Understanding the Book of Revelation
Why did the apostle John write the book of Revelation?
John had been imprisoned on the isle of Patmos, in the Aegean Sea, for the crime of sharing Jesus Christ with everyone he came into contact with (Revelation 1:9). It was on this island that John received a revelation from God. The book was apparently written around AD 95.
The original recipients of the book were Christians who lived some 65 years after Jesus had been crucified and resurrected from the dead. Many of these were second generation Christians, and the challenges they faced were great. Life as a Christian had become increasingly difficult because of Roman hostilities toward Christianity.
The recipients of the book were suffering persecution, and some of them were even being killed (Revelation 2:13). Unfortunately, things were about to get even worse. John therefore wrote this book to give his readers a strong hope that would help them patiently endure in the midst of relentless suffering.
At the time, it seemed like evil was prevailing at every level. However, Revelation indicates that evil will one day come to an end. Sin, Satan, and suffering will be forever banished in heaven. For believers, there will be no further sorrow or death, and fellowship with God will be perpetual and uninterrupted. This was good news for the suffering church back in John’s day. It’s good news for our day too!
In what way is the book of Revelation a “revelation”?
The opening words of the book label it as “the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Revelation 1:1). The word “revelation” carries the idea of “uncovering” or “revealing.” The book uncovers and reveals prophetic truth.
The phrase “revelation of Jesus Christ” can refer to revelation that comes from Jesus Christ or a revelation that is about Him. It seems likely that both senses may be intended in this verse.
Why is the book of Revelation classified as “apocalyptic literature”?
Apocalyptic literature is a special kind of writing that arose among the Jews and Christians in Bible times to reveal certain mysteries about heaven and earth, especially regarding the world to come. This type of literature is often characterized by visions, the necessity of making ethical and moral decisions or changes as a result of such visions, and a pervasive use of symbols. The symbols in the book of Revelation are either defined in the context of Revelation or are found in or alluded to in the Old Testament.
Certain themes are common to apocalyptic literature. These include: (1) a growing sense of hopelessness as wicked powers grow in strength; (2) the promise that the sovereign God will intervene; (3) heavenly visions, which provide readers with a heavenly perspective that helps them endure present suffering; (4) the intervention of God in overcoming and destroying evil; (5) the call to believers to live righteously; (6) the call to persevere under trial; and (7) God’s final deliverance and restoration, with the promise to dwell with His people. We see such themes illustrated throughout the book of Revelation.
In what way does the book of Revelation bring a special blessing to those who read it (Revelation 1:3)?
Revelation is the only book in the Bible that promises a blessing to the person who reads it and responds to it in obedience. There are seven specific pronouncements of blessing in the book (1:3; 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7,14). The word “blessed” means “spiritually happy.” Those who read Revelation are spiritually happy because they come to see that God controls human history—and that in the end, believers will enjoy a blessed eternity in heaven.
What is the historicist approach to the book of Revelation?
The historicist approach holds that the book of Revelation provides a panoramic sweep of church history from the first century to the second coming of Christ. This approach emerged in the fourth century AD when some interpreters saw parallels between current events and the prophecies in Revelation. Later, Joachim of Fiore (1135–1202) developed the approach by dividing history into three primary ages. Still later, some of the Reformers were attracted to this model, viewing the Roman Catholic pope as the antichrist of Revelation 13.
Among the shortcomings of this view is that a comparison of the prophecies in Revelation with other prophetic Scriptures—for example, Daniel 9:25-27; Matthew 24–25; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–5:11; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; and Titus 2:13-14—reveals that these prophecies point to the future tribulation period, the antichrist, the second coming, Christ’s millennial kingdom, the great white throne judgment, and the eternal state.
Another problem with historicism is that this model has led to endless speculation and subjectivity in dealing with specific details in the book of Revelation. It is difficult if not impossible to arrive at a consensus in identifying people and events in Revelation. Historicist interpreters tend to view the events of their own day as relating to prophecies in the book.
