Commentary on Revelation

Introduction

The general impression that we receive from the story of Rome's fall is that vast cosmic forces were at work which frustrated the counsels of the wisest statesmen, and rendered nugatory the skill and valour of the greatest generals; ... if ever in human history we can discern the working of destiny or inevitable fate, it is here. (Gamaliel Milner The Problem of Decadence (Williams and Norgate: London, 1931)).

Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! He who sat upon it 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 inscribed which no one knows but himself. He is clad 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, followed him on white horses. From his mouth issues a sharp sword with which to smite the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron; he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, King of kings and Lord of lords. (Revelation 19:11-16)

Preface

These notes on Revelation were compiled in preparation for a six month course that I taught to the singles class at Prestoncrest Church of Christ in Dallas, Texas in 1990. The primary sources for these notes were the commentaries on Revelation by Jim McGuiggan and William Barclay. My initial suggestion to anyone opening this volume is that he or she read these books first before turning to the present text. These notes were particularly influenced by McGuiggan's commentary- many of the references and ideas in these notes are due to him. In addition to these two primary sources, I have also included material from approximately seventy other sources ranging from Gibbon's Decline and Fall to Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth; that is, from the sublime to the ridiculous.

As you read these notes, please keep in mind that they were compiled in preparation for a class that I taught. In particular, they were not originally intended for distribution and have only been put into their present form due to the persistent prodding of Marion Williams. As such, the present work has much in common with lecture notes: except for a brief mention in the bibliography, my sources remain largely uncredited; some notes appear only in outline form; and much of the material is presented in a rather conversational style. Although I have tried to go back and give credit where credit is due I am sure that certain sections are still not properly cited. Finally, please keep in mind that in compiling these notes I have followed, as I always do when studying the Bible, the advice of Mark Twain who said "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority it's probably time to change sides."

Matthew 24

Before we begin our study of Revelation we will first exercise our interpretive skills by studying Matthew 24. This chapter in Matthew (and parallel chapters in Mark 13 and Luke 21) describes the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 in the same way that Revelation describes the fall of the Roman empire. Both Jerusalem and Rome were fierce enemies of the church and God's message to each is the same.

The Last Days

The New Testament often speaks of "the last days." What are or what were the last days? In Acts 2:16-21 Peter quotes Joel 2:28-32 and claims that his listeners at that time were living during the last days. Continuing to quote from the prophet Joel, Peter said that the following events would occur during the last days:

God would pour out his spirit on all flesh.
People would prophecy and see visions.
There would be wonders in heaven and signs on earth.
There would be blood, fire, and vapor of smoke.
The sun would be turned into darkness.
These events would precede a great notable and day.
All who called on the name of the Lord would be saved.

Are there any other clues regarding the last days? In 1 Peter 1:20 we see that Christ was manifested at the end of the times. In Hebrews 1:1-2 we see that God spoke through his son during the last days. Thus, whatever time period the last days refers to it must include some part of the first century. Are we still living in the last days? Note that an affirmative response would cause the "last days" to refer to nearly 2000 years (and still counting). Clearly, to answer this question we need to determine what the word "last" refers to. The Bible tells us that the "last days" would be a time of judgment. The images used in Acts 2 are taken directly from Old Testament passages that dealt with judgments of God against oppressors of his people. The New Testament has much to say about a coming judgment that was very near. In James 5:8-9 we read that "the coming of the Lord is at hand. Behold, the judge standeth before the doors." In Matthew 24:33 Jesus says, "When you see these things, know that it is near, even at the doors." In 2 Timothy 3:1 we see that in the last days grievous times would come. In Luke 21:20-22 we see that those days would be days of vengeance. In 1 Peter 4:17 Peter writes, "For the time is come for judgment to begin at the house of God: and if it begin first at us, what shall be the end of them that obey not the gospel of God?" Thus, the last days seems to refer to a period of time preceding a judgment of God against the house of God. What does this mean? What judgment has God ever sent against his own house? In A.D. 70 the Jewish age came to a rather abrupt and final end when God destroyed the Jewish temple- His former house. Jesus had warned Jerusalem that God's judgment was coming:

