Wednesday, September 13, 2006
4 VIEWS OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION
via email from Rusty Lee Thomas
Historical: Joachim of Fiore (1132-1202) was the first to introduce the historical view of interpreting the book of Revelation as a detailed prediction concerning the course of history. He systematically divided all history into an age of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The method he utilized is called the day/year formula. This view is based upon counting each day as a year. Once he established this formula, he went on to divide the entire book into seven periods of the Church.
He believed that he was personally living in the sixth period and was anxiously awaiting the seventh period that would usher in the final age. He was convinced the seventh and final stage would begin about 1260. At first, this view taught the different prophecies in the book referred to the same event. However, this view was later discarded and a chronological sequence replaced the original view.
The historical approach relies heavily upon the formula that a day in prophetic time is a year. Psalm 90:4 states, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” 2 Peter 3:8 states, “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” Both of these passages are cited to support the historical view. Obviously, these passages of Scripture do not speak specifically of a day prophetically becoming a year. It speaks in terms of God’s realm, which is outside of time, as a day being a thousand years or vice versa. Those who tend to overly spiritualize the Scriptures typically embrace this view. All these passages of Scripture teach, however, is that any apparent lapse of time does not invalidate God’s promises. God is simply above time, but He does act in His own good time.
Objections To This View
Advocates for the historical view cite Numbers 14:33,34 which states, “And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms, until your carcases be wasted in the wilderness. After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.” Israel was punished forty years for their unbelief. According to the historical view, Israel suffered God’s penalty as one year for each day the land of Canaan was explored.
David Clark points out, “Had God said they should wander forty days and the time turned out to be forty years the theory might claim some support.” Secondly, if the passage in Numbers represents a universal law, we should expect to see it illustrated in other examples of fulfilled prophecy. For instance, Noah’s flood which was predicted to last forty days did not take forty years to end. When Jesus declared that he would be crucified and resurrected in three days, did He intend to encourage the Apostles to wait three years till he came back from the tomb? The list could go on and on with such examples.
There are specific passages of Scripture that speaks of actual years, but none of them establishes this “prophetic” interpretation that a day means a year. Scriptures, such as, Judges 17:10, 1 Samuel 2:19; 2 Chronicles 21:19, and Isaiah 32:10 are a few examples that teach a year means an actual year and not a day.
John Walvoord, who holds to a futurist view of the book of Revelation, claimed at least fifty different interpretations that have arisen from the historical view. According to him, the historical view “seldom if ever takes cognizance of the Church outside Europe.” This weakness becomes even more pronounced as much of the Church’s growth in history takes places outside of Western Europe. Lastly, every prediction based upon this model of interpretation concerning chronological date setting has proven to be false and misleading.
Idealism: Those who hold to the idealist or spiritual approach to the book of Revelation, do not believe in any specific time frame concerning prophetic fulfillment. Their orientation is neither futurist (future fulfillment) or preterist (past fulfillment). The Idealist views the book of Revelation as a series of spiritual concepts, Biblical principles, and moral lessons that are universal in scope and are observed and applied in each generation throughout God’s redemptive history. It depicts the book of Revelation as the ultimate conflict between good and evil. It is the tale of two cities- fallen Babylon and the rise of New Jerusalem.
The Idealist believes that the truths contained in the book of Revelation are applicable to all ages in the struggle of right against evil. It encourages the saints to patiently suffer persecution and await the divine intervention of God to judge their persecutors and liberate His people from oppression.
Objections To This View
Some who object to this view believe that the book of Revelation was not written primarily to be a devotional book for suffering saints, regardless of what stage of history they found themselves. There must be some historical framework. The book of Revelation is primarily apocalyptic in nature. It warns of impending judgment. This would provide very little comfort if the Church could not be certain of a time frame.
Philip Carrington argued that Revelation was “decidedly a message to its own age, that its tone is too fierce to be the product of a philosophical interest in the general laws of history, and that a Hebrew never thought of the spiritual except as an actual living force in present history.” Robert Wall thought this view tended toward existentialism and an individualistic approach to interpretation. In other words, it makes the Church devoid of a unified eschatological meaning to the book. Its weakness then does not take into account the role of history in interpreting the book.