What is the idealist approach to the book of Revelation?
The idealist approach holds that the book of Revelation contains a symbolic description of the ongoing battle between God and the devil, between good and evil. In this view, Revelation does not relate to any historical or future events at all.
The problem with this understanding of Revelation is that it would not likely bring any genuine comfort to the original recipients of the book, who were suffering through great persecution and martyrdom under the Romans. A more literal understanding of Revelation—one that points to God’s absolute control of human history with a blissful afterlife for believers—is much more satisfactory in this regard.
Furthermore, idealism ignores the specific time markers within the book. For example, John is instructed to “write therefore the things that you have seen, those that are and those that are to take place after this” (Revelation 1:19). Such words indicate a definite sequence of events. We also read of time-limited events in Revelation. For example, the holy city is to be trampled for “forty-two months”—which is three and a half years (11:2). The Jewish remnant is to find refuge in the wilderness for “1,260 days”—which again is three and a half years (12:6). These Jews will be “nourished” in the wilderness for “a time, and times, and half a time” (12:14). “Time” is one year, “times” is two years, and “half a time” is half a year, totaling up to three and a half years. Idealism ignores such time-delimited events in Revelation.
The idealist may rebut that there are many symbols in the book of Revelation. That is true. However, as we have seen, these symbols are often defined in the immediate context (Revelation 1:20; 5:8; 17:15). They typically point to real personalities and real events. The idealist approach fails to account for this.
What is the futurist approach to the book of Revelation?
The futurist approach to interpreting the book of Revelation holds that most of the events described in the book will take place in the end times, just prior to the second coming of Jesus Christ. This view honors the book’s claim to be prophecy (see Revelation 1:3; 22:7,10,18-19). Moreover, as noted previously, Jesus informed John that “I will show you what must take place after this” (Revelation 4:1). The events that “take place after this” pertain to futuristic prophecy.
This view holds that just as the more than 100 prophecies of the first coming of Christ were fulfilled literally, so the prophecies of the second coming, and the events that lead up to it and follow it, will be fulfilled just as literally. Futurists believe, based on a literal interpretation, that there will one day be a literal tribulation period with literal judgments and a literal antichrist, followed by a literal second coming and a literal millennial kingdom (see Daniel 9:25-27; Matthew 24–25; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–5:11; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; Titus 2:13-14).
The early church took a futurist view of the book inasmuch as it saw the tribulation, second coming, and millennium as yet-future events. Later writers who took a futurist approach include Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) and John Nelson Darby (1800–1882). As we examine specific prophecies throughout Revelation, we will see that a futurist approach makes very good sense.
What is the preterist approach to the book of Revelation?
The word “preterism” derives from the Latin preter, meaning “past.” In this view, the prophecies in the book of Revelation (especially chapters 6–18) and Matthew 24–25 (Christ’s Olivet Discourse) have already been fulfilled. More specifically, the prophecies were fulfilled in AD 70 when Titus and his Roman warriors overran Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish temple. Hence, the book of Revelation does not deal with the future.
Are there different kinds of preterism?
There are two forms of preterism—moderate (partial) preterism, and extreme (full) preterism. Moderate preterism is represented by modern writers such as R.C. Sproul, Hank Hanegraaff, and Gary DeMar. While they believe the literal resurrection and second coming are yet future, the other prophecies in Revelation and Matthew 24–25, including prophecies about the antichrist, were fulfilled when Jerusalem fell in AD 70 (some relate the antichrist to General Titus). Extreme or full preterism goes so far as to say that all New Testament predictions were fulfilled in the past, including those of the resurrection and second coming.
What’s the problem with preterism?
