are Daniel 7-12, 1 Enoch 1-36, the "Similitudes of Enoch" (1 Enoch 37-71), the "Book of the Heavenly Luminaries" (1 Enoch 72-78), the "Animal Apocalypse" (1 Enoch 83-20), 1 Enoch 91-104, 2 Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Apoc. Bar. and the Apocalypse of Abraham. The similarities between Revelation and these writings pertain to both the form in which the revelation is presented and the content of the revelation. (p. 329)

From several sources several characteristics common to the genre can be deduced (Abrams, 1988, pp. 7-34; Beckwith, 1919, pp. 166-196; Collins, 1977, pp. 329-343; May, 1988, pp. 35-44; Satre, 1984, pp 57-61; Summers, 1951, pp. 3-26; Swete, 1907, pp. xxii-xxxii). Apocalypses were, at least in part, a heavenly vision delivered by a heavenly being. Usually the mediator was an angel who interpreted the vision. Revelation's conformity to the model of the genre begins in the first verse. Revelation is delivered by an angel.

Apocalyptic literature possessed historical significance. There was always some critical historical situation that had caused the book to be written. The main purpose of apocalyptic literature was to give comfort during a time of great tragedy. To ignore the historical situation is to ignore the main piece in the jig-saw of interpretation.

Generally, apocalyptic literature was pseudonymous (this applied only to uninspired literature). The Jews knew there were no more prophets. So, it was necessary to claim authorship of an earlier inspired writer to earn a hearing. Revelation diverges from the pattern on this point. Collins (1977) writes, "In earliest Christianity an authoritative status was again accorded to prophecy. Accordingly, since pseudonymity was due to the decline of prophecy, the Christian author of Revelation was free to dispense with it" (p. 331).

Some have argued that since Revelation is not pseudonymous, it cannot be legitimately classified with the apocalyptic genre. Collins (1977) responds,

In departing from the use of pseudonymity, Revelation merely dropped one of the accrediting devices of apocalyptic style which was found superfluous in the historical context. This omission is not sufficient to indicate a new genre (p. 332).

Apocalyptic writers began their messages with ex eventu prophecy. The pseudonymous writer would project himself back to the time of the writer whose name he had claimed. The writer would then rehearse the history of the struggle of God's people from that time up to the time of the writer as if it were prophetic instead of historic. Revelation lacks this element of ex eventu prophecy.

Guthrie (1990) argues that the lack of pseudonymity and ex eventu prophecy removes Revelation from the Apocalyptic genre (p. 967). Collins (1977) responds that, "The most basic function of ex eventu prophecies was rendered superfluous by the historical context of Revelation. Insofar as pseudonymity was designed to provide an occasion for such prophecy, it was rendered superfluous too" (p.333).

There is yet a third reason that the lack of pseudonymity and ex eventu prophecy does not remove Revelation from the genre. Collins (1977) was unable to see this third reason because of his preconceptions about Daniel. Collins viewed Daniel as a pseudonymous book containing ex eventu prophecy. However, If Daniel is not pseudonymous, then it is a perfect parallel to Revelation as an apocalyptic book that is not pseudonymous and does not begin with ex eventu prophecy. This point is especially significant when we realize the Daniel (especially chapter 2) may have been, "the most formative influence on the thought and structure of Revelation" (Beale, 1984, p. 423).

It must also be observed that no one has ever established that apocalyptic books had to contain all the elements of the genre to be legitimate (Collins, 1977, p. 349).

The message was presented through visions. This was an occasional tool of normal prophecy, but for apocalyptic literature, it was the primary tool. The Revelator wrote, "Then I turned to see . . . I saw" [Emphasis mine D. E. P.] (Rev. 1:12). Jesus instructed, "What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches" (Rev.1:11).

The predictive element is much more predominant in apocalyptic literature. The present is described as a time of great testing and the future as a time of great triumph and victory. Contrary to popular belief, prediction is not the major emphasis of the word "prophecy." The word "prophet" merely means, one who speaks for another. Anyone who spoke by direct inspiration of God was considered a prophet.

Symbols are used much more extensively in apocalyptic literature than in normal prophecy. This type of literature developed an elaborate system of esoteric symbols that were understood by the initiates but not the persecutors of the day. This meant that some symbols were somewhat arbitrary in nature, rather than taken from natural life as the symbols of the prophets often were (cf. the symbols of Jeremiah).