And when he drew near and saw the city he wept over it, saying, "Would that even today you knew the things that make for peace! But now they are hid from your eyes. For the days shall come upon you, when your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side, and dash you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you; because you did not know the time of your visitation." (Luke 19:41-44)

The last days are just that- last days. We are not living during the last days that are spoken of in the New Testament. The last days are the last days of the Jewish age and mark the division of the Christian age that started in A.D. 33 and the Jewish age that ended completely and finally with the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. The Law could never be fully kept again. The tribal lines were gone forever. The Levitical priesthood could never be restored.

The Fall of Jerusalem

In A.D. 65 a Roman named Florus was in charge of Judea. His reign caused a violent Jewish rebellion. Cestius Gallus, called in to put down the revolt, promptly surrounded Jerusalem and prepared to enter it. Without warning, however, he suddenly ordered his troops to withdraw. Josephus wrote that this happened "without any reason in the world." We are told that many Christians escaped the doomed city during this momentary lapse. In A.D. 67 Nero sent Vespasian to take over for Cestius Gallus. Vespasian subdued all of Judea except for Jerusalem. In A.D. 68 Nero committed suicide and Vespasian promptly returned to Rome leaving his eldest son Titus to take care of the Jerusalem problem. Titus besieged the city and the Jews, expecting Messianic intervention, resisted. In A.D. 70 Titus took the city and the sacrifices on the altar ceased to be offered. The Roman legionary standards were set up in the temple, the holy of holies was ransacked, and a pig was slaughtered on the altar. The temple was burned, the city was destroyed, and thousands were killed. In total, over one million died in the Roman siege. Josephus wrote, "It is impossible to give every instance of the iniquity of these men [the Romans]. I shall therefore speak my mind here at once briefly: that never did any other city suffer such miseries." How does the Bible view these events? In Daniel 9:26 Daniel wrote nearly 500 years earlier that because they cut off the Messiah, the people of a prince that was to come would destroy the city and the sanctuary. In the parable of the faithless husbandmen who killed the owner's son Jesus says that the owner will "miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen."

Matthew 24

As this chapter opens, Jesus tells his disciples that the temple they are looking at would one day be so utterly destroyed that not one stone would be left on another. (The present temple had been rebuilt 600 years earlier upon the Jews' return from Babylon. After the temple was burned the Romans discovered that much of the gold had melted and run in between the stones. As you might imagine when they were finished not one stone was left on top of another.)

The disciples were naturally astonished and asked when this would occur. As one might expect, they seemed to feel that such an event could only occur when the world itself came to an end. Thus, the ask when the temple will be destroyed and when the world will end. Jesus answers both questions in the remainder of Chapter 24. Jesus first gives the following signs of "the end." Our goal will be to determine the "end" to which Jesus refers- the end of the temple or the end of the world. Billy Graham and Hal Lindsey feel that the signs refer to the end of the world.

