| |
Easton's Bible Dictionary
The Apocalypse, the closing book and the only prophetical
book of the New Testament canon. The author of this book was undoubtedly John
the apostle. His name occurs four times in the book itself ( Revelation
1:1 , 1:4
, 1:9
; 22:8
), and there is every reason to conclude that the "John" here mentioned was the
apostle. In a manuscript of about the twelfth century he is called "John the divine,"
but no reason can be assigned for this appellation.
The date of the writing of this book has generally been fixed at A.D. 96, in the
reign of Domitian. There are some, however, who contend for an earlier date, A.D.
68 or 69, in the reign of Nero. Those who are in favour of the later date appeal
to the testimony of the Christian father Irenaeus, who received information relative
to this book from those who had seen John face to face. He says that the Apocalypse
"was seen no long time ago."
As to the relation between this book and the Gospel of John, it has been well
observed that "the leading ideas of both are the same. The one gives us in a magnificent
vision, the other in a great historic drama, the supreme conflict between good
and evil and its issue. In both Jesus Christ is the central figure, whose victory
through defeat is the issue of the conflict. In both the Jewish dispensation is
the preparation for the gospel, and the warfare and triumph of the Christ is described
in language saturated with the Old Testament. The difference of date will go a
long way toward explaining the difference of style." Plummer's Gospel of St. John,
Introd.
Hitchcock's Dictionary of Bible Names
(no entry)
Smith's Bible Dictionary
(REVELATION OF ST. JOHN)
The last book of the New Testament. It is often called the Apocalypse, which is
its title in Greek, signifying "Revelation".
Canonical authority and authorship. --
The inquiry as to the canonical authority of the Revelation resolves itself into
a question of authorship. Was St. John the apostle and evangelist the writer of
the Revelation? The evidence adduced in support of his being the author consists
of (1) the assertions of the author and (2) historical tradition.
(1) The authors description of himself in the 1st and 22d
chapters is certainly equivalent to an assertion that he is the apostle. He names
himself simply John, without prefix or addition. is also described as a servant
of Christ, one who had borne testimony as an eye-witness of the word of God and
of the testimony of Christ. He is in Patmos for the word of God and the testimony
of Jesus Christ. He is also a fellow sufferer with those whom he addresses, and
the authorized channel of the most direct and important communication that was
ever made to the Seven Churches of Asia, of which churches John the apostle was
at that time the spiritual governor and teacher. Lastly, the writer was a fellow
servant of angels and a brother of prophets. All these marks are found united
in the apostle John, and in him alone of all historical persons.
(2) A long series of writers testify to St. Johns authorship: Justin Martyr (cir.
150 A.D.), Eusebius, Irenaeus (A.D. 195), Clement of Alexandria (about 200), Tertullian
(207), Origen (233). All the foregoing writers, testifying that the book came
from an apostle, believed that it was a part of Holy Scripture. The book was admitted
into the list of the Third Council of Carthage, A.D. 397. |
Time and place of writing. --
The date of the Revelation is given by the great majority of critics as A.D. 95-97.
Irenaeus says: "It (i.e. the Revelation) was seen no very long time ago, but almost
in our own generation, at the close of Domitians reign. Eusebius also records
that, in the persecution under Domitian, John the apostle and evangelist was banished
to the Island Patmos for his testimony of the divine word. There is no mention
in any writer of the first three centuries of any other time or place, and the
style in which the messages to the Seven Churches are delivered rather suggests
the notion that the book was written in Patmos.
Interpretation. --
Modern interpreters are generally placed in three great divisions:
(a) The Historical or Continuous exposition, in whose opinion
the Revelation is a progressive history of the fortunes of the Church from the
first century to the end of time.
(b) The Praeterist expositors, who are of opinion that the Revelation has been
almost or altogether fulfilled in the time which has passed since it was written;
that it refers principally to the triumph of Christianity over Judaism and Paganism,
signalized in the downfall of Jerusalem and of Rome.
(c) The Futurist expositors, whose views show a strong reaction against some extravagances
of the two preceding schools. They believe that the whole book, excepting perhaps
the first three chapters, refers principally, if not exclusively, to events which
are yet-to come. |
Dr. Arnold in his sermons "On the Interpretation of Prophecy"
suggests that we should bear in mind that predictions have a lower historical
sense as well as a higher spiritual sense; that there may be one or more than
one typical, imperfect, historical fulfillment of the prophecy, in each of which
the higher spiritual fulfillment is shadowed forth more or less distinctly.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
(REVELATION OF JOHN)
The last book of the New Testament. It professes to be the record of prophetic
visions given by Jesus Christ to John, while the latter was a prisoner, "for the
word of God and the testimony of Jesus" (Revelation 1:9), in PATMOS (which see),
a small rocky island in the Aegean, about 15 miles West of Ephesus. Its precursor
in the Old Testament is the Book of Dnl, with the symbolic visions and mystical
numbers of which it stands in close affinity. The peculiar form of the book, its
relation to other "apocalyptic" writings, and to the Fourth Gospel, likewise attributed
to John, the interpretation of its symbols, with disputed questions of its date,
of worship, unity, relations to contemporary history, etc., have made it one of
the most difficult books in the New Testament to explain satisfactorily.
