Todays Bible Study Revelation 1/25/15 A Short Analysis Of Revelation 4–18 I have suggested that our most fruitful approach to the study of Revelation is to avoid majoring on the details of this or that interpretive system. Even so, we need to review how believers have approached this book before looking into its major section. We can distinguish four major systems of interpretation taken by those who have a high view of Scripture as God’s Word to man. Allegorical. This approach, with its roots in early church history (Clement of Alexandria and Origin) regards Revelation as a writing of encouragement. It was intended to assure the first-century reader of the ultimate triumph of Christianity, not to predict the future. As the Book of Revelation shows us vision after vision, we are convinced of God’s “sure triumph, glorious over and amid them all” (R.C.H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. John’s Revelation, Lutheran Book Concern). Preterist. This approach views Revelation as a record of conflicts between the early church and paganism/Judaism. The final chapters are thought to portray a contemporary triumph of the church. In this view, the focus of Revelation is the first century itself. The book’s value is in revealing principles of God’s action, not in delineating specific time periods or events. Historical. This approach has traditionally suggested that Revelation is a symbolic overview of church history, culminating in Jesus’ second coming. During Reformation times this was the most popular interpretation, with the beasts of Revelation 13 identified as the pope and the papacy. The major problem with this approach is its great flexibility; over 50 different interpretations of history have emerged, and each has identified the events and characters of Revelation to fit a particular historical point of view. Modern historists tend to see the book not as images of specific events but rather as seven parallel pictures of how God is at work within history. Futurist. This approach looks at Revelation as prophetic, and suggests that with the beginning of chapter 4 the book describes events that are still to come, not only for John but for us as well. This system of interpretation suggests the events describe a time period just preceding the return of Christ, the Tribulation time mentioned in Matthew and in the Old Testament. The Old Testament prophetic passages are expected to be fulfilled literally, and Jesus is to rule on earth as glorious King. Thus Revelation is correlated with pictures of the future given by Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and other Old Testament prophets. Which one? It’s clear from a quick glance at these different systems that the approach we take to Revelation will affect our understanding of it, and may even distract us from its chief value! If we take a historical view, we may try to correlate events with councils, persecutions, and movements in church history. If we take the allegorical, we may look for meaning, but deny that the events described could ever happen. If we take the futurist view, we might easily become involved in speculation about how a specific future event correlates with others described in this book or in the Old Testament. To me, the futurist view seems most in harmony with the whole of Scripture. But I do not want to argue for the futurist position. Nor do I think we should try to build a detailed picture of history to come from the teachings of this majestic book. What I want, for myself and those I teach, is a fresh vision of Jesus, standing as an awesome figure at history’s end. When we do study Revelation to meet Jesus, and our vision is drawn beyond time to an eternity in which He is Lord, our lives and our faith will be enriched.
Posted on: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 05:28:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015