Many shall say "I am Christ" and deceive many. The Jews expected Messianic intervention when their city was besieged. In Acts 5:36-37 we read of two false Messiahs.
There will be wars and rumors of wars. Before the fall of Jerusalem, four Roman emperors died violently within 18 months. Tacitus writes during this time of "disturbances in Germany," "commotions in Africa," "insurrections in Gaul," and "intrigues among the Parthians."
Famines, pestilences, and earthquakes will take place. Acts 11:28 speaks of a famine throughout the world that occurred during the reign of Claudius. Tacitus and Eusebius speak of famines in Rome, Judea, and Greece that occurred during this time. Suetonius wrote of a pestilence in Rome during Nero's day that killed 30,000 people. Josephus and Tacitus speak of pestilences in Babylonia and Italy during this period. Seneca wrote in A.D. 58, "How often have cities in Asia and Achaea fallen with one fatal shock! How many cities have been swallowed up in Syria! How many in Macedonia! News has often been brought us of the demolition of whole cities at once."
Great persecution will occur. It did. Read Acts.
False prophets will arise. They did. Read the epistles.
The gospel will be preached to all. The gospel at this time was preached to all- it was not confined to just one nation or one race. See Acts 2:5 (The gospel was preached to men from every nation under heaven.); Acts 8:1, 4 (Disciples went everywhere preaching the word.); Romans 1:8 ("Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world."); Romans 16:26 (The gospel has been made known to all nations.); Colossians 1:23 (The gospel has been preached to every creature under heaven.)
The abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel will occur. This may be the desecration of the holy of holies that we saw earlier. Recall that a pig was slaughtered on the altar. More likely, however, it refers to the encircling of Jerusalem by pagan forces since it was given as a sign for Christ's followers to escape. In the parallel passage in Luke 21:20 we read "but when ye see Jerusalem surrounded with armies, then know that her [Jerusalem's] desolation is at hand."
There will be great tribulation such as never has been seen and never shall be seen again. Recall the description of Jerusalem's fall provided by Josephus. Over one million were killed and nearly one hundred thousand were carried away into slavery.

Immediately after the tribulation we read in Matthew 24:29-31 that the following events would occur:

The sun would be darkened.
The moon would not give her light.
The stars would fall from heaven.
The powers of the heavens would be shaken.
The sign of the Son of man would appear.
All of the tribes of the earth would see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
The angels shall gather the elect.

Do these signs point to an event that has yet to occur or do they point to an event that has already occurred? (We should ask this question first before asking what the signs mean because if we can determine the proper time frame for the prophecy it will be much easier to determine its meaning. Determining a time frame for a prophecy is crucial to understanding the prophecy.) Matthew 24:34 tells us when these events would occur. In that verse, Jesus says "This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." That is, all of the events that Jesus spoke of in Mathew 24:1-34 were to take place during the lifetime of his listeners. "But wait," you say, "In my modern version of the Bible a footnote says that the word generation actually means race. That is, Jesus said that these events would occur before the Jewish race ceased to exist." A very good way to locate verses that cause problems for denominationalists is to look for footnotes in modern versions of the Bible. Although most are not so dishonest as to actually change the text, they do not hesitate to put into the footnotes what they wish the verse actually said. The Greek word for generation is ghen-eh-ah from which we get "genealogy." This is the word used in verse 34 and also in Matthew 1:17 and Matthew 12:41 where for some reason footnotes seldom appear. Does "generation" mean "race" in Matthew 1:17? The Greek word for "race" is ghen-os from which we get "genocide." This word is used in Acts 4:6 to denote the "kindred of the High Priest" and in 1 Peter 2:9 where the church is described as an "elect race." Instead of rewriting the Bible to fit our theology why don't we change our theology to fit the Bible? Verse 34 is the key to understanding Matthew 24. It marks the division between the answers Jesus provides in response to the apostles' two questions: When will the temple be destroyed? When will the world end? In response to the first question Jesus says that it will happen during their lifetimes (verse 34) and history tells us that it did. In response to the second question (after verse 34) Jesus says that no one will know or even expect when the when the world will end. (Indeed, in Mark 13:32 we find out that even Jesus did not know when the world would end!) What then does verse 29 mean when it says that the sun would be darkened, the stars would fall, etc.? These events did not literally occur when the temple was destroyed. Recall, however, the passage in Acts 2 where Peter quoted Joel and said that the sun and moon would be darkened during the last days- a period of time that he made clear was already underway. The image of the sun and moon being darkened is used many times in the Old Testament to depict figuratively the downfall of nations. There, as here, we should not take the language literally. Consider the following passages where similar language is used to describe the judgment of God:

Ezekiel 32:7-8 Read this description of God's judgment against Egypt. "When I blot you out, I will cover the heavens, and make their stars dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give its light. All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over you, and put darkness upon your land, says the Lord God."
Daniel 8:10 Calamities to befall the Jews are symbolized by the casting down of stars and hosts of heaven to the ground.
Amos 5:18-20 a day of darkness, and not light.
Amos 8:2-9 The end is come ... I will darken the earth. The sun will go down at noon.
Zephaniah 1:4, 15 a day of darkness and gloominess.
Isaiah 5:3, 30 a land of darkness and sorrow. Light is darkened in the heavens.
Jeremiah 4:3, 23, 28 The heavens are black and have no light.
Jeremiah 13:9-10, 16-19 God will cause darkness unless the people repent.
Ezekiel 34:12 The people will be scattered in a cloudy and dark day.
Micah 3:6, 12 The sun shall go down and there will be darkness.
Isaiah 34:4-10 The host of heaven will be dissolved. The heaven will be rolled together as a scroll.
Isaiah 13:9-10, 17-21 God's judgment against Babylon is described as occurring at a time when: The stars will not give light. The sun will be darkened. The moon will not shine.
Ezekiel The destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon in 586 B.C. is described by Ezekiel in language very similar to that used in Matthew 24.

In Ecclesiastes 12:1-2 the expression "while the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened" is used to symbolize good times. Also, in Isaiah 60:20 a promise of good times for Israel is described as a time when the "sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself." What about verse 30 where Jesus says that the people would see Jesus coming in the clouds? Did this happen in the first century as verse 34 suggests? It did not happen literally in the first century but it did happen figuratively. Indeed, in Matthew 26:64 Jesus told Caiaphas that he would personally witness Jesus coming on the clouds of heaven and sitting at the right hand of power. The judgments of God are often described as a coming of the Lord to seek justice for his people. Compare the following passages from the Old Testament where clouds and comings of God are used to depict judgments:

Isaiah 19:1 The burden of Egypt. Behold, the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence.
Ezekiel 30:3 For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near, a cloudy day.
Daniel 7:13 The son of man is pictured as "coming with the clouds of heaven" to receive his sovereign power.
Isaiah 31:4 So shall the Lord of hosts come down to fight for mount Zion.
Isaiah 35:4 Behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompense; he will come and save you.
Isaiah 59:20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.
Isaiah 66:15 For, behold, the Lord will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.

Angels are messengers. Thus when Jesus said that the angels would gather the elect he may have been referring to the spread of the gospel that would be unhampered by the Jews. There may also be an allusion here to the freedom of slaves in the Year of Jubilee.

Review

Remember the following points about Matthew 24 as we study the book of Revelation:

Jerusalem was a center of persecution against the early church and God judged them accordingly.
God's judgment came in the form of the complete destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
That judgment was described as a coming of the Lord.
That judgment was described by vivid imagery borrowed from the Old Testament.
Jesus said that this judgment would occur during the present day generation and it did.
This judgment did not include Christ's followers. Although, some Christians certainly suffered during the siege, many others heeded Christ's warnings and escaped. The judgment was not directed at them.

Revelation, as we will see, also speaks of an imminent judgment against an enemy of the Church and of the Church's complete victory over that enemy.

Introduction to Revelation

Rome and the Church

All agree that the book of Revelation describes a powerful false religious system that stands in opposition to God. As we will see, this false religion is the worship of the Roman emperor. Julius Caesar was killed by those who feared that he was leading Rome toward a monarchy. His death in 44 B.C. marked the end of the Roman Republic. His adopted son Octavius became Augustus, the first Roman emperor. As the Roman empire spread east, the Romans found rulers who thought themselves divine. The conquering Romans were called gods by the people they defeated. These attitudes quickly caught on and spread back to Rome. Although Augustus was never actually worshiped in Rome he encouraged cults in the provinces. Tiberius was against his own deification. Caligula thought himself a god and died before he was able to fulfill his goal of erecting a statue of himself in the Jewish holy of holies. Claudius did not want to be worshiped and in fact commended the Jews for refusing to worship Caligula. Nero did not want to be thought of as divine because he did not want his talent to be attributed to divinity. Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, and Titus did not have enough time to worry about such things. Domitian thought himself a god and actively persecuted those who disagreed. His policies grew into terrible persecutions against the church. At first, Christianity was thought to be just a Jewish sect and was ignored. Any cult that passed the following three tests was tolerated by Rome:

Will the cult upset the dominant position of the Roman cults?
Is the cult politically unsafe?
Is the cult morally desirable?