I. TITLE AND GENERAL CHARACTER OF BOOK
1. Title
"Revelation" answers to apokalupsis, in Revelation 1:1. The oldest form of the
title would seem to be simply, "Apocalypse of John," the appended words "the divine"
(theologos, i.e. "theologian") not being older than the 4th century (compare the
title given to Gregory of Nazianzus, "Gregory theologian"). The book belongs to
the class of works commonly named "apocalyptic," as containing visions and revelations
of the future, frequently in symbolical form (e.g. the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse
of Bar, the Apocalypse of Ezr; see APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE), but it is doubtful
if the word here bears this technical sense. The tendency at present is to group
the New Testament Apocalypse with these others, and attribute to it the same kind
of origin as theirs, namely, in the unbridled play of religious fantasy, clothing
itself in unreal visional form.
2. Uniqueness and Reality of Visions
But there is a wide distinction. These other works are pseudonymous--fictitious;
on the face of them products of imagination; betraying that this is their origin
in their crude, confused, unedifying character. The Apocalypse bears on it the
name of its author--an apostle of Jesus Christ (see below); claims to rest on
real visions; rings with the accent of sincerity; is orderly, serious, sublime,
purposeful, in its conceptions; deals with the most solemn and momentous of themes.
On the modern Nerotheory, to which most recent expositors give adherence, it is
a farrago of baseless fantasies, no one of which came true. On its own claim it
is a product of true prophecy (Revelation 1:3 ; 22:18), and has or will have sure
fulfillment. Parallels here and there are sought between it and the Book of Enoch
or the Apocalypse of Ezra. As a rule the resemblances arise from the fact that
these works draw from the same store of the ideas and imagery of the Old Testament.
It is there the key is chiefly to be sought to the symbolism of John. The Apocalypse
is steeped in the thoughts, the images, even the language of the Old Testament
(compare the illustrations in Lightfoot, Galatians, 361, where it is remarked:
"The whole book is saturated with illustrations from the Old Testament. It speaks
not the language of Paul, but of Isaiah and Ezekiel and Daniel"). These remarks
will receive elucidation in what follows. |
II. CANONICITY AND AUTHORSHIP
1. Patristic Testimony
The two questions of canonicity and authorship are closely connected. Eusebius
states that opinion in his day was divided on the book, and he himself wavers
between placing it among the disputed books or ranking it with the acknowledged
(homologoumena). "Among these," he says, "if such a view seem correct, we must
place the Apocalypse of John" (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 25). That it was rightly
so placed appears from a survey of the evidence. The first to refer to the book
expressly is Justin Martyr (circa 140 AD), who speaks of it as the work of "a
certain man, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ" (Dial, 81). Irenaeus
(circa 180 AD) repeatedly and decisively declares that the Apocalypse was written
by John, a disciple of the Lord (Adv. Haer., iv.20, 11; 30, 4; v.26, 1; 35, 2,
etc.), and comments on the number 666 (v.30, 1). In his case there can be no doubt
that the apostle John is meant. Andreas of Cappadocia (5th century) in a Commentary
on the Apocalypse states that Papias (circa 130 AD) bore witness to its credibility,
and cites a comment by him on Revelation 12:7-9. The book is quoted in the Epistle
on the martyrs of Vienne and Lyons (177 AD); had a commentary written on it by
Melito of Sardis (circa 170 AD), one of the churches of the Apocalypse (Euseb.,
HE, IV, 26); was used by Theophilus of Antioch (circa 168 AD) and by Apollonius
(circa 210 AD; HE, V, 25)--in these cases being cited as the Apocalypse of John.
It is included as John's in the Canon of Muratori (circa 200 AD). The Johannine
authorship (apostolic) is abundantly attested by Tertullian (circa 200 AD; Adv.
Mar., iii.14, 24, etc.); by Hippolytus (circa 240 AD), who wrote a work upon it;
by Clement of Alexandria (circa 200 AD); by Origen (circa 230 AD), and other writers.
Doubt about the authorship of the book is first heard of in the obscure sect of
the Alogi (end of the 2nd century), who, with Caius, a Roman presbyter (circa
205 AD), attributed it to Cerinthus. More serious was the criticism of Dionysius
of Alexandria (circa 250 AD), who, on internal grounds, held that the Fourth Gospel
and the Apocalypse could not have come from the same pen (Euseb., HE, VII, 25).
