Reflections on Revelation (6): The praise songs

Revelation paints a glorious picture of the worship of God in heaven. I have compiled a list of seven of the more prominent praise songs that are sung in the book of Revelation.

1) The worship portrayed in Revelation 4 is reminiscent of Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 1. John sees a vision of God sitting on his heavenly throne and being worshiped by mighty creatures whom he calls “elders” and “living creatures.” The text is full of imagery. Picture this:

-”around the throne was a rainbow that had the appearance of an emerald” (3)
-”before the throne there was as it were a sea of glass, like crystal” (6)
-”from the throne came flashes of lightning, and rumblings and peals of thunder” (5)

Day and night the four living creatures never cease worshiping God with this song:

“Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty,
who was and is and is to come!”

The twenty four elders sing this song:

“Worthy are you, our Lord and God,
to receive glory and honor and power,
for you created all things,
and by your will they existed and were created.”

One of my biggest questions in reading through this chapter (which frustratingly none of the commentaries addressed) was, who is the one one the throne – the Father, the Son, or the Triune God all at once? Because of the larger context of Revelation, in which the Lamb is clearly disassociated from the One who sits on the throne (e.g., 5:6, 13, 7:10, etc.), and because of the larger context of the New Testament, in which Christ is often portrayed as “sitting at the right hand of God the Father” (which assumes the Father is sitting on a throne), I have tentatively concluded that the One sitting on the throne is God the Father. This also makes sense of the praise song’s focus on God’s work of creation.

2) In chapter 5 the same angels shift their worship from God the Father to God the Son, “the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” (5:5):

“Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation,
and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God,
and they shall reign on the earth” (5:9-10)

3) This song is sung by the elders, the four living creatures, and innumerable angels, for God’s salvation of the 144,000 from Israel. From chapter 7:

“Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen“

4) In chapter 11, after the seventh angel blows his trumpet, the twenty four elders sing this song:

“We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,
who is and who was,
for you have taken your great power
and begun to reign.
The nations raged,
but your wrath came,
and the time for the dead to be judged,
and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints,
and those who fear your name,
both small and great,
and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.”

The reference in verse 17 to God’s reign beginning with this act of judgment, especially when read in light of the immediately preceding verse 15 (“the kingdom of this world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever”), is helpful for understanding the relation between preterism and millennial views. In the partial preterist view (and in some non-preterist views as well!), the 70 A.D. judgment marked the inauguration of the millennium of chapter 20 – this is why preterists are basically either post-mill or a-mill. The preterist views Christ’s judgment on Jerusalem as a major Christological event – the public vindication of his session at God’s right hand. Hence John can write that Christ’s kingdom begins with the judgment associated with the seventh trumpet (which, in this view, is the judgment on Jerusalem).

5) This is “the song of Moses” and “the song of the Lamb,” sung by those who conquer the beast, from chapter 15:

“Great and amazing are your deeds,
O Lord God the Almighty!
Just and true are your ways,
O King of the nations!
Who will not fear, O Lord,
and glorify your name?
For you alone are holy.
All nations will come
and worship you,
for your righteous acts have been revealed.”

6) This song is proclaimed by the angel who pours out the third bowl of God’s wrath in chapter 16:

“Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was,
for you brought these judgments.
For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets,
and you have given them blood to drink.
It is what they deserve!”

Its interesting to note how many of these songs, such as this one, have as their major impetus an act of divine wrath/judgment. This may lend credence to Gentry’s thesis that a major theme of Revelation is God’s judgment on apostate Israel.

7) And lastly, the great multitude at the marriage supper of the Lamb in chapter 19 sing this song:

“Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God,
for his judgments are true and just;
for he has judged the great prostitute
who corrupted the earth with her immorality,
and has avenged on her the blood of his servants.”

To conclude:

Nowhere else in the Bible do we get such a picture of heavenly worship (i.e., worship by angels and glorified saints) – most biblical praise songs are sung on earth. Getting a vision of this heavenly worship is such a powerful stimulus for our worship here, and our perseverance. To think – right now God is being incessantly worshiped by creatures which are so bright and awesome that we would be tempted to worship them if we saw them, as John was (19:9-10). Its more noisy, exciting, and beautiful than any concert has ever been on earth. Even just knowing that that is going on somewhere is enough to fill life with meaning. There is a place where goodness and light and happiness are untouched, unspoiled, unruined. No matter how neglected the glory of God may be among fallen humans, its not forgotten by the seraphim. No matter how terrible things may be going here on earth, the worship of heaven continues, undisturbed and un-interrupted.

