Repeating themes in Revelation

[canadyjd]

I’d like to discuss the way John uses repeating themes in Revelation.

The following was taught by Dr. Alan Tomlinson, PhD, at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary while I was studying there more than 25 years ago.

I know he intended to publish his research but I’m unsure if he was able before he passed. I believed they named the biblical Greek dept after him. I hope to do him justice with my rendering.

Foundation: The scene in which John himself was of the Bema seat judgement.

This was very common in the Roman Empire and wildly popular events. Governors would hear cases, arguments from counsel and make a decision. At times, visiting dignitaries would hear the case (Paul before Festus and Herod) and occasionally the Emperor would take part (Paul appealed his case directly to the Emperor)

There were two types of cases which had 7 seals. These were death penalty cases and wills.

John was witnessing a combination of the two. Jesus would inherit all things, Christians would inherit eternal life with God, and God’s wrath would be pronounced upon the ungodly that had rejected Him and His Christ.

The seven seals were upon the scroll, most likely wax with an imprint insignia of the person who would open the scroll. And each scroll had a tiny slip at each seal that had a brief summary of what was in that section of the scroll.

Once the 7th seal was opened, the entire scroll could be read and the case laid out before the judge.

More to come

Peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

Remember the scene. John is before the Bema seat as a spectator. As the seals
are opened, the contents are explained to him. These are things that have already occurred and are being presented at trial.

Notice the brief summary.

Seal #1: white horse: The rider is a conqueror going out to conquer

Seal #2: Red horse: the rider takes peace from the earth, given a sword people are killed

Seal #3: Black horse: description of famine (high prices)

Seal #4: Ashen (white) horse: death and hades personified killing 1/4 by the sword

Seal #5: Martyrs: testifying “how long” will God withhold His judgment: Answer: Until the number of their fellow servants that will be killed is complete.

Seal #6: Natural disasters; celestial signs of God’s coming wrath.

Peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

Before the 7th seal is opened, there is what some call an “interlude” before the throne. The 144,000 from the tribes of Israel are mentioned, as well as mentioning the martyred saints again (repeating theme).

Notice the language around the martyred saints and compare to the end of Revelation, no more tears, no more pain etc. a repeating theme.

When the 7th seal is opened, the full scroll can now be read. Notice the repeating themes first found when the seals were opened. Famine, natural disasters, celestial signs of impending wrath, death and destruction.

The scroll is explaining in greater detail what was first mentioned when the seals were opened.

It is not in chronological order. Some of what is described occurred long ago. The Devil and his demons are cast from heaven and bound. The woman gives birth, Israel giving birth to the Messiah. The child (Christians) fleeing into the wildness to avoid persecution.

You see the rise of kingdoms, some specifically had already occurred in John’s time, and two more were to come.

The scroll is being read before the throne. The allegations come forth. Eventually, God’s judgment is given upon all that have rejected Him and His Christ.

I will not pretend to understand it all. I won’t attempt to give names or predictions of who is involved in each account or make predictions.

My goal here is to get you to consider what is happening in Revelation.

John is witnessing the Bema seat judgment of God. It is a courtroom. The accusations are found in the scroll, which is systematically opened and the evidence revealed, explained to John which he writes down, not in chronological order but in repeating themes.

Thank you for considering this possibility.

Peace to you

 

[Charlie24]

Before the 7th seal is opened, there is what some call an “interlude” before the throne. The 144,000 from the tribes of Israel are mentioned, as well as mentioning the martyred saints again (repeating theme).

Notice the language around the martyred saints and compare to the end of Revelation, no more tears, no more pain etc. a repeating theme.

When the 7th seal is opened, the full scroll can now be read. Notice the repeating themes first found when the seals were opened. Famine, natural disasters, celestial signs of impending wrath, death and destruction.

The scroll is explaining in greater detail what was first mentioned when the seals were opened.

It is not in chronological order. Some of what is described occurred long ago. The Devil and his demons are cast from heaven and bound. The woman gives birth, Israel giving birth to the Messiah. The child (Christians) fleeing into the wildness to avoid persecution.

You see the rise of kingdoms, some specifically had already occurred in John’s time, and two more were to come.