He granted, however, that it was the work of a holy and inspired man--another
John. The result was that, while "in the Western church," as Bousset grants, "the
Apocalypse was accepted unanimously from the first" (EB, I, 193), a certain doubt
attached to it for a time in sections of the Greek and Syrian churches. It is
not found in the Peshitta, and a citation from it in Ephraim the Syrian (circa
373) seems not to be genuine. Cyril of Jerusalem (circa 386 AD) omits it from
his list, and it is unmentioned by the Antiochian writers (Chrysostom, Theodore
of Mopsuestia, Theodoret). The Canon attributed to the Council of Laodicea (circa
360 AD) does not name it, but it is doubtful whether this document is not of later
date (compare Westcott; also Bousset, Die Offenb. Joh., 28). On the other hand,
the book is acknowledged by Methodius, Pamphilus, Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa,
Cyril Alex., Epiphanius, etc.
2. Testimony of Book Itself
The testimony to the canonicity, and also to the Johannine authorship, of the
Apocalypse is thus exceptionally strong. In full accordance with it is the claim
of the book itself. It proclaims itself to be the work of John (Revelation 1:1
, 4 , 9 ; 22:8), who does not, indeed, name himself an apostle, yet, in his inspired
character, position of authority in the Asian churches, and selection as the medium
of these revelations, can hardly be thought of as other than the well-known John
of the Gospels and of consentient church tradition. The alternative view, first
suggested as a possibility by Eusebius, now largely favored by modern writers,
is that the John intended is the "presbyter John" of a well-known passage cited
by Eusebius from Papias (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 39). Without entering into
the intricate questions connected with this "presbyter John"--whether he was really
a distinct person from the apostle (Zahn and others dispute it), or whether, if
he was, he resided at Ephesus (see JOHN, GOSPEL OF)--it is enough here to say
that the reason already given, viz: the importance and place of authority of the
author of the Apocalypse in the Asian churches, and the emphatic testimony above
cited connecting him with the apostle, forbid the attribution of the book to a
writer wholly unknown to church tradition, save for this casual reference to him
in Papias. Had the assumed presbyter really been the author, he could not have
dropped so completely out of the knowledge of the church, and had his place taken
all but immediately by the apostle.
3. Objections to Johannine Authorship--Relation to Fourth Gospel
One cause of the hesitancy regarding the Apocalypse in early circles was dislike
of its millenarianism; but the chief reason, set forth with much critical skill
by Dionysius of Alexandria (Euseb., HE, VII, 25), was the undoubted contrast in
character and style between this work and the Fourth Gospel, likewise claiming
to be from the pen of John. Two works so diverse in character--the Gospel calm,
spiritual, mystical, abounding in characteristic expressions as "life," "light,"
"love," etc., written in idiomatic Greek; the Apocalypse abrupt, mysterious, material
in its imagery, inexact and barbarous in its idioms, sometimes employing solecisms--could
not, it was argued, proceed from the same author. Not much, beyond amplification
of detail, has been added to the force of the arguments of Dionysius. There were
three possibilities--either first, admitting the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse,
to assail the genuineness of the Gospel--this was the method of the school of
Baur; or, second, accepting the Gospel, to seek a different author for the Apocalypse--John
the presbyter, or another: thus not a few reverent scholars (Bleek, Neander, etc.);
or, third, with most moderns, to deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel
and Apocalypse, with a leaning to the "presbyter" as the author of the latter
(Harnack, Bousset, Moffatt, etc.). Singularly there has been of late in the advanced
school itself a movement in the direction of recognizing that this difficulty
of style is less formidable than it looks--that, in fact, beneath the surface
difference, there is a strong body of resemblances pointing to a close relationship
of Gospel and Apocalypse. This had long been argued by the older writers (Godet,
Luthardt, Alford, Salmon, etc.), but it is now more freely acknowledged. As instances
among many may be noted the use of the term "Logos" (Revelation 19:13), the image
of the "Lamb," figures like "water of life" words and phrases as "true," "he that
overcometh," "keep the commandments," etc. A striking coincidence is the form
of quotation of Zechariah 12:10 in John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7. If the Greek
in parts shows a certain abruptness and roughness, it is plainly evidenced by
the use of the correct constructions in other passages that this is not due to
want of knowledge of the language. "The very rules which he breaks in one place
he observes in others" (Salmon). There are, besides, subtle affinities in the
Greek usage of the two books, and some of the very irregularities complained of
are found in the Gospel (for ample details consult Bousset, op. cit.; Godet, Commentary
on John, I, 267-70, English translation; Alford, Greek Test., IV, 224-28; Salmon,
Introduction to the New Testament, 233-43, 2nd edition; the last-named writer
says: "I have produced instances enough to establish decisively that there is
the closest possible affinity between the Revelation and the other Johannine books").