Futurist: As with the Idealist, the Futurist interpretation also removes any historical verification of the book of Revelation. Whereas the Historical view interprets Revelation in light of European history, the Futurist views Revelation in the light of current events and political trends, especially, as they relate to the Middle East. Most Futurists believe that the Church is raptured in Revelation 4:1 which states, “After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.” According to the Futurist view, the rest of the book is future as well.
Objections To This View
In context of Revelation 4:1, the heavenly message was given specifically to the Apostle John, the human writer and chosen vessel of this divine revelation, and not granted generally to all believers as the Futurist teach. The purpose for the passage is to reveal the near future, not for the Church to escape tribulation upon the earth. Plus, the Futurist, out of all the different interpreters of the book of Revelation, is most likely to advocate a literal interpretation of a highly prophetical, symbolic book. Henry Morris explained, “It is inevitable that literalistic expositors of Revelation will be primarily futurists since practically none of the events of Revelation 4-22 have yet taken place in any literal sense.” It may, however, have been literally fulfilled through symbolic and prophetic language. This possibility does not enter the thinking of the Futurist.
Revelation 1:1 gives two important keys the Futurist must struggle with when it comes to interpreting the book of Revelation. It states, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.” Notice first, the time frame issue. The Revelation of Jesus Christ “must shortly come to pass.” The Strong’s Concordance defines the term shortly as an adverb from 5036; briefly, i.e. (in time) speedily, or (in manner) rapidly: --hastily, quickly, shortly, soon, suddenly.
Add to this, the shortly time frame theme is repeated throughout the entire book. Revelation 1:3 states “the time is near.” Revelation 1:7 states that Christ is coming (present tense). Revelation 2:5 states, “Christ will come to you (quickly).” Revelation 2:16 states that Christ will come quickly. Revelation 3:11 states that Christ is coming quickly. Revelation 6:11 states that the martyrs should rest for a little season.
At the end of the book, the theme remains the same. Revelation 22:6,7 states, “And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.” Revelation 22:10 states, “And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.” Revelation 22:12 and 20 both state the Christ is coming soon. If words mean anything, soon does not mean thousands of years.
Secondly, the book of Revelation came from God and it is all about one topic, namely our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Its stated purpose is the Revelation of Jesus Christ and not a revelation of end times. It came through an angel to John by way of signifying the truth of Jesus Christ. The word signifying comes from sema (a mark; of uncertain derivation); to indicate: --signify. The dictionary defines the term as a sign or an indication of; it is a sign that represents something or makes known.
In other words, from the very beginning of this highly controversial book, God warns against taking a literal approach of interpreting its contents. Its signified, symbolic, figurative language that employs much of the prophetic language found in the Old Testament. Commentator Tenny wrote, “(semaino, signified) This term evidently meant a kind of communication that is neither plain statement nor an attempt at concealment. It is figurative, symbolic, or imaginative, and is intended to convey truth by picture rather than by definition.”
Preterist: The word preterist is taken from the Latin praeteritus, which means past or gone by. This view takes into account the historical time frame that had great significance to the early Church for whom it was written. In other words, the Apostle John wrote to the generation that was his contemporaries and not to a future audience. If what he wrote had no bearing upon his generation, then why address them in the first place? If the book of Revelation is just a futurist book with no reality to those to whom it was written, then surely God would have made this clarification. The preterist believes He did not make this clarification.
The preterist believes that just as the Apostle Paul wrote epistles to the early Church that dealt with specific issues challenging the Church in his generation, so is the book of Revelation. Paul wrote about specific problems, but because it is the word of God, they are timeless in their application. The same is true with the book of Revelation according to preterism. Though it was written to those it would impact, it is the word of God that continues to speak to us today and forever.
The preterist, therefore, takes into account not only the historical context with its interpretation that had relevance to the first century audience, but also its application to the Church in every period of time.
Objection To This View
Typically, those who deny this view point out the weakness is the preterist relies too much upon interpreting the prophetic Scriptures as figurative or symbolic. They demand a more literal approach to interpreting the book of Revelation.
IN KING JESUS' SERVICE,
Rusty
Historical: Joachim of Fiore (1132-1202) was the first to introduce the historical view of interpreting the book of Revelation as a detailed prediction concerning the course of history. He systematically divided all history into an age of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The method he utilized is called the day/year formula. This view is based upon counting each day as a year. Once he established this formula, he went on to divide the entire book into seven periods of the Church.