The scroll is being read before the throne. The allegations come forth. Eventually, God’s judgment is given upon all that have rejected Him and His Christ.

I will not pretend to understand it all. I won’t attempt to give names or predictions of who is involved in each account or make predictions.

My goal here is to get you to consider what is happening in Revelation.

John is witnessing the Bema seat judgment of God. It is a courtroom. The accusations are found in the scroll, which is systematically opened and the evidence revealed, explained to John which he writes down, not in chronological order but in repeating themes.

Thank you for considering this possibility.

Peace to you

This is the Reformed approach to Revelation and I would think Dr. Tomlinson is a Calvinist by definition.

The view is a different hermeneutics and does not recognize the separation of Israel and the Church.

So the dispensations will totally disagree with this approach.

But if you're addressing the Reformed I'm sure you'll find some agreeing.

 

[Charlie24]

This is the Reformed approach to Revelation and I would think Dr. Tomlinson is a Calvinist by definition.

The view is a different hermeneutics and does not recognize the separation of Israel and the Church.

So the dispensations will totally disagree with this approach.

But if you're addressing the Reformed I'm sure you'll find some agreeing.

Now canadyjd you may or may not be interested in the approach to Revelation from the dispensation veiw.

You may be just addressing the fellow Reformed. But if you want the dispensation view of Revelation, mainly it's approach to Revelation, I can explain that for you.

 

[canadyjd]

Now canadyjd you may or may not be interested in the approach to Revelation from the dispensation veiw.

You may be just addressing the fellow Reformed. But if you want the dispensation view of Revelation, mainly it's approach to Revelation, I can explain that for you.

Sure, explain it to me.

However, the view Dr. Tomlinson expressed not only focused on scripture, but also in 1st century Roman culture… the Bema seat judgement.

It seems clear God intended to use that common event to reveal these truths to us, because John was writing with that in mind given the description of the scene in heaven that he put forth.

Would you consider that and comment?

Thanks for the post.

Peace to you

 

[Charlie24]

Sure, explain it to me.

However, the view Dr. Tomlinson expressed not only focused on scripture, but also in 1st century Roman culture… the Bema seat judgement.

It seems clear God intended to use that common event to reveal these truths to us, because John was writing with that in mind given the description of the scene in heaven that he put forth.

Would you consider that and comment?

Thanks for the post.

Peace to you

There are so many views on this it's unreal, but I can see some see some common ground in his view with dispensations.

What John is seeing taking place in heaven is in the spiritual realm, it's a view into the spirit world before it takes place on earth with the overlaps that I think you refer to as "repeating themes." We differ in that we see it as in chronological order with the several overlaps.

The comparison with the Roman culture is interesting along with the Bema Seat. But I haven't heard it quite this way.

 

[Charlie24]

There are so many views on this it's unreal, but I can see some see some common ground in his view with dispensations.

What John is seeing taking place in heaven is in the spiritual realm, it's a view into the spirit world before it takes place on earth with the overlaps that I think you refer to as "repeating themes." We differ in that we see it as in chronological order with the several overlaps.

The comparison with the Roman culture is interesting along with the Bema Seat. But I haven't heard it quite this way.

What I would explain in the dispensational view is is that Revelation is the fulfillment of the OT prophesies. It's a sister volume to Daniel and the visions and dreams of Daniel are the same as John discusses in more detail.

The vision and dreams of Daniel concern the Daniel's people, the Jews, and that is a major theme in Rev.

It's based on Rev. 1:19, when Christ told John to write "the things which you have seen, the things which are, and the things which are hereafter."

This the outline so to speak and I would go from there, not sure that fits with the OP, but that's what I would be discussing.

 

[canadyjd]

This is the Reformed approach to Revelation and I would think Dr. Tomlinson is a Calvinist by definition.

The view is a different hermeneutics and does not recognize the separation of Israel and the Church.

So the dispensations will totally disagree with this approach.

But if you're addressing the Reformed I'm sure you'll find some agreeing.

I take issue with your assessment. This isn’t a “Reformed” view. This is scholar’s view.

Scholarship requires setting aside personal views and acknowledge what is discovered in research.