Great differences in character and style no doubt still remain. Some, to leave
room for these, favor an early date for the Apocalypse (68-69 BC; on this below);
the trend of opinion, however, now seems, as will be shown, to be moving back
to the traditional date in the reign of Domitian, in which case the Gospel will
be the earlier, and the Apocalypse the later work. This, likewise, seems to yield
the better explanation. The tremendous experiences of Patmos, bursting through
all ordinary and calmer states of consciousness, must have produced startling
changes in thought and style of composition. The "rapt seer" will not speak and
write like the selfcollected, calmly brooding evangelist. |
III. DATE AND UNITY OF THE BOOK
1. Traditional Date under Domitian
Eusebius, in summing up the tradition of the Church on this subject, assigns John's
exile to Patmos, and consequently the composition of the Apocalypse, to the latter
part of the reign of Domitian (81-96 AD). Irenaeus (circa 180 AD) says of the
book, "For it was seen, not a long time ago, but almost in our own generation,
at the end of the reign of Domitian" (Adv. Haer., v.30, 3). This testimony is
confirmed by Clement of Alexandria (who speaks of "the tyrant"), Origen, and later
writers. Epiphanius (4th century), indeed, puts (Haer., li.12, 233) the exile
to Patmos in the reign of Claudius (41-54 AD); but as, in the same sentence, he
speaks of the apostle as 90 years of age, it is plain there is a strange blunder
in the name of the emperor. The former date answers to the conditions of the book
(decadence of the churches; widespread and severe persecution), and to the predilection
of Domitian for this mode of banishment (compare Tacitus, History i.2; Eusebius,
Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 18).
2. The Nero-Theory
This, accordingly, may be regarded as the traditional date of composition of the
Apocalypse, though good writers, influenced partly by the desire to give time
for the later composition of the Gospel, have signified a preference for an earlier
date (e.g. Westcott, Salmon). It is by no means to be assumed, however, that the
Apocalypse is the earlier production. The tendency of recent criticism, it will
be seen immediately, is to revert to the traditional date (Bousset, etc.); but
for a decade or two, through the prevalence of what may be called the "Nero-theory"
of the book, the pendulum swung strongly in favor of its composition shortly after
the death of Nero, and before the destruction of Jerusalem (held to be shown to
be still standing by Revelation 11), i.e. about 68-69 AD. This date was even held
to be demonstrated beyond all question. Reuss may be taken as an example. According
to him (Christian Theology of the Apostolic Age, I, 369, English translation),
apart from the ridiculous preconceptions of theologians, the Apocalypse is "the
most simple, most transparent book that prophet ever penned." "There is no other
apostolical writing the chronology of which can be more exactly fixed." "It was
written before the destruction of Jerusalem, under the emperor Galba--that is
to say, in the second half of the year 68 of our era." He proceeds to discuss
"the irrefutable proofs" of this. The proof, in brief, is found in the beast (not
introduced till Revelation 13) with seven heads, one of which has been mortally
wounded, but is for the present healed (Revelation 13:3). "This is the Roman empire,
with its first 7 emperors, one of whom is killed, but is to live again as Antichrist"
(compare Revelation 17:10 f). The key to the whole book is said to be given in
Revelation 13:18, where the number of the beast is declared to be 666. Applying
the method of numerical values (the Jewish Gematria), this number is found to
correspond with the name "Nero Caesar" in Hebrew letters (omitting the yodh, the
Hebrew letter "y"). Nero then is the 5th head that is to live again; an interpretation
confirmed by rumors prevalent at that time that Nero was not really dead, but
only hidden, and was soon to return to claim his throne. As if to make assurance
doubly sure, it is found that by dropping the final "n" in "Neron," the number
becomes 616--a number which Irenaeus in his comments on the subject (v.30,1) tells
us was actually found in some ancient copies. The meaning therefore is thought
to be clear. Writing under the emperor Galba, the 6th emperor (reckoning from
Augustus), the author anticipates, after a short reign of a 7th emperor (Revelation
17:10), the return of the Antichrist Nero--an 8th, but of the 7, with whom is
to come the end. Jerusalem is to be miraculously preserved (Revelation 11), but
Rome is to perish. This is to happen within the space of 3 1/2 years. "The final
catastrophe, which was to destroy the city and empire, was to take place in three
years and a half. .... The writer knows .... that Rome will in three years and
a half perish finally, never to rise again." It does not matter for this theory
that not one of the things predicted happened--that every anticipation was falsified.
Nero did not return; Jerusalem was not saved; Rome did not perish; 3 1/2 years
did not see the end of all things. Yet the Christian-church, though the failure
of every one of these predictions had been decisively demonstrated, received the
book as of divine inspiration, apparently without the least idea that such things
had been intended (see the form of theory in Renan, with a keen criticism in Salmon's
Introduction to the New Testament, lecture xiv).