An important rule of interpretation to be emphasized here is that, like the parables of the Lord, it is often important to understand the central theme or truth being portrayed by each scene and not try to force every detail of the vision into a spiritual meaning. Some symbols are merely present to fill out the picture. For example, in the Parable of the Good Samaritan, there is no significance to the water, wine, two pieces of money, the inn, or the innkeeper. They were merely intended to fill out the picture in response to the question, "Who is my neighbor?"

Numbers play a special part in the symbolism of apocalyptic literature and have set spiritual values. Numbers are seldom used for their numerical values (cf. discussion of numerology p. ).

The dramatic element is prevalent. One purpose of apocalyptic literature is to make the truth taught, as vivid as possible. Hyperbole is a frequent tool. And, so, it must again be emphasized that we cannot press the details of individual visions too hard.

Apocalyptic literature presents a cosmic struggle between clearly defined forces of good and evil. The battle lines are so clearly delineated that there is no room for compromise. In Revelation we have: Satan, the Beast, and the Great Whore, with their wicked agents (the kings of the earth and their armies). Opposed to them are: God, Christ, the archangel and his minions, the "new Jerusalem," and the company of earthly saints.

Satre (1984) comments, "Humans are in the thick of it" (p. 60). Abrams (1988) observes, "The consummation of history will occur, not by mediation between these polar opposites, but only after the extirpation of the forces of evil by the forces of good" (p. 11).

The history of kingdoms and kings is portrayed as under the deterministic control of the all-powerful God of heaven (Dan. 2:45; Rev. 1:1). The forces of evil may appear to be on the verge of sweeping over the forces of good, yet in God's good time the persecuting tyrant will be judged. This deterministic control of the creator governs the external events of history. Yet, the individual is free to choose which side to join (Collins, 1977, p. 336).

Satre (1984) comments, "Despair and hope are the Siamese twins of apocalyptic theology" (p. 60). The servant's hope is to be found in Christus Victor.

Apocalypses borrow widely from previously written texts. Some use direct quotations. Although Revelation is filled with allusions to many Old Testament books, there are no direct quotes. Instead, John is more likely to borrow and shape the Old Testament allusions and metaphors to his own purpose.

Although apocalyptic literature is boldly symbolical, the readers were expected to understand the meaning of the symbolism. According to Satre (1984),

Apocalypses are not meant to be obscure to their intended audience; they are composed to uncover, to reveal. They are exposes par excellence, meaningful to their first readers, with messages subject to contextual controls, and therefore are not to be subjected to the whims and fantasies of scaremongers and bookmongers 2,000 months or 2,000 years after they were written (p.61).

Numerology

A proper understanding of Revelation can be helped by an understanding of the numerology of Revelation. Hailey (1979, pp. 41-48) and Summers (1951, pp. 21-26) include discussions of the role played by numbers (numerology) in the Apocalypse.

• One stood for independent existence. This number is not used symbolically in Revelation.

• Two stood for strength, for confirmation, for redoubled courage or effort. Thus, the word is confirmed by two witnesses (Rev. 11:3-12); two lampstands stand before the throne.

• Three is used as a symbol of the divine.

• Four indicated the world in which men worked, lived and died or the forces of nature. Scripture alludes to, "four corners of the earth" (Isa. 11:12), "the four winds" (Jer. 49:36), and four world empires (Daniel 2).

• Six was the number of man (one short of perfect). This was an appropriate number for man who was made, "a little lower than the angels" (Psa. 8).

• Seven was the most sacred number to the Hebrew mind. It signified completeness through union with heaven (3+4=7).

• Three & one-half was half of the complete number 7 and therefore symbolized the incomplete, indefinite or imperfect.

• Ten equals completeness.

• Twelve is used of organized religion. There were twelve tribes of Israel, twelve apostles, twelve gates to the holy city of Revelation.

• Twenty-four is the doubling of twelve. In Revelation, the twenty-four elders suggest the presence of the Jewish church and the New Testament church in heaven.

• One Thousand  represents a large indefinite period of time or grouping. Example:

(Psalms 50:10 NKJV) "For every beast of the forest is Mine, And the cattle on a thousand thousand hills."