Well, this is my last post on Revelation. I have loved studying this book, but am ready to move on. I have been doing scattered reading from Psalms for the past few days, and in a few days I will start reading through and posting about Zechariah.

Read Full Post »

Reflections on Revelation (5): Why I disagree with Gentry on 21:1-22:5

I have been heavily using Gentry throughout my study of Revelation, and I owe him a great deal of debt for all I have learned from him. I had to part ways with him, however, when I got to 21:1-22:5 and read his interpretation of this glorious vision of the New Jerusalem. After acknowledging that 20:7-15 predict the (still future) second coming of Christ, Gentry claims that 21:1-22:5 revert back to the first century and describe (in highly poetic language) the glory of the church and salvation. Gentry argues that John’s major theme is the replacement of the old Jerusalem with the new Jerusalem, and thus “the coming of the new Jersusalem down from heaven (chaps. 21-22) logically should follow soon upon the destruction of the old Jerusalem on the earth (Rev. 6-11, 14-19), rather than waiting thousands of years” (Four Views on the Book of Revelation, 87). Gentry finds additional support for his view in:
(1) the time frame indicators which follow this section immediately in 22:6, 10.
(2) the progressive nature of “new creation” language, in line with Isaiah 65:17- 20
(3) the alleged harmony between this view and the imagery employed elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., the depiction of the church as the bride of Christ in Eph. 5)

As a fellow partial preterist who has much respect and appreciation for Gentry’s general contribution to eschatology and interpretation of the book of Revelation, I find Gentry’s view of 21:1-22:5 unconvincing for the following reasons:

1) The book of Revelation builds in momentum as one moves through the book: its vision grows exponentially more and more grandiose. The praise songs get longer and grander, the judgements get fiercer, the warfare gets more intense, and so on. There is definite crescendo. As Gentry himself writes, “the closer John approaches his conclusion, the more glorious the outcome appears” (82). It would be strange, therefore, if, after painting such a glorious vision in 20:7-15 of Satan’s defeat, Christ’s glorious return, and the final judgment, events which Gentry admits were thousands of years away from John’s lifetime, John were to return to first century events in chapter 21. 21:1 begins, “Then I saw …”, implying continuity and escalation. Gentry’s reading seems to disrupt this movement, this crescendo. This reading of Revelation makes John’s conclusion quite underwhelming: instead of going out with a bang, the book trails off with a thud.

2) Since 22:6-21 is the conclusion of the entire book, it is illegitimate to insist that the time frame indicators of 22:6 and 22:10 limit 21:1-22:5 simply because they are textually near. On this reading it is not clear why 20:7-15 are not also bound by these time frame indicators. It seems better to see the time frame indicators of chapter 22 as referring to the book as a whole, without demanding that every single event in the book (such as those specified as a thousand years long!) be completed within John’s readers’ lifetimes.

3) The events of 21:1-22:5 seem too glorious for Gentry’s view. When arguing against the futurist interpretation of 1:1 and 1:3, Gentry asks, “why not accept John’s statements at face value?” (92). Can the same question be asked regarding Gentry’s interpretation of 21:4: “death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore” (21:4)? Admittedly John’s language in 21:1-22:5 is very symbolic, but the symbolism here seems to draw from the height and the grandeur of the events described. To restrict the fulfillment of 21:4 to gospel salvation which begins to remove ultimate grief and death does not seem (to me at least) to be taking John’s statements at face value.

4) I agree that the old Jerusalem/new Jerusalem (prostitute/bride) contrast is a strong theme in Revelation, and that a decisive redemptive historical shift occured in 70 A.D. with regard to the nature of God’s people. But none of this entails that the church (the new Jerusalem, the bride) does not also feature prominently at the second coming of Christ at the end of history.