3. Composite Hypotheses--Babylonian Theory
What is to be said with reference to this "Nero-theory" belongs to subsequent
sections: meanwhile it is to be observed that, while portions of theory are retained,
significant changes have since taken place in the view entertained of the book
as a whole, and with this of the date to be assigned to it. First, after 1882,
came a flood of disintegrating hypotheses, based on the idea that the Apocalypse
was not a unity, but was either a working up of one or more Jewish apocalypses
by Christian hands, or at least incorporated fragments of such apocalypses (Uslter,
Vischer, Weizsacker, Weyland, Pfieiderer, Spitta, etc.). Harnack lent his influential
support to the form of this theory advocated by Vischer, and for a time the idea
had vogue. Very soon, however, it fell into discredit through its own excesses
(for details on the different views, see Bousset, or Moffatt's Introduction to
the New Testament, 489), and through increasing appreciation of the internal evidence
for the unity of the book. Gunkel, in his Schopfung und Chaos (1895), started
another line of criticism in his derivation of the conceptions of the book, not
from Jewish apocalypse, but from Babylonian mythology. He assailed with sharp
criticism the "contemporary history" school of interpretation (the "Nero-theory"
above), and declared its "bankruptcy." The number of the beast, with him, found
its solution, not in Nero, but in the Hebrew name for the primeval chaos. This
theory, too, has failed in general acceptance, though elements in it are adopted
by most recent interpreters. The modified view most in favor now is that the Apocalypse
is, indeed, the work of a Christian writer of the end of the 1st century, but
embodies certain sections borrowed from Jewish apocalypse (as Revelation 7:1 -
8, the 144,000; Revelation 11, measuring of the temple and the two witnesses;
especially Revelation 12, the woman and red dragon--this, in turn, reminiscent
of Babylonian mythology). These supposed Jewish sections are, however, without
real support in anything that is known, and the symbolism admits as easily of
a Christian interpretation as any other part of the book. We are left, therefore,
as before, with the book as a unity, and the tide of opinion flows back to the
age of Domitian as the time of its origin. Moffatt (connecting it mistakenly,
as it seems to us, with Domitian's emphasis on the imperial cult, but giving also
other reasons) goes so far as to say that "any earlier date for the book is hardly
possible" (Expository Greek Testament, V, 317). The list of authorities for the
Domitianie date may be seen in Moffatt, Introduction, 508. |
IV. PLAN AND ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK
1. General Scope
The method of the book may thus be indicated. After an introduction, and letters
to the seven churches (Revelation 1-3), the properly prophetic part of the book
commences with a vision of heaven (Revelation 4; 5), following upon which are
two series of visions of the future, parallel, it would appear, to each other--the
first, the 7 seals, and under the 7th seal, the 7 trumpets (Revelation 6:1 - 11:19,
with interludes in Revelation 11:1 - 12:1); the second, the woman and her child
(Revelation 12), the 2 beasts (Revelation 13), and, after new interludes (Revelation
14), the bowls and 7 last plagues (Revelation 15). The expansion of the last judgments
is given in separate pictures (the scarlet woman, doom of Babylon, Har-Magedon,
Revelation 17-19); then come the closing scenes of the millennium, the last apostasy,
resurrection and judgment (Revelation 20), followed by the new heavens and new
earth, with the descending new Jerusalem (Revelation 21; 22). The theme of the
book is the conflict of Christ and His church with anti-Christian powers (the
devil, the beast, the false prophet, Revelation 16:13), and the ultimate and decisive
defeat of the latter; its keynote is in the words, "Come, Lord Jesus" (Revelation
22:20; compare Revelation 1:7); but it is to be noticed, as characteristic of
the book, that while this "coming" is represented as, in manner, ever near, the
end, as the crisis approaches, is again always postponed by a fresh development
of events. Thus, under the 6th seal, the end seems reached (Revelation 6:12 -
17), but a pause ensues (Revelation 7), and on the opening of the seventh seal,
a new series begins with the trumpets (Revelation 8:2). Similarly, at the sounding
of the 6th trumpet, the end seems at hand (Revelation 9:12 - 21), but a new pause
is introduced before the last sounding takes place (Revelation 11:15). Then is
announced the final victory, but as yet only in summary. A new series of visions
begins, opening into large perspectives, till, after fresh interludes, and the
pouring out of 6 of the bowls of judgment, Har-Magedon itself is reached; but
though, at the outpouring of the 7th bowl, it is proclaimed, "It is done" (Revelation
16:17), the end is again held over till these final judgments are shown in detail.
At length, surely, in Revelation 19, with the appearance of the white horseman--"The
Word of God" (Revelation 19:13)--and the decisive overthrow of all his adversaries
(Revelation 19:18 - 21), the climax is touched; but just then, to our surprise,
intervenes the announcement of the binding of Satan for 1,000 years, and the reign
of Jesus and His saints upon the earth (the interpretation is not here discussed),
followed by a fresh apostasy, and the general resurrection and judgment (Revelation
20). Precise time-measures evidently fail in dealing with a book so constructed:
the 3 1/2 years of the Nero-interpreters sink into insignificance in its crowded
panorama of events. The symbolic numbers that chiefly rule in the book are "seven,"
the number of completeness (7 spirits, seals, trumpets, bowls, heads of beasts);
"ten," the number of worldly power (10 horns); "four," the earthly number (4 living
creatures, corners of earth, winds, etc.); 3 1/2 years--42 months--"time, and
times, and half a time" (Revelation 12:14) = 1,260 days, the period, borrowed
from Daniel (7:25 ; 12:7), of anti-Christian ascendancy.