Christianity upset the Roman cults because it taught that all men were lost without Christ. Christianity was considered politically unsafe because it was centered around the worship of a criminal who had been executed by Rome. Christianity was not even considered morally desirable since Christians were accused of practicing cannibalism and incest. Christians would not pray to the king, they refused military service since such service required them to wear idolatrous insignias, they preached universal dominion by Jesus, and they refused to acknowledge the emperor as god. The persecution of the church by Rome was particularly intense during the reigns of Nero and Domitian. In A.D. 66 a fire destroyed much of Rome. A rumor spread that Nero had set the fire to further his plans to rebuild the city. To dispel the rumor Nero blamed the Christians who, as was well known, predicted a fiery end of the world. Tacitus describes the situation as follows:

To scotch the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue. First, then, the confessed members of the sect were arrested; next, on their disclosures, vast numbers were convicted, not so much on the count of arson as for hatred of the human race. And derision accompanied their end: they were covered with wild beasts' skins and torn to death by dogs; or they were fastened on crosses, and, when daylight failed were burned to serve as lamps by night. Nero had offered his gardens for the spectacle, and gave an exhibition in his circus, mixing with the crowds in the habit of a charioteer, or mounted on his car. Hence, in spite of a guilt which had earned the most exemplary punishment, there arose a sentiment of pity, due to the impression that they were being sacrificed not for the welfare of the state but to the ferocity of a single man.

This fierce persecution was reduced for awhile after the death of Nero but began again with renewed intensity when Domitian came to power. Tertullian called Domitian "a limb of the bloody Nero."

Apocalyptic Language

Revelation is called Apokalupsis in Greek and it is from this word that we get the word apocalyptic that means unveiled, uncovered, or revealed. Apocalyptic language is composed of symbols that are often lurid in color, violent in tone, and easily remembered. They strike the imagination and grab hold of the mind. Instances of such language can be found in Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah, Isaiah, as well as in Revelation, the minor prophets, and the gospels. See for example, Isaiah 13, Isaiah 34, Micah 1, Zephaniah 1, and Jeremiah 4. What is the purpose of such language? It denotes conflict and victory. It is used to describe what happens when God smites an oppressor and vindicates his people. It is used to describe times of crisis. Why did God use such language? It may have been to shield the Church from retaliation from Rome. The reason may have been similar to that given by Jesus concerning his use of parables. There may not be any reason at all. As Psalm 115:3 reminds us, God does whatever he pleases! Some have described such language as being oil paintings by God. In studying such passages we should pay particular attention to numbers and periods of time. Further, such language always has historical significance and we should study history in order understand the images. The usual approach to scripture is to understand a passage literally unless forced to do otherwise. This is reversed for apocalyptic language- that is, one should understand apocalyptic language figuratively unless forced to do otherwise. In any case, consistency is vital. God did not always intend for prophetic language to be taken literally. To do so with the first prophecy in Genesis 3:15 would cause it to apply to a conflict between humans and snakes. Numbers 12:8 reminds us that God does not always speak clearly but sometimes uses "dark speech." Hosea told Israel that they were going into Egyptian captivity yet they actually went into Assyrian captivity. Hosea knew that to a Jew Egypt meant captivity and oppression. Many modern commentators are inconsistent in this regard. To Hal Lindsey the 144,000 Jews in Rev. 7:4 are literal yet the locusts in Rev. 9:3 are Cobra helicopters. To John Walvoord, the 10 days in Rev. 2:10 are figurative yet the 1000 years in chapter 20 are literal. Attempting to take prophetic language literally can lead to big problems. To literalize Isaiah 11:6-10 is to deny that Paul applied it correctly to the first century in Romans 15:10-12. To literalize Ezekiel 16:53-55 would require the resurrection of the inhabitants of Sodom to their former prosperity despite what we read in Jude 7. To literalize Ezekiel 37:22-25 would require that David and not Jesus be Israel's eternal king. To literalize Isaiah 34:5-17 would require that the land of Edom will exist eternally here on earth and burn eternally while weeds and animal live in it. To literalize Micah 5:2-7 would require that the Assyrian empire rise again and attack Israel.