A primary problem with preterism is that Revelation claims to be prophecy (see Revelation 1:3; 22:7,10,18-19). Also against preterism are the many key events described in the book of Revelation that simply did not occur in AD 70. For example, in AD 70 “a third of mankind” was not killed as predicted in Revelation 9:18. An invasion of 200 million soldiers from the East did not occur as predicted in Revelation 9:13-15. Nor has “every living thing died that was in the sea” as predicted in Revelation 16:3. In order to explain these and many other such texts, preterists must resort to an allegorical interpretation of prophecy.
How does the dating of the book of Revelation relate to preterism?
Preterists often claim that the book of Revelation was written prior to AD 70, and hence the book must have been fulfilled in AD 70 when Rome overran Jerusalem. Futurists point out, however, that some of the earliest Church Fathers confirmed a late date (AD 90 or later), including Irenaeus who claimed the book was written at the close of the reign of Domitian (about AD 96). Victorinus confirmed this date in the third century, as did Eusebius (263–340). Since the book was written well after AD 70, it could hardly have been referring to events that would be fulfilled in AD 70. This deals a significant blow to preterism.
What is the eclectic approach to understanding the book of Revelation?
The eclectic view mixes and combines the features of all the other views. It says there is both a present and a future fulfillment of the prophecies contained in Revelation. Or perhaps some of the events described in the book were fulfilled in the past while others will be fulfilled in the future. This is not a widely held view.
Are there any contextual clues in the book of Revelation regarding how the book is to be understood?
Yes. We discover a contextual outline of John’s prophetic book in Revelation 1:19—and it supports a futurist approach to understanding Revelation. The Lord instructs John: “Write therefore the things that you have seen, those that are and those that are to take place after this.” The “things that you have seen” is a reference to Revelation 1, where we find a description of Jesus in His present majestic glory and an introduction to the book of Revelation. The things “that are” relates to the then-present circumstances of the seven churches of Asia Minor recorded in Revelation 2 and 3. John directed his book to these seven churches. The things “that are to take place after this” refers to futuristic prophecy of the tribulation period, the second coming, the millennial kingdom, the great white throne judgment, and the eternal state described in Revelation 4 through 22.
Does Matthew 16:28 support preterism?
In Matthew 16:28 Jesus affirms to His disciples, “There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” Preterists claim that prophecies of the second coming must have been fulfilled during that generation—apparently in a metaphorical way in AD 70 when Rome overran Jerusalem.
Contrary to the preterist view, many evangelicals believe that when Jesus said this, He had in mind the transfiguration, which happened precisely one week later (Matthew 17:1-13). The transfiguration served as a preview of the kingdom in which the divine Messiah would appear in glory. Moreover, against the idea that this verse refers to AD 70 is the pivotal fact that among the disciples, all but John had been martyred by AD 70 and hence wouldn’t have been around to witness the events of AD 70.
Does Matthew 24:34 support preterism?
In Matthew 24:34 Jesus asserts, “This generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” Preterists claim this verse proves the prophecies would soon be fulfilled.
Contrary to this view, many evangelicals believe Christ was simply saying that those people who witness the signs stated earlier in Matthew 24—the abomination of desolation (verse 15); the great tribulation, such as has never been seen before (verse 21); and the sign of the Son of Man in heaven (verse 30)—will see the coming of Jesus Christ within that very generation. Since it was common knowledge among the Jews that the future tribulation period would last only seven years (Daniel 9:24-27), it is obvious that those living at the beginning of this time would likely live to see the second coming seven years later (except for those who lose their lives during this tumultuous time).
Other evangelicals hold that the word “generation” is to be understood in its basic usage of “race,” “kindred,” “family,” “stock,” or “breed.” If this is what is meant, then Jesus is here promising that the nation of Israel will be preserved, despite terrible persecution during the tribulation, until the consummation of God’s program for Israel at the second coming. Many divine promises have been made to Israel, including land promises (Genesis 12; 15; 17) and a future Davidic kingdom (2 Samuel 7). Jesus could thus be referring to God’s preservation of Israel in order to fulfill the divine promises to the Jews (see Romans 11:11-27). Whichever view is correct, the verse is perfectly compatible with futurism.
