Book of Revelation

For other uses, see Book of Revelation (disambiguation).

Visions John the Evangelist, as depicted in the Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry. Four seraphim surround the throne; the twenty-four elders sit to the left and right. They are dressed in white robes, representing pureness, and have crowns of gold on their heads, denoting royalty and honor. (Revelation 4:4) The Book of Revelation does not specifically identify who the twenty-four elders are, though it is thought to be the twelve sons of Jacob and the twelve Disciples of Jesus.

The Book of Revelation or The Apocalypse of John (IPA: [əˈpɑkəlɪps], from Greek ἀποκάλυψις ἀπο or apo- ["away from"] and κάλυψις or kaluptein ["cover"]—meaning literally "to pull the cover away from") is the last canonical book of the New Testament in the Bible. It is the only biblical book that is wholly composed of apocalyptic literature. The book is frequently called by the incorrect name Revelations. However, the actual title of the book is The Revelation of Jesus Christ ... unto his servant John, as it is rendered in the first verse.^[1]

After a short introduction (ch. 1:1–10) it contains an account of the author, who identifies himself as John, of two visions that he received on the isle of Patmos. The first vision (chs. 1:11–3:22), related by "one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle", speaking with "a great voice, as of a trumpet", are statements addressed to the seven churches of Asia. The second vision comprises the rest of the book (chs. 4–22) begins with "a door … opened in heaven" and describes the end of the world—involving the final rebellion by Satan at Armageddon, God's final defeat of Satan, and the restoration of peace to the world.

Revelation is considered one of the most controversial (see Jonadabs) and difficult books of the Bible, with many diverse interpretations of the meanings of the various names and events in the account. B.A. Robinson of the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance says that Revelation portrays "a very different picture of God than we see described in the synoptic gospels. There is no love for one's enemies. There is only bitterness, hatred, and a desire for revenge." [2] However, when considering the apocalyptic setting of the book and comparing it to the apocalyptic passages in the gospels, this difference decreases enormously.

In the 4th century, St. John Chrysostom and other bishops argued against including this book in the New Testament canon, chiefly because of the difficulties of interpreting it and the danger for abuse. Christians in Syria also reject it because of the Montanists' heavy reliance on it. In the 9th century it was included, with the Apocalypse of Peter among "disputed" books in the Stichometry of St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople. In the end, it was included in the accepted canon, although it remains the only book of the New Testament that is not read within the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Authorship, Audience, and Date

The author of Revelation identifies himself several times as "John" (1:4, 1:9, 22:8). The author also states that he was in exile on the island of Patmos when he received his first vision (1:9, 4:1–2). As a result, the author of Revelation is referred to as John of Patmos.

Traditional views hold that John of Patmos was the same person as John the Apostle, who is also considered to be the author of the Gospel of John. Others speculate that John the Apostle, John the Evangelist, and John of Patmos refer to at least three separate individuals (see Authorship of the Johannine works). Those in favor of a single common author point to similarities between the Gospel and Revelation. For example, both works frequently refer to Jesus as a lamb or as a shepherd.

In contrast to the traditional view, several lines of evidence suggest that John of Patmos wrote only Revelation, not the Gospel of John or the Epistles of John. Revelation and the Gospel of John are very dissimilar in many ways. For one, the author of Revelation explicitly identifies himself as John several times, but the author of The Gospel of John remains anonymous, never identifying himself directly. The theology of the Gospel is markedly different from that of Revelation. While both works liken Jesus to a lamb, they consistently use different words for lamb—the Gospel uses "amnos", Revelation uses "arnion". Lastly, the Gospel is written in nearly flawless Greek, but Revelation contains grammatical errors and stylistic abnormalities which indicate its author may not have been as familiar with the Greek language as the Gospel's author. Proponents of the traditional view explain these differences by the collaboration of the author with different scribes.

Some theologians also argue that the Gospel of John contains a realised eschatology which contradicts the futurist eschatology contained in Revelation (e.g., chs. 21–22).

John explicitly addresses Revelation to the seven Christian churches in Asia, in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea (1:4, 11). All of these sites are located in what is now Turkey.