Approaches to Revelation

The Historical Approach

This view is sometimes called the standard Protestant interpretation and is taken in the Gospel Advocate commentary by Hinds. This approach views the book as a forecast in symbols of the history of the church. The Roman Catholic church often plays the role of the villain in this approach. This view ignores John's clearly stated time frame for the book. In particular, John says that all of the events dealt with in the book would occur shortly after the book was written. See Rev. 1:1; 1:3; 22:6; and 22:10. The meaning of these passages would not be disputed in any other context. In Revelation, however, the passages conflict with men's interpretation of the book and instead of changing their interpretation many change the clear meaning of these important verses. Walvoord recognizes the proper meaning but ignores it. Hinds inserts a word in order to have John say that his writings concern events that were to shortly begin to come to pass. This, however, is not what John said. Daniel received a vision in 550 B.C. (described in Daniel 8) that was fulfilled 400 years later in 165 B.C. when the sanctuary was restored after the desecration by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid king. In Daniel 8:26 Daniel was told to shut up the vision because its fulfillment was a long way off. In Rev. 22:10 John is told just the opposite- Don't seal up the vision because the time for its fulfillment is at hand. What about 2 Peter 3:8 where we see that to God 1000 years appears as 1 day? Time does not mean the same thing to God as it means to man yet in Rev. 1:1, 3 God is not talking to himself- God is talking to man. Which time frame do you think he would use? In Daniel 8 he said that 400 years were "many days." In addition to ignoring the time frame, this approach makes the book to be of little significance to its initial readers. Further, it quickly becomes absurd in its attempt to match historical details to the visions in the book. As in the popular book by Nostradamus, something in Revelation can be found to fit almost any historical fact if the context and time frame are ignored.

Aside: Many of us seem to be under the mistaken impression that God is confined to exist in time as we exist in time. That is, we imagine a Heaven and a Hell with clocks on the wall marking the passage the time. Such is not the case even in the physical realm! What may appear at one point to last a few seconds may appear from another frame of reference to last for centuries. Einstein's Theory of Relativity has actually been observed- it is now Einstein's Fact of Relativity! The idea that those in Heaven will one day be able to say that they have "been there 10,000 years" betrays our misconception. When we leave this world behind to live with Christ I suspect that we will leave our notion of time behind as well. If length and weight have no meaning in Heaven then why should time be any different?

The Futurist or Eschatological Approach

This approach claims that nothing in Revelation from chapter 4 until the end of the book has been fulfilled yet. Instead, the entire book will be fulfilled at some time immediately preceding the second coming of Christ and the end of the world. This approach includes the very popular dispensationalist view that is summarized below:

Jesus came to establish a visible rule on earth.
The Jews did not accept Christ so the offer to rule was withdrawn.
The establishment of the kingdom was postponed until his return.
The church was established for the interim period. The church is a parenthesis in history and is not a fulfillment of any Old Testament prophecy.
The church age will end with a "rapture" in which all believers will meet Christ in the air. This is the first stage of the second advent.
During the next seven years, the antichrist will rule the earth, the Jews will be restored to Palestine, the temple will be rebuilt, and the sacrificial system will be reinstituted. Those saved during this time are called tribulation saints.
The antichrist will break a covenant with the Jews after 3.5 years and a terrible persecution will follow.
After another 3.5 years Christ will appear, defeat the antichrist, and rule on earth for 1000 years.