There can be no doubt the scene in heaven as described by John is that of a Bema seat judgement, common in the first century. That isn’t “Reformed”. That isn’t dispensationalism.

The seals mentioned were also common to issues being judged at the Bema, namely, death penalty cases and wills. That isn’t reformed or dispensationalism.

That the seals could only be broken by specific people and contain a brief summary of the contents is simply facts based on research, not theological views.

What effects theological views is the issue of writing in repeating themes, not chronological order.

We know John writes in repeating themes in his gospel, not chronological order. We know the situation of breaking the seals, one by one and reading the summary of the contents, then after the 7th seal is broken going back to elaborate on the sections of each seal lends itself to writing in repeating themes.

Again, my intention is not to debate Reformed or Dispensational theology. My intent is to get folks to look at the facts I laid out from this research and let that guide their study of Revelation.

I do realize many will reject this out of hand because it conflicts with their established views.

But my hope is some will at least consider it and as they study, see those repeating themes, which become obvious once you see the context. It will help you better understand what has been written

Peace to you

 

[John of Japan]

Remember the scene. John is before the Bema seat as a spectator. As the seals
are opened, the contents are explained to him. These are things that have already occurred and are being presented at trial.

The problem here is that bema (βῆμα) occurs only once in John's corpus, and that is not in Revelation, but in John 19:13 for Pilate's literal judgment seat. And it occurs nowhere at all in the book of Revelation. So your professor (a great scholar I'm sure) is using bema as a completely symbolic term, yet that usage never occurs in the NT in any way, shape or form. It only occurs (with one exception, Acts 7:5) in the NT as a literal chair from which to judge: Pilate, Herod, Jesus, etc.

On the other hand, the word "throne," thronos (θρόνος) occurs 31 times in the book of Revelation, making it far more important that there is a bema there. In fact, a throne is for a king, so it is much more legitimate to point to Jesus Christ as King, the dispensational truth of the millennial reign, in Revelation than it is to refer to Him as on a bema as judge!!

 

[John of Japan]

I take issue with your assessment. This isn’t a “Reformed” view. This is scholar’s view.

Generally it is reformed people who take to covenant theology and reject dispensationalism. And there are many solid dispensational scholars, including my son, a dispensationalist who has written two scholarly books and many articles in theological journals. He took his PhD under well known Greek scholar David Alan Black at Southeastern Baptist Theological Journal. He was recently cited in a French theological journal. I have the privilege of teaching with him, and our offices are next to each other. Lots of fun here!

Scholarship requires setting aside personal views and acknowledge what is discovered in research.

True.

There can be no doubt the scene in heaven as described by John is that of a Bema seat judgement, common in the first century. That isn’t “Reformed”. That isn’t dispensationalism.

I have a lot of doubt, since the word bema never occurs in Revelation, but Jesus sits on a throne instead.

 

[canadyjd]

The problem here is that bema (βῆμα) occurs only once in John's corpus, and that is not in Revelation, but in John 19:13 for Pilate's literal judgment seat. And it occurs nowhere at all in the book of Revelation.

The description of the events in Revelation is of a Bema seat judgement, common in Roman culture. The elements match that of a Bema. The announcement of the scroll containing the case. The seals upon the scroll. Finding the one person worthy to break the seals. I suppose it was so obvious to John’s readers, he didn’t feel it necessary to specifically use the term Bema.

So your professor (a great scholar I'm sure) is using bema as a completely symbolic term, yet that usage never occurs in the NT in any way, shape or form. It only occurs (with one exception, Acts 7:5) in the NT as a literal chair from which to judge: Pilate, Herod, Jesus, etc.

No, that is not what he did, in this case it was literally a depiction of Bema and he was a master scholar of Biblical Greek and 1st century Roman culture.

On the other hand, the word "throne," thronos (θρόνος) occurs 31 times in the book of Revelation, making it far more important that there is a bema there. In fact, a throne is for a king, so it is much more legitimate to point to Jesus Christ as King, the dispensational truth of the millennial reign, in Revelation than it is to refer to Him as on a bema as judge!!

God the Father is on the Bema. It is the great throne judgement. The case is made, judgement is announced.