What about Revelation 22:12,20, where Jesus says, “I am coming soon”?
The Greek word for “soon” often carries the meaning “swiftly,” “speedily,” “at a rapid rate.” For example, in Luke 18:7-8, Jesus stated, “Will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them? I tell you, he will give justice to them speedily.” In the context of Revelation 22, it appears that the term indicates that when the predicted events of the tribulation period first start to occur, they will progress speedily, in rapid succession.
The Greek word can also mean “suddenly.” The catastrophic events described in Revelation may descend upon humanity suddenly, taking them off guard.
Both usages of the Greek word are perfectly compatible with futurism.
Questions on Millennialism
The book of Revelation teaches that following the second coming of Christ, He will personally set up His kingdom on earth. In theological circles, this is known as the millennial kingdom. The primary passage on this kingdom is Revelation 20:1-6 (see also Psalm 2:6-9; Isaiah 65:18-23; Jeremiah 31:12-14,31-37; Ezekiel 34:25-29; 37:1-13; 40–48; Daniel 2:35; 7:13-14; Joel 2:21-27; Amos 9:13-14; Micah 4:1-7; Zephaniah 3:9-20).
The nature of the millennial kingdom is an issue of great debate among Christians. The debate is largely rooted in what hermeneutical approach one uses in interpreting the prophetic texts involved. Those who take an allegorical approach to Revelation 20:2-7 (and other passages) generally uphold amillennialism or postmillennialism. Those who take a more literal approach embrace premillennialism. If these are foreign words to you, fear not. I explain them below.
What is the biblical case for premillennialism?
Premillennialism teaches that following the second coming, Christ will institute a kingdom of perfect peace and righteousness on earth that will last for 1000 years. Two forms of premillennialism have emerged. Dispensational premillennialism, championed by scholar John F. Walvoord (1910–2002) among others, draws a distinction between the church and Israel and holds that the millennium will be a time of fulfillment of unconditional promises made to Israel. Historic premillennialism, espoused by George Eldon Ladd (1911–1982) among others, more generally rests its case on a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1-6.
Among the biblical arguments offered in favor of premillennialism are that this view…
• naturally emerges from a literal interpretation
• best explains the unconditional land promises made to Abraham and his descendants (the Jews), which are yet to be fulfilled (Genesis 13:14-18)
• makes the best sense of the unconditional Davidic covenant, which promises that one of David’s descendants (Jesus) will reign on a throne in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 7:12-16)
• is most compatible with numerous Old Testament predictions about the coming messianic age (millennial kingdom)
• is consistent with the Old Testament ending with an expectation of the messianic kingdom (for example, Isaiah 9:6; 16:5; Malachi 3:1)
• best explains the scriptural teaching that Jesus and the apostles would reign on thrones in Jerusalem in the future (Matthew 19:28; 25:31-34; Acts 1:6-7)
• is most consistent with the apostle Paul’s promise that Israel will one day be restored by God (Romans 9:3-4; 11:1)
Since a plain (literal) reading of Scripture naturally leads to this view, and since this view makes perfectly good sense, I see no good reason to allegorize Revelation 20:1-6 (the primary passage about the millennial kingdom). Many throughout church history have held to premillennialism, including Church Fathers Justin Martyr (AD 100–165), Clement of Alexandria (150–215), and Tertullian (155–225). Augustine (354–430), early in his theological career, held to this view. Other theological luminaries who held to this view include John Nelson Darby (1800–1882), Griffith Thomas (1861–1924), Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871–1952), and James Montgomery Boice (1938–2000).
What is the biblical case for amillennialism?
Amillennialism takes a spiritualized approach in interpreting biblical prophecy. It teaches that when Christ comes, eternity will begin with no prior literal thousand-year reign of Christ on earth. “Amillennial” literally means “no millennium.” Instead of believing in a literal rule of Christ on earth, amillennialists typically interpret prophetic verses related to the reign of Christ metaphorically and say they refer to Christ’s present (spiritual) rule from heaven. Old Testament predictions made to Israel are viewed as being spiritually fulfilled in the New Testament church.