Some proponents of this view are even more imaginative. Hal Lindsey presented the following scenario of the final seven years before the millennial reign:

For 3.5 years Satan will rule the world through a Jewish antichrist in Rome.
The Jews will be allowed to rebuild the temple.
Many Jews will be converted and a worldwide evangelism program will be undertaken by 144,000 Jewish preachers.
After 3.5 years the antichrist will set up his own image in the newly rebuilt Jewish temple.
World War III will break out.
Egypt will invade Israel.
Russia will invade the Middle East and trample both Egypt and Israel.
The Roman dictator will invade Israel.
Rome will launch a nuclear attack against Russian forces in Israel.
200,000,000 Chinese troops will march on Palestine to battle the Roman army.
The battle of Armageddon will begin and lead to worldwide destruction.
Jesus will return to reign on earth for 1000 years.

Space does not permit us to discuss everything that is wrong with such an approach. First, it ignores the time frame as did the first approach that we considered. Further, it causes the book to have little significance to its initial readers. Finally, it changes as quickly as the headlines. Many thought Hitler was the antichrist- some still do. The political scene that caused Lindsey to reach his conclusions in 1974 is quite different in 1992. Many saw Gorbachev as the antichrist- he even came complete with a built-in 'mark of the beast'! More recently Hussein became their antichrist du jour as he threatened Israel with destruction while based near the site of historic Babylon. When asked about his changing views, a local dispensationalist preacher in Dallas said he wasn't worried because everything he had said (and later retracted) was biblical! Although the purpose of this study is not to expose premillennialism, we will now briefly consider a few points concerning that popular but badly misguided approach.

Premillennialism

First, does it make any difference what we believe about this subject? Is it all just a matter of opinion? John Walvoord, a leading proponent of premillennialism has the following to say in this regard:

If premillennialism is only a dispute about what will happen in a future age which is quite removed from present issues, that is one thing. If, however, premillennialism is a system of interpretation which involves the meaning and significance of the entire Bible, defines the meaning and course of the present age, determines the present purpose of God, and gives both material and method to theology, that is something else. It is the growing realization that premillennialism is more than a dispute about Revelation 20. It is not too much to say that millennialism is a determining factor in Biblical interpretation of comparable importance to the doctrines of verbal inspiration, the deity of Christ, substitutionary atonement, and bodily resurrection.

It does make a difference what we believe about this subject. The premillennialist doctrine has consequences that run counter to the very heart of the gospel. Preachers in the church of Christ betray their ignorance when they proclaim that our views about the end of the world are of little consequence and hence shouldn't be a test for fellowship. Consider the following premillennial positions and their associated consequences:

The Restoration of the Levitical Priesthood

Premillennialists teach that the Levitical priesthood is going to be restored during the millennium. This view arises from a misinterpretation of Ezekiel 44. The role of the Levitical priests was to offer the sacrifices for sin that were demanded by the Law of Moses. Jesus' perfect sacrifice put these people out of business permanently (Hebrews 10:12, 18). The Levitical system was imperfect, weak, and useless (Hebrews 7:11, 18) and was set aside by Jesus Christ (Hebrews 7:18). The coming of reality in Jesus Christ meant that the shadow of the Levitical system was removed forever. Further, Jesus could not be a priest if the Levitical system were still functioning. Under the Law of Moses (Numbers 18), only Aaron's sons could be priests. The Law of Moses and the Levitical system cannot be separated- one cannot exist without the other (Hebrews 7:12). In addition, the old and new covenants cannot coexist (Romans 7:1-6). The first covenant was taken away so that the second could be established (Hebrews 10:9-10). Jesus could not be priest on earth under the Levitical system (Hebrews 8:4).

The Restoration of the Sacrificial System

Premillennialists teach that bloody sacrifices for sin will be restored during the millennium. This view arises from a misinterpretation of Ezekiel 43-45 and Zechariah 14. Animal sacrifices were never able to cleanse the soul. They simply shadowed the coming sacrifice that would provide true cleansing. Jesus' sacrifice was all sufficient. His perfect once-for-all sacrifice meant that future sacrifices were unnecessary (Hebrews 10:17-18). Those who have remission of sin have no further need of sacrifice. The premillennial view undermines the sufficiency of Christ's sacrificial atonement. Paul wrote in Galatians 2:21 that "if justification were through the Law, then Christ died to no purpose."