5) Personally, I find the vision of heaven painted in 21:1-22:5 very encouraging. If this language is merely “expressing, by means of elevated poetic imagery, the glory of salvation” (89), I must admit I am thoroughly dissapointed. The trajectory of the whole biblical story is that God will renew his fallen creation into its original theo-centric harmony and bliss. Wouldn’t one expect a glorious conclusion to this glorious story? As I said earlier, this interpretation of Revelation seems quite underwhelming. I think of T.S. Eliot’s poem: “this is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but a whimper.”

For these reasons, I conclude that the glorious vision of 21:1-22:5 awaits future fulfillment and that Christians can therefore find great encouragement in this passage’s prediction of a new heavens and a new earth in which “the former things have passed away” and thus there is (quite literally) no more mourning, no more pain, and no more death. But the best part about it is this: “behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God” (21:3).

I am sure it will be greater than we can even imagine.

“But if we hope for what we do not yet see, we wait for it with patience” (Romans 8:25).

Read Full Post »

Reflections on Revelation (4): My overall favorite verse

I finished Revelation this morning. Perhaps my favorite passage in the whole book is 21:6b-7, which comes right in the middle of the description of the New Jersusalem. It is such a beautiful promise:

To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment. The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son.

Read Full Post »

Reflections on Revelation (3): The Names of Jesus Christ

In my first post, I noted two theological emphases that come through very forcefully in the book of Revelation, regardless of the hermenuetical approach that one adopts in reading Revelation: (1) a high Christology and (2) a glorious vision of heaven. Stated negatively, this means that the book of Revelation is a strong corrective for two very serious and very common theological errors: (1) a wimpy Jesus and (2) a boring heaven. As I have continued reading, I would add at least two more emphases to this list: (3) a call for Christian perseverance amidst suffering; and (4) God’s sovereignty over history and nations. I have also been struck by how much the book of Revelation draws from the Old Testament. Revelation does not quote from the Old Testament as much as some other New Testament books, but there are constant allusions and echos: John’s whole thought world is informed by Old Testament imagery and pattern. He especially draws from Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Zechariah.

In this post I am going to focus on the first of these emphases: Revelation’s high Christology. In my next post on Revelation I will focus on the second emphasis I have noticed in the book, its glorious vision of heaven.

Here is a list of all the names that Jesus Christ is called in Revelation that I have compiled as I have been reading through:

The faithful witness (1:5). The firstborn of the dead (1:5). The ruler of the kings of the earth (1:5). The First and the Last (1:17). The living One (1:18). (He) who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks among the seven golden lampstands (2:1). The First and the Last, who died and came to life (2:8). (He) who has the sharp two-edged sword (2:12). The Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze (2:18). He who searches mind and heart (2:23). (He) who has the seven spirits of God and the seven stars (3:1). The holy One, the true One, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, who shuts and no one will open (3:7). The Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation (3:14). The Lion of the Tribe of Judah (5:5). The Root of David (5:5). The Lamb (5:6). The Lamb who was slain (5:12). One who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron (12:5). (One) seated on the cloud like a son of man, with a golden grown on his head, and a sharp sickle in his hand (14:14). Lord of Lords and King of Kings (17:14). The Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End (22:13). The root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star (22:16).

Here are the two lengthiest physical descriptions of Jesus Christ in Revelation:

1:13-16:
In the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash around his chest. The hairs of his head were white, like white wool, like snow. His eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burnished bronze, refined in a furnace, and his voice was like the roar of many waters. In his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth came a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength.

19:11-16:
The one sitting on (the horse) is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

I am so glad for the study I have put into Revelation in the past few weeks. This book has greatly increased my love and reverence for Jesus Christ. During times of corporate worship, its helpful to remember that the Jesus we are singing to is not in a state of humiliation, but glory and power, like these passages describe.  Revelation helps us recapture this glorious vision of Christ that we need so urgently.

Read Full Post »

Reflections on Revelation (2): A Brief Introduction to Preterism

Preterism is well defined at theopedia.com as “a view in Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days refer to events which took place in the first century after Christ’s birth, especially associated with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning past, since this view deems certain biblical prophecies as past, or already fulfilled.”