He believed that he was personally living in the sixth period and was anxiously awaiting the seventh period that would usher in the final age. He was convinced the seventh and final stage would begin about 1260. At first, this view taught the different prophecies in the book referred to the same event. However, this view was later discarded and a chronological sequence replaced the original view.
The historical approach relies heavily upon the formula that a day in prophetic time is a year. Psalm 90:4 states, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” 2 Peter 3:8 states, “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” Both of these passages are cited to support the historical view. Obviously, these passages of Scripture do not speak specifically of a day prophetically becoming a year. It speaks in terms of God’s realm, which is outside of time, as a day being a thousand years or vice versa. Those who tend to overly spiritualize the Scriptures typically embrace this view. All these passages of Scripture teach, however, is that any apparent lapse of time does not invalidate God’s promises. God is simply above time, but He does act in His own good time.
Objections To This View
Advocates for the historical view cite Numbers 14:33,34 which states, “And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms, until your carcases be wasted in the wilderness. After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise.” Israel was punished forty years for their unbelief. According to the historical view, Israel suffered God’s penalty as one year for each day the land of Canaan was explored.
David Clark points out, “Had God said they should wander forty days and the time turned out to be forty years the theory might claim some support.” Secondly, if the passage in Numbers represents a universal law, we should expect to see it illustrated in other examples of fulfilled prophecy. For instance, Noah’s flood which was predicted to last forty days did not take forty years to end. When Jesus declared that he would be crucified and resurrected in three days, did He intend to encourage the Apostles to wait three years till he came back from the tomb? The list could go on and on with such examples.
There are specific passages of Scripture that speaks of actual years, but none of them establishes this “prophetic” interpretation that a day means a year. Scriptures, such as, Judges 17:10, 1 Samuel 2:19; 2 Chronicles 21:19, and Isaiah 32:10 are a few examples that teach a year means an actual year and not a day.
John Walvoord, who holds to a futurist view of the book of Revelation, claimed at least fifty different interpretations that have arisen from the historical view. According to him, the historical view “seldom if ever takes cognizance of the Church outside Europe.” This weakness becomes even more pronounced as much of the Church’s growth in history takes places outside of Western Europe. Lastly, every prediction based upon this model of interpretation concerning chronological date setting has proven to be false and misleading.
Idealism: Those who hold to the idealist or spiritual approach to the book of Revelation, do not believe in any specific time frame concerning prophetic fulfillment. Their orientation is neither futurist (future fulfillment) or preterist (past fulfillment). The Idealist views the book of Revelation as a series of spiritual concepts, Biblical principles, and moral lessons that are universal in scope and are observed and applied in each generation throughout God’s redemptive history. It depicts the book of Revelation as the ultimate conflict between good and evil. It is the tale of two cities- fallen Babylon and the rise of New Jerusalem.
The Idealist believes that the truths contained in the book of Revelation are applicable to all ages in the struggle of right against evil. It encourages the saints to patiently suffer persecution and await the divine intervention of God to judge their persecutors and liberate His people from oppression.
Objections To This View
Some who object to this view believe that the book of Revelation was not written primarily to be a devotional book for suffering saints, regardless of what stage of history they found themselves. There must be some historical framework. The book of Revelation is primarily apocalyptic in nature. It warns of impending judgment. This would provide very little comfort if the Church could not be certain of a time frame.
Philip Carrington argued that Revelation was “decidedly a message to its own age, that its tone is too fierce to be the product of a philosophical interest in the general laws of history, and that a Hebrew never thought of the spiritual except as an actual living force in present history.” Robert Wall thought this view tended toward existentialism and an individualistic approach to interpretation. In other words, it makes the Church devoid of a unified eschatological meaning to the book. Its weakness then does not take into account the role of history in interpreting the book.
Futurist: As with the Idealist, the Futurist interpretation also removes any historical verification of the book of Revelation. Whereas the Historical view interprets Revelation in light of European history, the Futurist views Revelation in the light of current events and political trends, especially, as they relate to the Middle East. Most Futurists believe that the Church is raptured in Revelation 4:1 which states, “After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.” According to the Futurist view, the rest of the book is future as well.