2. Detailed Analysis
The following is a more detailed analysis:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Title and Address (Revelation 1:1-8)
2. Vision of Jesus and Message to the Seven Churches of the Province of Asia (Revelation
1:9 - 20)
3. The Letters to the Seven Churches (Revelation 2; 3)
(1) Ephesus (Revelation 2:1 - 7)
(2) Smyrna (Revelation 2:8 - 11)
(3) Pergamos (Revelation 2:12 - 17)
(4) Thyatira (Revelation 2:18 - 29)
(5) Sardis (Revelation 3:1 - 6)
(6) Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7 - 13)
(7) Laodicea (Revelation 3:14 - 22) |
|
II. THE THINGS TO COME. FIRST SERIES OF VISIONS: THE SEALS AND TRUMPETS
1. The Vision of Heaven
(1) Adoration of the Creator (Revelation 4)
(2) The 7-Sealed Book; Adoration of God and the Lamb (Revelation 5) |
2. Opening of Six Seals (Revelation 6)
(1) The White Horse (Revelation 6:1 , 2)
(2) The Red Horse (Revelation 6:3 , 4)
(3) The Black Horse (Revelation 6:5 , 6)
(4) The Pale Horse (Revelation 6:7 , 8)
(5) Souls under the Altar (Revelation 6:9 - 11)
(6) The Wrath of the Lamb (Revelation 6:12 - 17) |
3. Interludes (Revelation 7)
(1) Sealing of 144,000 on Earth (Revelation 7:1 - 8)
(2) Triumphant Multitude in Heaven (Revelation 7:9 - 17) |
4. Opening of Seventh Seal: under This Seven Trumpets, of Which Six Now Sounded
(Revelation 8; 9)
(1) Hail and Fire on Earth (Revelation 8:7)
(2) Burning Mountain in Sea (Revelation 8:8 , 9)
(3) Burning Star on Rivers and Fountains (Revelation 8:10 , 11)
(4) One-third Sun, Moon, and Stars Darkened (Revelation 8:12). "Woe"--Trumpets
(Revelation 8:13)
(5) The Fallen Star-Locusts (Revelation 9:1 - 11)
(6) Angels Loosed from Euphrates--the Horseman (Revelation 9:12 - 21) |
5. Interludes--
(1) Angel with Little Book (Revelation 10)
(2) Measuring of Temple and Altar--the Two Witnesses (Revelation 11:1 - 13) |
6. Seventh Trumpet Sounded--Final Victory (Revelation 11:14 - 19) |
III. SECOND SERIES OF VISIONS: THE WOMAN AND THE RED DRAGON; THE TWO BEASTS; THE
BOWLS AND LAST PLAGUES
1. The Woman and Child; the Red Dragon and His Persecutions
(Revelation 12)
2. The Beast from the Sea, Seven-headed, Ten-horned (Revelation 13:1 - 10); the
Two-horned Beast (Revelation 13:11 - 18)
3. Interludes (Revelation 14)
(1) The Lamb on Mt. Zion; the 144,000 (Revelation 14:1 -
5)
(2) The Angel with "an Eternal Gospel" (Revelation 14:6 , 7)
(3) Second Angel--(Anticipatory) Proclamation of Fall of Babylon (Revelation 14:8)
(4) Third Angel--Doom of Worshippers of the Beast (Revelation 14:9 - 12)
(5) Blessedness of the Dead in the Lord (Revelation 14:13)
(6) The Son of Man and the Great Vintage (Revelation 14:14 - 20) |
4. The Seven Last Plagues--the Angels and Their Bowls: the Preparation in heaven
(Revelation 15)--the Outpouring (Revelation 16)
(1) On Earth (Revelation 16:2)
(2) On Sea (Revelation 16:3)
(3) On Rivers and Fountains (Revelation 16:4 - 7)
(4) On Sun (Revelation 16:8 , 9)
(5) On Seat of Beast (Revelation 16:10 , 11)
(6) On Euphrates--Har-Magedon (Revelation 16:12 - 16)
(7) In the Air--Victory and Fall of Babylon (Revelation 16:17 - 21) |
|
IV. EXPANSION OF LAST JUDGMENTS (Revelation 17 - 19)
1. The Scarlet Woman on Beast--Her Judgment (Revelation
17)
2. Doom of Babylon and Lament over Her (Revelation 18)
3. Interlude--Announcement of Marriage of the Lamb (Revelation 19:1 - 10) |
V. THE MILLENNIUM--NEW HEAVENS AND NEW EARTH (Revelation 20:1 - 6)
1. Satan Bound; First Resurrection and Reign of Saints for
1,000 Years (Revelation 20:1 - 6)
2. Loosing of Satan and Final Conflict--Doom of Adversaries and of the Devil (Revelation
20:7 - 10)
3. General Resurrection and Last Judgment (Revelation 20:11 - 15)
4. New Heavens and New Earth
(1) The New Jerusalem from Heaven (Revelation 21:1 - 9)
(2) Description of the City (Revelation 21:10 - 27)
(3) Blessedness of Its Citizens (Revelation 22:1 - 7)
(4) Epilogue (Revelation 22:8 - 21) |
|
|
|
V. PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION
1. General Scheme of Interpretation
As a book intended for the consolation of the church under present and future
afflictions, the Apocalypse is meant by its author to be understood (Revelation
1:3 ; 22:7). He must have been aware, however, that, while its general scope might
be apprehended, mystery must rest upon many of its symbols, till the time of their
actual fulfillment. The book relates to "things which must shortly come to pass"
(Revelation 1:1)--in their beginnings at least--and the divers interpretations
since put upon its prophecies are the best evidence of the difficulties attaching
to them. Schemes of interpretation have generally been grouped into praeterist
(the prophecies being regarded as already fulfilled), futurist (the fulfillment
being thrown wholly into the future), and the historical (the fulfillment being
looked for in the continuous history of the church from John's day till the end).