I do not know if “Bema” was used of any “chair” where a trial was conducted. If that is the case, the throne serves as the Bema… the place of judgement.

Edit to add. The word bema refers to a raised platform that was used for public speeches, tribunals or where judgements were rendered. Also called the judgement seat, as in 2 Corinthians 5:10 referring to the judgement seat of Christ.

So, the depiction in Revelation is of the great throne judgement, with “bema” used by my old professor to refer to a judgement seat.

Peace to you

 

[Charlie24]

I take issue with your assessment. This isn’t a “Reformed” view. This is scholar’s view.

Scholarship requires setting aside personal views and acknowledge what is discovered in research.

There can be no doubt the scene in heaven as described by John is that of a Bema seat judgement, common in the first century. That isn’t “Reformed”. That isn’t dispensationalism.

The seals mentioned were also common to issues being judged at the Bema, namely, death penalty cases and wills. That isn’t reformed or dispensationalism.

That the seals could only be broken by specific people and contain a brief summary of the contents is simply facts based on research, not theological views.

What effects theological views is the issue of writing in repeating themes, not chronological order.

We know John writes in repeating themes in his gospel, not chronological order. We know the situation of breaking the seals, one by one and reading the summary of the contents, then after the 7th seal is broken going back to elaborate on the sections of each seal lends itself to writing in repeating themes.

Again, my intention is not to debate Reformed or Dispensational theology. My intent is to get folks to look at the facts I laid out from this research and let that guide their study of Revelation.

I do realize many will reject this out of hand because it conflicts with their established views.

But my hope is some will at least consider it and as they study, see those repeating themes, which become obvious once you see the context. It will help you better understand what has been written

Peace to you

So then I was correct the first time, you're addressing the Reformed.

It's impossible for this to be anything other than Reformed conclusion.

 

[Charlie24]

So then I was correct the first time, you're addressing the Reformed.

It's impossible for this to be anything other than Reformed conclusion.

The dead giveaway is the courtroom model of interpretation.

That is the Reformed approach to Revelation.

 

[canadyjd]

So then I was correct the first time, you're addressing the Reformed.

It's impossible for this to be anything other than Reformed conclusion.

No. You are incorrect. Being reformed or dispensational has nothing to do with the scholarship.

The bema seat judgement isn’t theological. It is cultural. To deny it because it may conflict with your views is bad hermeneutics and could lead to bad interpretations.

Does dispensationalism recognize the great throne judgement?

Peace to you

 

[Charlie24]

No. You are incorrect. Being reformed or dispensational has nothing to do with the scholarship.

The bema seat judgement isn’t theological. It is cultural. To deny it because it may conflict with your views is bad hermeneutics and could lead to bad interpretations.

Does dispensationalism recognize the great throne judgement?

Peace to you

Nope, my friend, we will disagree all the way through this.

I've never heard of Dr. Tomlinson until I read the OP, but he's not the only one who teaches this.

I've heard it many times in the past, it's the covenant lawsuit theory based on the absolute sovereignty of God.

This is the approach the Reformed take to interpreting the book of Revelation.

It's the legal aspect and you can see the 5 points of Calvinism coming through the picture through Covenant Theology. I know what I'm talkin about!

I totally and completely disagree with that approach.

 

[Charlie24]

Nope, my friend, we will disagree all the way through this.

I've never heard of Dr. Tomlinson until I read the OP, but he's not the only one who teaches this.

I've heard it many times in the past, it's the covenant lawsuit theory based on the absolute sovereignty of God.

This is the approach the Reformed take to interpreting the book of Revelation.

It's the legal aspect and you can see the 5 points of Calvinism coming through the picture through Covenant Theology. I know what I'm talkin about!

I totally and completely disagree with that approach.

Another thing I was thinking about last night on the way Dr. Tomlinson presented a trial as in a court atmosphere, and these things already have taken place, I have heard the Preterists use this theory to support their case in what is called the covenant lawsuit theory.

I can't remember if they were full or partial Preterists, but I was wondering if Dr. Tomlinson is a Preterist? Maybe not, but just wondering.