Traditionally, the date of the writing of this book has generally been fixed at the year AD 96, in the reign of Domitian. Others contend for an earlier date, AD 68 or 69, in the reign of Nero or shortly hereafter. Those who are in favour of the later date appeal to the external testimony of the Christian father Irenaeus (d. AD 185), who received information relative to this book from those who had seen John face to face. He says that the Apocalypse "was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign" (A.H. 5.30.3). Also internal evidence has been used to place it under Domitian, who according to Eusebius had started the persecution referred to in the book. However, recent scholars dispute that the book is situated in a time of ongoing persecution and have also doubted the reality of a large-scale Domitian persecution, as there is no reference to such a persecution before Eusebius.

The Book Of Revelation is commonly and incorrectly referenced as the Book of Revelations.

Major Schools of Interpretation

There are several schools of thought concerned with how the symbolism, imagery, and contents of the Book of Revelation should be interpreted.

• The Biblical prophecy school of thought holds that the contents of Revelation, especially when interpreted in conjunction with the Book of Daniel and other eschatological sections of the Bible, constitute a prophecy of the end times. This school can be further subdivided into the preterist view, which sees the book concerned with 1st century events; the futurist view, which applies all the events in the book into the end times; and the historicist view, which regards the book as spanning history from the first century through the second coming.

• A second Biblical Prophecy school of thought exists, believing that Revelation is merely a rewrite of the various prophetic books of the Old Testament and that it was originally located at the end of the old Testament with several other, since removed, prophetic books. This school also maintains that many of these same prophetic books are merely rewrites of each other in the same way that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are.

• The historical-critical approach, which became dominant among critical scholars of religion since the end of the 18th century, attempts to understand Revelation within the genre of apocalyptic literature, which was popular in both Jewish and Christian tradition since the Babylonian diaspora, following the pattern of the Book of Daniel. There is further information on these topics in the entries on higher criticism and apocalyptic literature.

• Recently, aesthetic and literary modes of interpretation focus on Revelation as a work of art and imagination, viewing the imagery as symbolic depictions of timeless truths and the victory of good over evil.

• The Ebionites and other Essene and Primitive churches regard Revelation as a description of the Destruction of The Temple in AD 66 and the subsequent Imperial Roman persecution of Jews and Christians.

• The "Patristic Interpretation", or the view held by St. Augustine, Jerome, and other early Church Fathers, views Revelation as an attempt to describe a spiritual reality and heavenly worship and compare it to the liturgy of the Christian Church. Although all but forgotten today, this interpretation is alluded to in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and has been avidly promoted by modern theologians such as Scott Hahn.

These schools of thought are not mutually exclusive, and many Christians adopt a combination of these approaches in the manner they find most meaningful. However, certain tendencies may be observed. The Biblical Prophecy school of thought is popular among Protestant fundamentalists, other evangelicals (many of whom also find value in the other approaches), and amongst Rastafarians, who interpret the book very differently from fundamentalist Christians but definitely belong to the Biblical Prophecy school. (Rastafarians believe Haile Selassie I to be the Messiah and God incarnate.) Members of more mainline and liberal churches tend to prefer the historical-critical and aesthetic approaches. Moreover, Roman and Orthodox churches have delimited their own specific positions on Revelation.

Interpretative Views of Revelation as Biblical Prophecy

The Preterist View

The view of Preterism holds that the contents of Revelation constitute a prophecy of events that were fulfilled in the 1st century. This view depends critically on an early date of Revelation, circa AD 68, since any later date makes the "prophecy" postdate the events prophesied. Even accepting that date leaves a narrow margin of one to two years before the fulfillment occurs. Preterist interpretations generally identify Jerusalem as the persecutor of the Church, "Babylon", the "Mother of Harlots", etc. They see Armageddon as God's judgment on the Jews, carried out by the Roman army, which is identified as "the beast". Some preterists see the second half of Revelation as changing focus to Rome, its persecution of Christians, and the fall of the Roman Empire. It sees the Revelation being fulfilled in AD 70, thereby bringing the full presence of God to dwell with all humanity.