(1) The older praeterist view may be taken as represented
by Moses Stuart, who finds the fulfillment of Revelation 6-11 in the destruction
of Jerusalem (Commentary, 520), and of Revelation 13 - 19 in the reign of Nero
(690). Even he, however, has to interpret the chapter on the last things of the
future.
(2) The futurist view connects the whole with the times of the second advent and
the millennium. The beast is an individual who shall then appear as Antichrist.
This rejects the plain intimations of the book that the events predicted lay,
in their beginnings at least, immediately in the future of the writer.
(3) The historical view connects the various symbols with definite occurrences--as
the invasions which overthrew the Roman Empire (the first 4 trumpets), the Saracens
(first woe-trumpet), the Turks (second woe-trumpet), the papacy (the beast, Revelation
13; the scarlet woman, Revelation 17), etc. A day-year principle is applied to
the periods (1,260 days--1,260 years). As representatives of this view may be
mentioned Mode, Vitringa, Sir Isaac Newton, Elliott in Horae Apocalypticae, A.
Barnes. |
2. The Newer Theories
These older schemes are largely put out of date by the newer theories, already
alluded to, in which the Apocalypse is explained out of contemporary conditions,
the legend of the returning Nero, Jewish apocalypse, and Babylonian mythology.
These are praeterist theories also, but differ from the older in that in them
all real prophecy is denied. A mainstay of such theories is the declaration of
the book that the events announced are close at hand (Revelation 1:1 , 3 ; 22:20).
When, however, it is remembered that, on any view, this nearness includes a period
of 1,000 years before the judgment and descent of the new Jerusalem, it will be
felt that it will not do to give these expressions too restricted a temporal significance.
The horizon is wider. The coming of Christ is ever near--ever approaching--yet
it is not to be tied down to "times and seasons"; it is more of the nature of
a process and has anticipatory exemplifications in many crises and providential
events forecasting the end (see above). The "coming," e.g. to the church at Ephesus
(Revelation 2:5), or to the church at Pergamos (Revelation 9:16)--contingent events--can
hardly exhaust the full meaning of the Parousia. The Nero-theory demands a date
at latest under Galba, but that date we have seen to be generally abandoned. Those
who place it under Vespasian (omitting three short reigns) sacrifice the advantage
of dating the book before the destruction of Jerusalem, and have to fall back
on a supposititious Jewish fragment in Revelation 11, which those who incorporated
it must have known had never been fulfilled. The attempt to give a "contemporary
historical" interpretation to the symbols of the successive churches, as Gunkel
has acutely shown, completely breaks down in practice, while Gunkel's own attempt
at a Babylonian explanation will be judged by most to be overstrained. "Dragon"
in the Old Testament and elsewhere may be associated with widespread oriental
ideas, but the definite symbolism of the Apocalypse in Revelation 12 has no provable
connection with Babylonian myths. There is the widest disagreement in theories
of "composite" origin (from Jewish apocalypse). What seems simple and demonstrable
to one has no plausibility to others. A form of "Nero Caesar," indeed, yields
the mystic 666, but so do 1,000 other names--almost any name, with proper manipulation
(compare Salmon, lecture xiv). Lastly, the returning-Nero legend yields no satisfactory
explanation of the language in Revelation 13:3 , 12 , 14 ; 17:11. The theory is
that these words allude to the belief that Nero would return from the dead and
become Antichrist (see above). Tacitus attests that there were vague rumors that
Nero had not really died (Hist. ii.8), and later a pretender arose in Parthia
taking advantage of this feeling (Suet. Nero. 57). The idea of Nero returning
from the dead is categorically stated in Sib Or 5:363-70 (circa 120 AD); compare
Sib Or 4:119-22 (circa 80 AD). Augustine mentions the idea (City of God, xx.19,
3), but without connection with the Apocalypse. By Domitian's time, however, it
was perfectly certain that Nero had not returned, and there was no longer, on
this interpretation, any appositeness in speaking of a "head" the "deathstroke"
of which was healed (Revelation 13:3), which became the "eighth head" of Revelation
17:11--if, indeed, the apostle could be conceived capable of being influenced
by such vagaries. The events predicted lay, evidently, still in the future. It
may be added that neither Irenaeus, nor any early interpreter, seems to have heard
of the connection of 666 with "Nero." Ireneus himself suggests the solution Lateinos
(compare Salmon, ut supra).