 

[John of Japan]

The description of the events in Revelation is of a Bema seat judgement, common in Roman culture. The elements match that of a Bema. The announcement of the scroll containing the case. The seals upon the scroll. Finding the one person worthy to break the seals. I suppose it was so obvious to John’s readers, he didn’t feel it necessary to specifically use the term Bema.

Here's the thing. The number 7 is used all through Scripture as God's number: the days of creation, the seven spirits in Isaiah, etc. etc. So to say that 7 all of a sudden refers to a bema simply because it is the number 7 is a non sequitur. Also, the reference in Revelation is not to a "scroll" per se (occurring only in 6:14 in the KJV, used there as a figure of speech), but to a "book" (βιβλίον), which could be a scroll or a codex. Either one could have seals on it. To insist it refers to a scroll rather than a codex is a leap of logic.

No, that is not what he did, in this case it was literally a depiction of Bema and he was a master scholar of Biblical Greek and 1st century Roman culture.

Question: Was he a covenant theologian? If so, than his depiction of a bema in Revelation was completely allegorical. No covenant theologian takes Revelation literally. So far you yourself don't appear to take it literally. (Correct me if I'm wrong.)

As for him being a master scholar, that is no doubt true, but proves nothing. I've known such master scholars to be completely wrong, like Daniel Wallace (awesome Greek scholar that he is) and his position that skubalon (σκύβαλον, Phil. 3:8) is a taboo word.

God the Father is on the Bema. It is the great throne judgement. The case is made, judgement is announced.

You are mixing up two different terms here. The term in Rev. 20 is throne (θρόνος), not bema. A bema is not the same as a throne. In all of the Bible God the Father is never portrayed as sitting on a bema, but rather on a throne (Matt. 5:34, etc.).

Only a king sits on a throne, but Pilate sat on a bema to judge Jesus, not a throne, because he was not a king. It's the same with Sergio Paulus and Gallio in Acts, a bema not a throne. Therefore, when Jesus sits on a throne in Revelation, He is there as the King of the universe, not simply an underling like Pilate, judging a sports event (one usage of bema).

I do not know if “Bema” was used of any “chair” where a trial was conducted. If that is the case, the throne serves as the Bema… the place of judgement.

Bema is used for trials, such as for the seat from which Pilate (not a king) judged Jesus. As for the throne serving as the bema, that is an unnecessary stretch. Thrones are also used for judgment in the Bible. You don't have to postulate a throne being used as a bema.

Edit to add. The word bema refers to a raised platform that was used for public speeches, tribunals or where judgements were rendered. Also called the judgement seat, as in 2 Corinthians 5:10 referring to the judgement seat of Christ.

So, the depiction in Revelation is of the great throne judgement, with “bema” used by my old professor to refer to a judgement seat.

Peace to you

It does not follow logically or exegetically that any throne in Revelation is equal to a bema. The Great White Throne (θρόνος, not βῆμα) is used for Jesus judging sin which leads to eternal Hell. Jesus sits on a throne because He is the King of all the universe, not some underling like Pilate. In 2 Cor. 5:10 Christ does sit on a bema for judgment, but that is judgment for rewards, not punishment, like an official at the Greek Olympic games (another use of bema).

 

[John of Japan]

The title of the thread is "Repeating themes in Revelation," which refers to our thread founder's view that the seals, trumpets, and vials in Revelation are those repeating themes. However, I submit that the book does not present them as parallel themes (if I have canadyjd correctly), but as chronological events. Note that the 7th seal judgment is the trumpet judgments (8:1-2). That makes the trumpet judgments a continuation of the seal judgments. It cannot be parallel because of that, but consecutive.

 

[canadyjd]

Nope, my friend, we will disagree all the way through this.

I've never heard of Dr. Tomlinson until I read the OP, but he's not the only one who teaches this.

I've heard it many times in the past, it's the covenant lawsuit theory based on the absolute sovereignty of God.

This is the approach the Reformed take to interpreting the book of Revelation.

It's the legal aspect and you can see the 5 points of Calvinism coming through the picture through Covenant Theology. I know what I'm talkin about!

I totally and completely disagree with that approach.

Well then, no need to discuss it, since you know.

Peace to you