The Futurist View

The futurist view assigns all of the prophecy to some future time, shortly before the second coming. Futurist interpretations generally predict a Great Tribulation, a relatively short period of time where believers will experience worldwide persecution and be purified and strengthened by it, and a rapture, whereby all true Christians are taken from Earth by God into Heaven. Pretribulationists believe that all Christians then alive will be taken bodily up to Heaven before the Tribulation begins. Some variants of this interpretation portray Israeli Jews as collaborators with the Antichrist; well-known futurist Pat Robertson was sharply criticized for actually stating that "The Antichrist is probably a Jew alive in Israel today." Midtribulationists believe that the rapture of the faithful will occur halfway through the tribulation, after it begins, but before the worst part of it occurs. Posttribulationists believe that Christians will not be taken up into Heaven until Christ returns at the end of the Tribulation.

The futurist view was first proposed by two Catholic writers, Lacunza and Ribera. Lacunza wrote under the pen name "Ben Ezra", and his work was banned by the Catholic church. It has grown in popularity in the 19th and 20th centuries, so that today it is probably most readily recognized. Books about the "rapture" by authors like Hal Lindsey, and the more recent Left Behind novels (byJerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye) and movies, have done much to popularize this school of thought.

The Rastafarians hold a futurist view of the book of Revelation, relating it both to 20th-century events such as the crowning of Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie and the Second Italo-Ethiopian War, and also to future events such as the supposed second coming of Selassie on the supposed day of judgment.

The Historicist View

The historicist view regards the prophecy as spanning the time from the end of the first century through the second coming of Christ.

Politically, historicist interpretations apply the symbols of Revelation to the gradual division and collapse of the Roman Empire, the emergence of a divided Europe in the West and a Muslim empire in the East, and the collapse of the Eastern Empire while Europe attempts to reunite and recreate the Roman Empire.

Ecclesiastically, historicist interpretations see Revelation as teaching that the Church would expand, despite persecution, until it "conquered" the whole world—but, in the process, would gradually evolve into an apostate system within which true Christians would be a persecuted minority. The apostate Church is associated with the symbols of the "Mother of Harlots" and with "Babylon". It is seen as an "Antichrist system" which exists for much of history rather than expecting a single "Antichrist" in the last days, as futurist interpretations do.

According to historicist interpretations, the second coming of Christ occurs about the time that a partly reunited Europe starts to wage war against Israel. This view is held mainly by Fundamentalist Protestant Christians. The exact constitution of this confederacy differs between interpretations: in some it is mainly composed of Eastern European countries, notably Russia; in others, Western European; some include England, while others suggest that England and former Commonwealth nations will oppose the confederacy. In all historicist interpretations, Christ defeats this confederacy, rescues Israel from certain destruction, judges apostate Christianity and vindicates the true believers, and sets up a kingdom on earth.

The earliest Christian writers adopted a historicist viewpoint, though at such an early date the distinction between historicist and futurist views was less pronounced. Historicist interpretations tend to be millenarian, emphasizing the literal reign of Christ on earth, and as that doctrine receded in importance, so too did the historicist focus in interpretation. Today, historicist interpretations are favored in the most ardently millenarian sects.

Many Protestant writers today use this school of interpretation as the foundation for an anti-Catholic polemic, but it should be noted that such is not an inherent property of historical interpretations. Many Catholic writers in the fourth and fifth centuries applied the notion of future apostasy to their own church, in various ways. Some argued that an apostasy would arise within the church. Others argued that this had already happened, and cited one or another sect which arose over some theological dispute. What differs between interpretations is the identity of the apostasy.

The Spiritual or Idealist View

The Spiritual view (also called Idealist by some writers) does not see the book of Revelation as predicting specific events in history. Rather it sees the visions as expressing eternal spiritual truths that find expression throughout history. Only in the last few chapters are specifically predictive eschatological issues taken up.