3. The Book a True Prophecy
It is not proposed here to attempt the lines of a positive interpretation. If
it is once recognized that the Apocalypse is a book of true prophecy, that its
symbols stand for something real, and that its perspective is not to be limited
to a brief period like 3 1/2 years, the way is opened, not, indeed, for a reading
into it of a series of precise historical occurrences, but still for doing justice
to the truth which lies at the basis of the historical interpretation, namely,
that there are here prefigured the great crises in the age-long conflict of Christ
and His church with pagan and anti-Christian adversaries. Events and tendencies
may be grouped, or under different forms may relate to the same subject (e.g.
the 144,000 sealed on earth--a spiritual Israel--in Revelation 7:1 - 8, and the
triumphant multitude in heaven, 7:9 - 17); successions of events may be foreshortened;
different pictures may overlap; but, shining through the symbols, great truths
and facts which have historical realization appear. There is no need for supposing
that, in a drama of this range, the "heads" of the beast of Revelation 13 and
17 (behind whom is the Dragon-enemy, Satan, of Revelation 12) stand, in contrariety
to the analogy of Daniel, for seven individual emperors, and that "the image of
the beast," which has life given to it and "speaks" (Revelation 13:14 , 15), is
the statue of the emperor; or that such tremendous events as the fall of the Roman
Empire, or the rise of the papacy--with which, however, must be combined all ecclesiastical
anti-Christianism--or the false prophecy of later intellectual anti-Christianism
have no place in the symbolism of the book. Sane, reverent thought will suggest
many lines of correspondence with the course of God's providence, which may serve
to illuminate its dark places. More than this need not be said here. |
VI. THEOLOGY OF THE BOOK
On this it is hardly necessary to dwell, for expositors are now well agreed that
in its great doctrines of God, Christ, man, sin, redemption, the teaching of the
Apocalypse does not vary essentially from the great types in the Epistles. The
assonances with John's mode of thinking have already been alluded to. It is granted
by all writers that the Christology is as high as anywhere in the New Testament.
"It ought unhesitatingly to be acknowledged," says Reuss, "that Christ is placed
in the Apocalypse on a paragraph with God" (op. cit., I, 397-98; compare Revelation
1:4 , 17 ; 2:8 ; 5:12 - 14 ; 22:13, etc.). Not less striking are the correspondences
with the teaching of Paul and of Peter on redemption through the blood of Christ
(Revelation 1:5 ; 5:9 ; 7:14 ; 14:4, etc.). The perverted conception of the school
of Baur that we have in the book an anti-Pauline manifesto (thus also Pfieiderer;
compare Hibbert Lectures, 178), is now practically dead (see the criticism of
it by Reuss, op. cit., I, 308-12). The point in which its eschatology differs
from that of the rest of the New Testament is in its introduction of the millennium
before the final resurrection and judgment. This enlarges, but does not necessarily
contradict, the earlier stage of thought.
LITERATURE
Moses Stuart, Commentary on Apocalypse; Alford, Greek Testament, IV, "The Revelation";
S. Davidson, Introduction to the New Testament (3rd edition), 176; G. Salmon,
Introduction to the New Testament (2nd edition), lects xiii, xiv; Elliott, Horae
Apocalypticae, with literature there mentioned; Farrar, Early Days of Christianity,
chapter xxviii; Milligan, Discussions on the Apocalypse; H. Gunkel, Schopfung
und Chaos; W. Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis, and article "Apocalypse" in EB,
I; C. Anderson Scott, "Revelation" in Century Bible; J. Moffatt, Introduction
to Literature of the New Testament (with notices of literature); also "Revelation"
in Expositor's Bible; Trench, Epistles to the Seven Churches; W. M. Rarnsay, Letters
to the Seven Churches; H. B. Swete, The Apocalypse of John.
James Orr
Tags:
angel, apocalypse, apostle john, bible commentary, bible history, bible reference, bible study, book of revelation, false prophet, heaven, jesus christ, patmos vision, prophecy, red dragon, revelation of john, satan, seven bowls, seven churches, seven seals, seven trumpets, the beast, white horse
Comments:
|
 |
|