Objections To This View
In context of Revelation 4:1, the heavenly message was given specifically to the Apostle John, the human writer and chosen vessel of this divine revelation, and not granted generally to all believers as the Futurist teach. The purpose for the passage is to reveal the near future, not for the Church to escape tribulation upon the earth. Plus, the Futurist, out of all the different interpreters of the book of Revelation, is most likely to advocate a literal interpretation of a highly prophetical, symbolic book. Henry Morris explained, “It is inevitable that literalistic expositors of Revelation will be primarily futurists since practically none of the events of Revelation 4-22 have yet taken place in any literal sense.” It may, however, have been literally fulfilled through symbolic and prophetic language. This possibility does not enter the thinking of the Futurist.
Revelation 1:1 gives two important keys the Futurist must struggle with when it comes to interpreting the book of Revelation. It states, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.” Notice first, the time frame issue. The Revelation of Jesus Christ “must shortly come to pass.” The Strong’s Concordance defines the term shortly as an adverb from 5036; briefly, i.e. (in time) speedily, or (in manner) rapidly: --hastily, quickly, shortly, soon, suddenly.
Add to this, the shortly time frame theme is repeated throughout the entire book. Revelation 1:3 states “the time is near.” Revelation 1:7 states that Christ is coming (present tense). Revelation 2:5 states, “Christ will come to you (quickly).” Revelation 2:16 states that Christ will come quickly. Revelation 3:11 states that Christ is coming quickly. Revelation 6:11 states that the martyrs should rest for a little season.
At the end of the book, the theme remains the same. Revelation 22:6,7 states, “And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.” Revelation 22:10 states, “And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.” Revelation 22:12 and 20 both state the Christ is coming soon. If words mean anything, soon does not mean thousands of years.
Secondly, the book of Revelation came from God and it is all about one topic, namely our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Its stated purpose is the Revelation of Jesus Christ and not a revelation of end times. It came through an angel to John by way of signifying the truth of Jesus Christ. The word signifying comes from sema (a mark; of uncertain derivation); to indicate: --signify. The dictionary defines the term as a sign or an indication of; it is a sign that represents something or makes known.
In other words, from the very beginning of this highly controversial book, God warns against taking a literal approach of interpreting its contents. Its signified, symbolic, figurative language that employs much of the prophetic language found in the Old Testament. Commentator Tenny wrote, “(semaino, signified) This term evidently meant a kind of communication that is neither plain statement nor an attempt at concealment. It is figurative, symbolic, or imaginative, and is intended to convey truth by picture rather than by definition.”
Preterist: The word preterist is taken from the Latin praeteritus, which means past or gone by. This view takes into account the historical time frame that had great significance to the early Church for whom it was written. In other words, the Apostle John wrote to the generation that was his contemporaries and not to a future audience. If what he wrote had no bearing upon his generation, then why address them in the first place? If the book of Revelation is just a futurist book with no reality to those to whom it was written, then surely God would have made this clarification. The preterist believes He did not make this clarification.
The preterist believes that just as the Apostle Paul wrote epistles to the early Church that dealt with specific issues challenging the Church in his generation, so is the book of Revelation. Paul wrote about specific problems, but because it is the word of God, they are timeless in their application. The same is true with the book of Revelation according to preterism. Though it was written to those it would impact, it is the word of God that continues to speak to us today and forever.
The preterist, therefore, takes into account not only the historical context with its interpretation that had relevance to the first century audience, but also its application to the Church in every period of time.
Objection To This View
Typically, those who deny this view point out the weakness is the preterist relies too much upon interpreting the prophetic Scriptures as figurative or symbolic. They demand a more literal approach to interpreting the book of Revelation.
IN KING JESUS' SERVICE,
Rusty
posted by Steve Harris, 6:16 PM
0 Comments:
-
- Reclaiming America for Christ
- John Piper Ministries
- Elijah Ministries
- Man in The Mirror
- Setting Captives Free
- Stand to Reason
- Foundation for American Christian Education
- American Center for Law and Justice
Marriage & Family
Christian Views
Tax Reform
General Politics
God, family, and country. My allegiance stands in that order. Church and State will illustrate my opinions on issues of religion and politics, along with regular thoughts on family.
Contact Me
Recently Published Letters
Blogs I Read
- Blue Dog
- The Market Center Blog
- Government Bytes
- RedState
- The Club for Growth
- Tax Policy Blog
- Joshua P. Allem
Archive
- current
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