The following arguments are suggested in favor of amillennialism:
• The Abrahamic and Davidic covenants were conditional, and hence do not require a future fulfillment because the conditions were not met. (Premillennialists rebut that these covenants were unconditional, resting upon God alone for their fulfillment.)
• Prophecy should be interpreted symbolically, for apocalyptic literature is highly symbolic in nature. (Premillennialists rebut that prophesy ought to be interpreted literally, for all the prophecies dealing with the first coming of Christ [over 100] were fulfilled literally. Though there are symbols in Revelation and Daniel, these symbols point to literal truths, and Scripture itself guides us in how to interpret them.)
• Israel and the church are not two distinct entities but rather one people of God united by the covenant of grace. (Premillennialists rebut that the church and Israel are viewed as distinct all throughout the New Testament [for example, 1 Corinthians 10:32, Romans 9:6, and Hebrews 12:18-24].)
• This view is most compatible with the idea that the Old Testament is fulfilled in the New Testament. (Premillennialists rebut that the Old Testament promises to Israel were unconditional and await a future fulfillment. God does not break His promises!)
This view was held by the later Augustine, as well as by Reformers Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564). Most Puritans were amillennial, as are most Roman Catholics. Famous proponents of the view in more recent history include Oswald Allis (1880–1973), Louis Berkhof (1873–1957), and Anthony Hoekema (1913–1988).
There is much debate on amillennialism. My approach has always been rather simple: When the plain sense makes good sense, seek no other sense lest you end up in nonsense. To me, premillennialism makes great sense. I see no justification for allegory-rich amillennialism.
What is the biblical case for postmillennialism?
The postmillennial view also takes a spiritualized approach in interpreting biblical prophecy. It teaches that through the church’s progressive influence, the world will be Christianized before Christ returns. The millennium will involve a “thousand years” of peace and prosperity that precedes Christ’s physical return. (The “thousand years” is viewed as a metaphor for a very long time period.) Famous proponents of this view include A.A. Hodge (1823–1886), B.B. Warfield (1851–1921), A.H. Strong (1836–1921), Loraine Boettner (1932–2000), and R.J. Rushdoony (1916–2001).
The following arguments are suggested in favor of postmillennialism:
• A universal proclamation of the gospel is promised in Scripture (Matthew 28:18-20).
• People from all nations will come to salvation (Revelation 7:9-10).
• Christ’s throne is in heaven, and it is from this throne—not a throne on earth—that He rules (see Psalm 9:7; 11:4; 47:8; 103:19).
• Jesus’ parable of the mustard seed indicates there will be a continual advance of Christianity in the world (Matthew 13:31-32).
• World conditions are improving morally, socially, and spiritually—all due to the church’s influence.
Premillennialists challenge each of these points. For example, it hardly seems that the world is getting better and better. In fact, the world seems to be plummeting ever deeper into sin, darkness, and utter apathy toward God. Moreover, postmillennialism seems to contradict clear biblical passages that predict a massive apostasy in the end times prior to Christ’s return (Matthew 24:3-14; Luke 18:8; 1 Timothy 4:1-5; 2 Timothy 3:1-7). Further, the unconditional Davidic covenant and other biblical passages clearly point to a literal future reign of Christ on earth (2 Samuel 7). Finally, it requires a leap in logic to claim that simply because there will be a universal proclamation of the gospel prior to the Lord’s return (Matthew 28:18-20) that this means the world will get better and better, and that the world will be Christianized. The truth is that despite this universal proclamation, many will continue to reject it. (Any who doubt this should take a hard look at Jesus’ sobering words in Matthew 7:13-14.)
I believe premillennialism best reflects the teachings of Scripture on the millennial kingdom.