The New Covenant is not in force now

Premillennialists teach that the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31ff is not yet in force and that it will not come into force until the millennium. Walvoord says that the new covenant applies only to Israel and has no relation with this present age. What does the Bible say? In Luke 22:20 Jesus says "this cup is the new covenant in my blood." In Hebrews 9:15 we read that Jesus is the mediator of a new covenant. In 2 Corinthians 3:5-6 Paul writes that "our sufficiency is from God; who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant." The problem of sin is the motivation behind both covenants. The new covenant provides forgiveness through the blood of Christ. Walvoord claims that Christ's blood produced two new covenants. The new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is the covenant that we are under today. This covenant provides salvation and forgiveness through the blood of Christ and there is no need for any other covenant.

Jesus is not presently ruling over Israel

Premillennialists deny the complete Lordship of Jesus. They insist he is not presently ruling over Israel. Walvoord and Lindsey both claim that although Jesus has the right to rule the earth, he is not exercising that authority at this time. For proof they point to the mess that the world is in. This argument parallels that of Epicurus who argued that God could not be both good and all powerful. (If God wills evil then he is not good. If God does not will evil then he is not all powerful since evil exists.) What does the Bible say? Psalm 29:10 reminds us that God rules at the time of the flood even though the world was in a mess at the time. Paul told the Ephesians in Eph. 1:21 that Jesus is "far above all rule and authority and power and dominion" in this age. Acts 2:36 says that Jesus is Lord over Israel. In Rev. 2:26-27 Jesus claims to have already been given the authority over nations that was prophesied in Psalm 2:8-9. In Rev. 1:5 we see that Jesus is the ruler of the kings of the earth. Psalm 110 depicts Jesus as sitting at God's right hand and ruling in the midst of his enemies. (This passage is quoted many times in the New Testament as having been already fulfilled.) Hebrews 10:12 says that Jesus is now a priest sitting at the right hand of God. Jesus' office is a royal priesthood. What does Walvoord say? He claims that although Psalm 110:1 and Psalm 110:4 have been fulfilled, the remaining verses in Psalm 110 have not been fulfilled.

The Preterist or Contemporary Historical Approach

This approach applies the book primarily (or completely) to the conflict between the Church and Rome. (Some taking this approach apply the book to the conflict between the Church and Jerusalem. As we will see, however, this idea doesn't hold water.) This approach does not violate John's claim that the prophecies in Revelation were to come to pass shortly. This approach makes the book meaningful to its initial readers in that it gives comfort and assurance of victory to those being persecuted. According to this approach the book is not eschatological- that is, it is not concerned with the end of the world. Since the remainder of this book is devoted to developing this position, we will not expound upon it here.

Principles of Interpretation

The following general rules for interpreting Revelation will be used throughout our study:

The writer must be assumed to have written primarily for the benefit of the initial readers to whom it was addressed.
As with any apocalyptic book we should reverse the ordinary rule of interpretation. That is, we should look for a symbolic meaning unless forced to do otherwise.
The meaning of symbols should be ascertained by considering how similar imagery was used in the Old Testament. No other book in the New Testament contains as many Old Testament references as does Revelation. One has estimated that out of 404 verses there are 278 allusions to the Old Testament.
As we would look at an oil painting, we should study an image in this book by looking at it as a whole and not by dividing it up into many disjoint pieces that are examined separately.
Revelation is an impressionistic book that appeals to the imagination. Details are often given to increase a scene's emotional impact rather than to relay specific information. This book is much different from a book such as Romans which is designed to appeal chiefly to the intellect.

Finally, note in Rev. 1:3 that the book contains a blessing for those who read it and keep what is says. That is, God intended the book to be understood.