There are two main kinds of preterism: full preterism and partial preterism (though these labels are disputed by each side). Partial preterism is also called moderate preterism and orthodox preterism, while full preterism is also called consistent preterism, hyper-preterism, and radical preterism. I use the terms “full” and “partial” to denote the two views, because they seem to me to be both less charged and more accurate than the other labels. Some examples of contemporary partial preterists are Kenneth Gentry, R.C. Sproul, and Gary DeMar. Some examples of contemporary full preterists are Edward E. Stevens and Max King. The most historically significant case for full preterism was J. Stuart Russell’s The Parousia, first published in 1878.

Full preterists believe that all eschatological events were fulfilled in the first century, and we now living in the new heavens and the new earth. For full preterists, Jesus’ second coming was not a bodily and visible return at the end of history, but a spiritual return manifested in judgment on Jerusalem via the Roman army in 70 A.D. Full preterists also the final resurrection took place “spiritually” during the first century. Full preterism is viewed as heretical by most conservative Christians and creedally heterodox by all Christians (including most full preterists themselves).

Partial preterists believe that prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, the great tribulation, the anti-Christ, and a “judgment coming” of Christ were fulfilled during the Roman siege of Jerusalem culminating in the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. Textually, partial preterists view the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) and the majority of the book of Revelation as referring to first century events. Partial preterists maintain, however, that the second coming (bodily and undeniable), the final judgment, the final resurrection, and the inaugeration of the new heavens and new earth await future fulfillment. Partial Preterists are almost always amillennialists or postmillennialists.

With regard to Revelation, this means that chapters 1-19 (in the partial preterist view) are primarily concerned with first century events – events that most of John’s original readers would experience within their lifetime. For example, Kenneth Gentry views the seven seals of Revelation chapter 6 and the seven trumpets of chapters 8-9 as referring to various events during the 67-70 period of the first Roman Jewish War. Other examples: he views the beast of chapter 13 as referring to the Roman Emperor Nero (and more basically to the entire Roman Empire), and he views the great prostitute of chapter 17 and Babylon of chapter 18 as referring to first century Jerusalem.

Preterism is one of the four most common hermeneutical approaches to Revelation. The others are:
1) Futurism – this views holds that the bulk of Revelation refers to events in the future, just prior to return of Christ. This is by far the majority evangelical interpretation.
2) Historicism – this views holds that the events of Revelation find fulfillment throughout the course of church history. This view was very popular among the Reformers (who identified the papacy with the anti-Christ) but is less common today.
3) Idealism – this view holds that Revelation does not specific historical events as much as the timeless struggle between good and evil and the eventual triumph of Christ.

I do not have space in this post to give a thorough explanation of why I lean towards the partial preterist interpretation, but I do hope to return to this topic in future posts in more depth. For now, I will simply summarize several of the main points that incline me towards partial preterism at this point in my study.

1) The first and greatest factor that inclines me towards preterism is the teaching of Christ in the synoptic Gospels that his return would be within the lifetime of many of his hearers.

Consider these statements in Matthew:

When sending out the twelve, Jesus said to them 10:23:
“When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes.”

While teaching about discipleship, Jesus said in 16:27-28:
“For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. 28I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

And finally, during the Olivet discourse, after mentioning is glorious coming, Jesus says in 24:34:

“I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

The force of these passages in increased by these facts: (1) they each express nearness in variously different ways and thus clarify and corroborate each other; (2) they are corroborated by other New Testament passages concerning the “nearness” of Christ’s return (e.g., Revelation 1:1, 3, 22:7, 20); (3) they accord remarkably with many of Jesus’ parables and statements of judgment against “this generation” towards the end of his earthly ministry (e.g., cf. Matthew 23:35-36).

I don’t want to take the space here to go into the various reasons that I find the typical evangelical futurist interpretations of these passages unconvincing, but let me simply summarize by stating that all too often they seem to be an exercise in hermeneutical gymnastics that do not give sufficient weight to the most straightforward reading of Jesus’ statements. I encourage a fresh consideration of how Jesus’ statements would have been understood by his original hearers in their historical context.

2) The second factor that inclines me towards preterism is the nature of biblical prophecy. Too often the Olivet Discourse and the book of Revelation are subjected to a wooden literalism that no one uses to read Old Testament prophecy. But New Testament prophecy is consiously in the tradition of Old Testament prophecy, often using the same kind of imagistic, magisterial language. Here is one example – cf. Matthew 24:29 with Isaiah 13:10-13 or Ezekiel 32:7-8. If Scripture speaks of the heavens melting and the sun ceasing to shine to describe the historical judgments of Babylon and Egypt, shouldn’t we allow it to use the same kind of grandiose language to describe the historical judgment of Jerusalem?

3) A third factor that inclines me towards preterism is the remarkable congruence between Josephus’ account of the siege on Jerusalem and the biblical testimony. Its tough to deny, for example, the force of Gentry’s line by line comparison of Josephus and Revelation 8-9. If nothing else, reading Josephus (and Tacitus) on the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple will give you a heightened appreciation for the historical and theological significance of this event, which is clearly anticipated in some texts of the New Testament (e.g., Luke 21:6, 20, 24, Revelation 11:2).

4) A fourth factor is develping a fresh appreciate for the original audience of the Olivet Discourse. Everything in the Olivet Discourse is flavored with the distinctives of Jesus’ original context and the needs of his original hearers. Consider:

a) “when you hear of wars and tumults, do not be terrified” (21:9)

b) “before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you” (21:12)

c) “when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near” (21:20)

d) “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it” (21:21)

e) “when these things begin to take place, straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near” (22:28)

What meaning would Jesus’ words have had to his original hearers if the “you” and the “those who are inside the city” which are emboldened in the above sentences referred not to them, but to people thousands of years later?

I will post more on this topic in the future. To end this post I will provide some pictures of the destruction of Jerusalem.

This is an 1850 painting by David Roberts entitled The Siege and Destruction of Jerusalem:

This is a map of Jerusalem in 70 AD with the temple in yellow:

This is an 1867 painting by Francesco Hayez entitled The Destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem:

Read Full Post »

Reflections on Revelation (1): why read it?

I used to avoid the book of Revelation completely. I remember in High School I did one of those read through the bible in a year projects, and for the New Testament section, I just stopped after Jude, because Revelation seemed too daunting. I had read enough of it to know how challenging it was, and I seriously doubted that I would be able to make any progress in understanding it. In addition, it seemed irrelevant to my life – how am I supposed to be edified by this bizarre apocalyptic literature?

However, in the last year or so I have developed a much greater appreciation for how much we need the difficult and strange books of the Bible like Revelation. I would even say that the parts of the bible that we find most difficult and offensive are probably the ones we need most urgently. The more a certain book or teaching rubs us the wrong way, or is a struggle to understand, the greater potential for learning and correction.

Here are seven reasons why we should not avoid difficult books in the Bible like Revelation:

1) According to II Timothy 3:16, “all Scripture … is useful.” Useful was not a word I would have used to describe the book of Revelation until recently. But apparently it should be. If every part of the Bible is equally from God, then every part should be received with gratitude and held in high esteem.

2) Twice (once at its beginning and once at its end) Revelation pronounces a blessing on the person who reads and heeds its word:

“Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it.” (1:3)

“Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book.” (22:7)

One could find similar statements in other difficult biblical books. For example, as difficult as we often find the Old Testament law, blessing is attached to reading and obeying it (e.g., Deuteronomy 30:16, Joshua 1:8).

3) If we only read the parts of the Bible with which we are already comfortable, we are not really submitting to it (at least not as fully as we could be). We are not completely under it. Think about it – if a son obeys his father only when it makes sense to him, and when it is in accord with what he already wants to do, but never obeys when it hurts, or costs, or is difficult to understand – is this sincere obedience? True submission manifests itself in a willingness to hear what is difficult as well as what is natural, a willingness to actually be corrected and changed.

4) If every part of the Bible makes a unique contribution to the overall biblical message, then by erecting “a canon within a canon” we can actually alter or distort what God is communicating in the Bible. By never preaching from the Old Testament prophets, for example, we can develop an insufficient theology of God’s wrath, the seriousness of sin, and God’s sovereignty over the nations. By never reading from the Psalms, we can develop a simplified or flat view of spirituality. If we neglect Jude, we won’t be as well equipped to respond to false teachers in the church. And so on – each chunk of the bible makes an important contribution to the overall message.

Take the book of Nahum as an example. The book of Nahum starts off, “The LORD is a jealous and avenging God; the LORD is avenging and wrathful; the LORD takes vengeance on his adversaries and keeps wrath for his enemies” (1:2, ESV), and then proceeds to pronounce an intense prophetic judgment against Ninevah (the capital of Assyria). Many preachers today avoid texts like this, perhaps fearing that they won’t be well received in our culture of pluralism and tolerance. But the book of Nahum tells us important things about the God we worship (and it makes a lot more sense when you understand how unthinkably brutal ancient Assyria was). We don’t need to be embarrassed of anything in the Bible, or afraid of where it will lead us if we believe it. This is what it means to confess the Bible as God’s word: we can trust it and lean into it wholeheartedly.

5) The word canon literally means “measuring rod.” If the canon of Scripture is our measuring rod for discerning truth, and we confine ourselves to only certain parts of it, then we are “measuring” (discerning truth) with an incomplete measuring rod. How then can we expect to be successful in distinguishing what is false from what is true?

6) A foundational principle of biblical interpretation is to “Scripture interpret Scripture.” We need all the various parts of the Bible to understand each other. There is so much in the New Testament, for example, that presupposes a familiarity with the Old Testament – while the Old Testament itself is very much incomplete without Christ and the New Testament. By avoiding certain parts of the Bible, we limit our understanding of the rest. And if nothing else, reading the tougher parts of the Bible will make you appreciate the easier parts!

7) The Bible’s diversity is a safeguard against reductionism, which is the cause of many theological errors. Learning to appreciate, rather than resist, the vast diversity of biblical genre and terminology can help us cultivate a godly and healthy openness in theological reflection and dialogue. Truth is one, but it can be looked at from different angles and communicated with different words and styles. Diversity is good. Even God has diversity built within his Triune being. Good is inherently diverse, while evil is monotonously repetitive.

Recognizing the Bible’s diversity can deliver us from the attitude that says, “you have to say things just like I say them.” After all, if God himself has chosen to spoke in diverse languages, through diverse people(s), at diverse times, in diverse situations, through diverse means of revelation, in diverse genres (law, proverb, oracle, narrative, poetry, epistle, etc.), to communicate a message which is essentially one – if God himself had done this, then shouldn’t we be willing to accept other Christians who use different words and styles than we do?

Part of the reason I go into all this I am reading through Revelation in my devotions now and I am really enjoying it. I just finished chapters 8 and 9 this morning. While different hermeneutical approaches to Revelation (e.g., preterism, futurism, idealism, historicism, etc.) yield important differences of interpretation, I am convinced that there are some theological emphases in Revelation that are so forceful and clear that they can be agreed upon by thoughtful readers from all these different perspectives.

Here are two theological emphases that I have noticed so far in chapters 1-9 that are not dependent upon any particular hermeneutical approach:

1) Revelation has a high Christology: almost every chapter emphasizes the deity, authority, and glory of the risen Christ. Even if you understand nothing else in the whole book, its worth reading Revelation for this emphasis alone. You cannot read the description in 1:12-16, for example, without getting a sense of how awesome and glorious and terrifying Christ’s physical appearance is. His authority over nations and kings is highlighted again and again. His atoning death, his intimate involvement in the life of the church, his just judgment on his enemies – all these themes come through forcefully. This is important, it seems to me, because sometimes we put so much emphasis on the humiliation of the cross that we forget the glory of Jesus’ current resurrection life.

In short, Revelation will deliver you from having a wimpy view of Jesus.

Consider, for example, 19:11-16:

11Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. 12 His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. 13He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. 14And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. 15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

2) Revelation shows how intense and glorious is the worship of God in heaven. The vision of chapter 4, for example, is overwhelming: 24 elders, 4 living creatures, innumerable angels (cf. 5:11), lighting and thunder, torches, a rainbow, a sea of glass, incessant praise songs – with God in the center of it all. All the images bombard the reader with a sense of the height and awesomeness of the events described. In an uncertain world, that vision of heaven is enough to base your whole life on.

I am finding Four Views on the Book of Revelation a helpful parallel book as I read. So far Kenneth Gentry’s case for the preterist interpretation has been the most convincing. That will be the focus of my next post on Revelation.

Read Full Post »