The Eastern Orthodox View

Eastern Orthodoxy has an interpretation that does not fit well into any of the above classifications. It treats the text as simultaneously describing contemporaneous events and as prophecy of events to come, for which the contemporaneous events were a form of foreshadow. It rejects attempts to determine, before the fact, if the events of Revelation are occurring by mapping them onto present-day events, taking to heart the Scriptural warning against those who proclaim "He is here!" prematurely. Instead, the book is seen as a warning to be spiritually and morally ready for the end times, whenever they may come ("as a thief in the night"), but they will come at the time of God's choosing, not something that can be precipitated nor trivially deduced by mortals.

Historical-Critical Interpretation

The historical-critical interpretation takes as axiomatic some qualities that would be considered commonplaces in a non-Christian or non-Rastafarian context, first of all that Revelation is a text, which is embodied and transmitted in manuscripts, which have their own histories. Such texts are subject to changes, such as miscopying, repetition of lines already entered, excision, interpolation or emendation. Motivations for such changes run the whole gamut of human motivations, and need also to be assessed in their historical context.

The acceptance of Revelation into the canon is itself the result of a historical process, essentially no different from the career of other texts. The eventual exclusion of other contemporary apocalyptic literature from the canon may throw light on the unfolding historical processes of what was officially considered orthodox, what was heterodox, what was even heretical.

The historical-critical interpretation cannot address two aspects of Revelation. It is not prepared to discuss aspects of divine inspiration of the original text, nor can it assess the book's relevance to the modern world. Interpretation of meanings and imagery are limited to what the historical author intended and what his contemporary audience inferred. Thus, the symbolism of Revelation is to be understood entirely within its historical literary and social context. Critics study the conventions of apocalyptic literature and events of the 1st century to make sense of what the author may have intended.

Nevertheless, many interpretative questions remain. Is the structure of the book linear, resumptive, or thematic? How does the imagery relate to historical events? Did the author intend one or multiple meanings in the text? The plurality of answers to these (and other) questions is plain to see both from the text of this article and scholarly opinion. Historical-criticism does not sit well within this plurality, but contemporary approaches to biblical texts, notably the literary-critical method, revel in this uncertainty. Different questions are asked, and as a result, the focus shifts from author to reader. What does it matter who wrote Revelation? Why can't the structure be linear, resumptive and thematic simultaneously? What stops the imagery relating to just 1st-century events and not 21st-century events as well? Fundamentally, what stops Revelation having more than one valid meaning? (For more related information, see Literary criticism, but see also Historical-grammatical hermeneutics.)

The Beast from the Sea

Among many critics, the beast from the sea that had received plenitude of power from the dragon, or Satan, is actually the Roman Empire, or rather, the Emperor, its supreme representative.

The token of the beast with which its servants are marked is the image of the emperor on the coins of the realm. This seems to be the obvious meaning of the passage, that all business transactions, all buying and selling were impossible to them that had not the mark of the beast (Rev 13:17). Against this interpretation it is objected that the Jews at the time of Jesus had no scruple in handling money on which the image of Caesar was stamped (Matt 22:15–22). But it should be borne in mind that the horror of the Jews for the imperial images was principally due to the policy of Caligula. He confiscated several of their synagogues, changing them into pagan temples by placing his statue in them. He even sought to erect an image of himself in the Temple in Jerusalem (Josephus, Antiquities, 18.8.2).

Seven Heads of the Beast

The seven heads of the beast are said to represent seven Roman emperors. Five of them are said to be fallen. They are Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. The year of Nero's death is 68. The text goes on to say "One is", namely Vespasian, 70-79. He is the sixth emperor. The seventh "is not yet come. But when he comes his reign will be short." Titus is meant, who reigned but two years (79–81). The eighth emperor is Domitian (81–96); he is identified with the beast. He is described as the one that "was and is not and shall come up out of the bottomless pit" (xvii, 8). In verse 11 it is added: "And the beast which was and is not: the same also is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into destruction."

All this sounds like oracular language. But the clue to its solution is furnished by a popular belief largely spread at the time. The death of Nero had been witnessed by few. Chiefly in the East a notion had taken hold of the mind of the people that Nero was still alive. Gentiles, Jews, and Christians were under the illusion that he was hiding himself, and as was commonly thought, he had gone over to the Parthians, the most troublesome foes of the empire. From there they expected him to return at the head of a mighty army to avenge himself on his enemies. The existence of a belief in a Nero redivivus is attested by Tacitus and Dio Chrysostom.

Many contemporaries of the author of this book believed Nero to be alive and expected his return. The author either shared their belief or utilized it for his own purpose. Nero had made a name for himself by his cruelty and licentiousness. The Christians in particular had reason to dread him. Under him the first persecution took place. The second occurred under Domitian. But unlike the previous one, it was not confined to Italy, but spread throughout the provinces. Many Christians were put to death, many were banished (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., III, 17–19). In this way the Book of Revelation seems to regard Domitian as a second Nero, "Nero redivivus". Hence it describes him as "the one that was, that is not, and that is to return". Hence also he counts him as the eighth and at the same time makes him one of the preceding seven, the fifth, Nero.

Note that pagan authors called Domitian a second Nero (calvus Nero, Juvenal. IV, 38). The popular belief concerning Nero's death and return seems to be referred to also in the passage (xiii, 3): "And I saw one of its heads as it were slain to death: and its death's wound was healed."

The seven heads might also refer to the Seven Hills of Rome.

Ten Horns of the Beast

The ten horns are commonly explained as the vassal rulers under the supremacy of Rome. They are described as kings (basileis), here to be taken in a wider sense, that they are not real kings, but received power to rule with the beast. Their power, moreover, is but for one hour, signifying its short duration and instability (xvii, 17).

Number of the Beast

Main article: Number of the Beast (numerology)

The beast is identified by the number 666 in the text (Rev 13:18). This is very likely an instance of gematria, an early form of Jewish mysticism. Its object is to conceal a name by substituting for it a cipher of equal numerical value to the letters composing it. When the name "Nero Caesar" is spelled with Hebrew letters as נרון קסר (NRON QSR—Hebrew vowels are usually not letters), each letter has a corresponding numerical value, N=50, R=200, O=6 N=50, Q=100, S=60, R=200, resulting in the sum of 666.

Some Greek manuscripts of Revelation have a different number. Here the number is not 666, but 616. If Nero is alternatively spelled as NRO instead of NRON, one gets 616; NRO minus N(=50).

Other people, primarily those who hold to dispensationalism, discount the gematrian theory and argue that "666" symbolically represents an anti-trinity of evil (the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet), as "6" is one short from the perfect "7". It is also believed the number six represents mankind as created on the sixth day of creation and is a step below God, represented by seven. The three sixes represent mankind trying to be like God by becoming omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.

The Beast from the Earth

According to some interpreters, the second beast represents the personal Roman Imperial Cult whose office was to assist the beast from the sea, probably signifying the work of seduction carried on by apostate Christians. They endeavored to make their fellow Christians adopt the pagan practices and submit themselves to the cultus of the Caesar. Other interpreters believe that the second beast is the church corrupted by its relationship with the Roman Empire after Christianity was legalized in the early 4th century AD. The woman with child is a personification of Israel. Her firstborn is Jesus; her other children represent the community of the faithful—Christians. For some Orthodox and Roman Catholic Christians, the "woman clothed with the sun" here is the Virgin Mary.

Footnotes

1. ^ "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..." (Revelation 1:1) - Quote taken from the King James Version.

External links

Online translations of the Book of Revelation :

• Template:Biblegateway
• Early Christian Writings: Apocalypse of John: text, introduction, context

Related article:

• Book of Revelation: Outlines, analyzing the literary structure.

Other:

• Fulfilled Prophecy Unfolding events prophesied in the book of Revelation

See also

Directly related

• Number of the Beast (numerology)
• Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
• Whore of Babylon
• Apocalypse
• Wikisource Text
• Fifth Monarchy Men
• Laodicean Church
• Summary of Christian eschatological differences

General

• Christian eschatology
• Apocalyptic literature
• Apocalypticism
• Bible code
• End times
• Millennialism
• Books of the Bible
• Left Behind
• The Omen
• Endtime Ministries

Books of the Bible
Preceded by: Jude	Revelation	Followed by: End