Understanding the book of Revelation
Submitted by Forgiven on September 24 2000 12:33:24
|
To get the conversation underway on the board, I thought I'd throw out a few comments. Hopefully this will provide some sort of outline route map for us to have a few landmarks to look for. 1) The title of the book is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place". One of the first decisions that you must take when interpreting it is whether this is a true statement, or not. i.e. is this book a record of what John saw as a vision from God in its entirety, or did he write it himself out of his own imagination. A firm commitment to the former locks the door on a lot of speculation that starts with the phrase 'John was trying to hint at....'. It also does not allow us to stand in judgement on it - we do not have the right to reject particular passages because they don't coincide with our understanding of God - instead we have to alter our understanding of God to include this material as well as the other parts of the new testament. 2) It's a book full of very strange images. For those of us who restrict our reading to the straightforward bits of the New Testament, this comes as a major surprise. However in the wider context of the biblical revelation, this is a normal pattern of God's communication with his people, and there are many cross references within Revelation to images explained elsewhere in the bible - they are unexplained in Revelation because they are explained elsewhere. However it may be questioned as to WHY God choses to speak like this. 3) The core question in interpreting the book is whether the material relates to the then current experience of the church, the recurring experience of the church or to a specific period that has yet to occur. These are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but having a clear view on this, particularly as to whether on the whole there are to be future events that will correspond to the visions in the book, is fundamental. 4) In assessing question 3, it is important to put into the mix the mini apocalypses of the gospels - Mt. 24 (and 25 - a link that is sometimes overlooked) - Mark 13 and Luke 21 and also 2 Thess 2. Again the basic question arises - do we believe what Paul writes, and interpret in the light of the 2000 year wait between his comments and their happening, or do we argue that he was wrong in his belief about how it will be. I suspect that most of you know me well enough to know my answers to these - but they are questions to consider for ourselves!! My prayer is that they may stir debate that leads us to know our God better. |
Follow ups: