Revelation

[JasonF]

Hello,

So it seems that in Spurgeon's time, so about 150 years ago, the majority of people understood Revelation as referring to historical events, mostly dealing with the Roman Empire, the Roman Catholic Church, Islam, and the Byzantine Empire, those types of things.

It seems most today do not hold that view. I am wondering what caused the change?

What do people here tend to believe? I am thinking maybe it has to do with both those historical things and all of it may still be things that have yet to occur more specifically in line with it? Not sure.

Thank you for any help.

 

[37818]

Revelation 1:19, ". . . Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; . . ."
The "the things which shall be hereafter," that John was give in that book write are what the disagrments are on.

Denial that Revelation 20:1-10 is truely yet future is a major disagreement. And that should not be.

 

[kyredneck]

What do people here tend to believe?

I believe probably 98% fulfilled:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand. Rev 1
11 I come quickly: hold fast that which thou hast, that no one take thy crown. Rev 3
7 And behold, I come quickly. Blessed is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book.
10 And he saith unto me, Seal not up the words of the prophecy of this book; for the time is at hand.
12 Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to each man according as his work is.
20 He who testifieth these things saith, Yea: I come quickly. Amen: come, Lord Jesus. Rev 22

 

[Marooncat79]

Careful

I feel it coming on

 

[KenH]

What do people here tend to believe? I am thinking maybe it has to do with both those historical things and all of it may still be things that have yet to occur more specifically in line with it? Not sure.

Thank you for any help.

My favorite commentary on the book of Revelation, by William Hendriksen. I find it to be consistent with the rest of the Bible.

Hendricksen-W-More_Than_Conquerors_-1940.pdf (tn-biblecollege.edu)

 

[kyredneck]

My favorite commentary on the book of Revelation, by William Hendriksen. I find it to be consistent with the rest of the Bible.

Hendricksen-W-More_Than_Conquerors_-1940.pdf (tn-biblecollege.edu)

I bought it and was perusing it, then Dad got sick, haven't got back to it yet, would place it in the Idealist view category.

 

[KenH]

would place it in the Idealist view category.

Certainly is.

 

[Marooncat79]

Everyone benefits when 3,000+ pages of Hendriksen are read

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Hello,

So it seems that in Spurgeon's time, so about 150 years ago, the majority of people understood Revelation as referring to historical events, mostly dealing with the Roman Empire, the Roman Catholic Church, Islam, and the Byzantine Empire, those types of things.

It seems most today do not hold that view. I am wondering what caused the change?

What do people here tend to believe? I am thinking maybe it has to do with both those historical things and all of it may still be things that have yet to occur more specifically in line with it? Not sure.

Thank you for any help.

People tend to think most about the time they live in and so there is a very natural tendency for people to read that time into Revelation. The early Christians were living under the Roman persecutions, so naturally they tended to see the beast and/or the Antichrist as Rome and to see things getting worse and worse until the the return of Christ. In 410, Rome fell to the Goths and so people had to think again, and Augustine came up with something much nearer to Amil.
The Reformers and Puritans saw the Church of Rome as the Antichrist, and the Puritans saw him being defeated as many countries and people became Protestant. They therefore tended to become Postmil. At the time of the French Revolution, everything seemed to be shaking apart and so J.N. Darby came along and said that Christ was coming at any time and all the denominations and churches were corrupt and hopeless, and he promoted Premil. Darby had a huge influence on the churches in the 19th Century. Even Spurgeon, who opposed him in many things, was influenced by his eschatology. Just the other day I had an argument with a newcomer to our church who insisted that the riots in France presaged the collapse of civilization and the return of the Lord, as if there had never been riots in France before! "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming."

All I have to say is this: do not take your theology from the news, especially not from websites, and even more especially not from websites obsessed with Israel. Ecclesiastes 7:10. 'Do not say, "Why were the former days better than these?" For you do not inquire wisely concerning this.'

 

[Piper]

Hello,

So it seems that in Spurgeon's time, so about 150 years ago, the majority of people understood Revelation as referring to historical events, mostly dealing with the Roman Empire, the Roman Catholic Church, Islam, and the Byzantine Empire, those types of things.

It seems most today do not hold that view. I am wondering what caused the change?

What do people here tend to believe? I am thinking maybe it has to do with both those historical things and all of it may still be things that have yet to occur more specifically in line with it? Not sure.

Thank you for any help.

People who believe it is all in the past are called Preterists. They have good exegesis. I think it is a little off, but I do not think they are heretics or anything of the sort. There are a lot of questions on end time theologies.

The average Baptist is a dispensationalist. Pre-tribulation, Pre millenial. Christ will reign on the earth on David's physical (I mean as his direct descendent, not a wooden structure called a throne) Throne in Israel for 1000 years, or so.

Presbyterians tend to be A-millenial, or they do not believe in a 1000 year Kingdom (reign of Christ on the earth).

Some ore post-Millenial. There is a 1000 year kingdom, but Christ returns after having reigned on his father's throne in heaven for 1000 years and judges humanity.

 

[Jerome]

about 150 years ago, the majority of people understood Revelation as referring to historical events, mostly dealing with the Roman Empire, the Roman Catholic Church, Islam, and the Byzantine Empire, those types of things.

The majority of people believed that? The majority of what people?

 

[Jerome]

A contemporary report of what many Baptists believed in the 18th century:

"Many of the Baptists believe the Millennium, or the saints living and reigning with Christ upon earth 1000 years"

James Murray, The History of Religion: Particularly of the Principal Denominations of Christians, 2d ed. (London, 1764) vol. 4, p. 225.

 

[KenH]

A contemporary report of what many Baptists believed in the 18th century:

"Many of the Baptists believe the Millennium, or the saints living and reigning with Christ upon earth 1000 years"

James Murray, The History of Religion: Particularly of the Principal Denominations of Christians, 2d ed. (London, 1764) vol. 4, p. 225.

Wasn't that historic premillennialism, not dispensational premillennialism? Also, toward the late 19th century - early 20th century, weren't a lot of folks postmillennialists?

 

[Jerome]

A lot of folks postmillennialists? What sort of folks?
And why not divide postmillennialists into different types too, and dismiss certain ones. Yeah, I see what you did there.

 

[kyredneck]

“Only fools and madmen are positive in their interpretations of the apocalypse.” C.H. Spurgeon

 

[kyredneck]

Yeah, I see what you did there.

...lol, give it up @KenH, Jerome is wise to your craftiness...

 

[JasonF]

The majority of people believed that? The majority of what people?

That is what I seemed to read somewhere, but I don't know, besides I am not sure most things break it down by Baptist and non-baptist. Where does your source get his information about Baptists. If Spurgeon, a baptist preacher, believed it was historical as he is the one that talked about Elliot's work as being the standard on the subject, how would most baptists believe something different, does not saying it is the standard mean that it is the generally accepted interpretation?

1. ELLIOTT (C. B., A.M. Died 1875). Horae Apoc-alypticae; or, a Commentary on the Apocalypse, critical and historical. 4 vols. 8va., Lond., Seeleys. 1862. S. iS/-The standard work an the subject.

I think maybe it seems your source is from a hundred years prior. So that is interesting. I tried looking through a work that made Elliot's work shorter, and there were some very coincidental things if it wasn't historical, but at the same time, I am not sure that everything matched up perfectly.

I wonder if it wasn't historical, as well as referring to more specific future events, but since it doesn't really affect how I live my daily life outside of needing to be ready, I have not been devoting a huge amount of time to it.

 

[kyredneck]

Preterists. They have good exegesis

Agree.

I think it is a little off,

Why? Because it lacks the sensationalism of Dispensationalism?

 

[KenH]

A lot of folks postmillennialists? What sort of folks?
And why not divide postmillennialists into different types too, and dismiss certain ones. Yeah, I see what you did there.

Dispensational Premillennialism:

Dispensational premillennialists hold that Christ will come before a seven-year period of intense tribulation to take His church (living and dead) into heaven. After this period of fulfillment of divine wrath, He shall then return to rule from a holy city (i.e., the New Jerusalem) over the earthly nations for one thousand years. After these thousand years, Satan, who was bound up during Christ's earthly reign, will be loosed to deceive the nations, gather an army of the deceived, and take up to battle against the Lord. This battle will end in both the judgment of the wicked and Satan and the entrance into the eternal state of glory by the righteous. This view is called premillenialism because it places the return of Christ before the millennium and it is called dispensational because it is founded in the doctrines of dispensationalism.
...

• Major proponents: John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, Louis Sperry Chafer, J. Dwight Pentecost, Norman Geisler, Charles Stanley, Chuck Smith, and Chuck Missler.

Historic Premillennialism:

Historical premillennialists place the return of Christ just before the millennium and just after a time of great apostasy and tribulation. After the millennium, Satan will be loosed and Gog and Magog will rise against the kingdom of God; this will be immediately followed by the final judgment. While similar in some respects to the dispensational variety (in that they hold to Christ's return being previous the establishment of a thousand-year earthly reign), historical premillennialism differs in significant ways (notably in their method of interpreting Scripture).
...

• Major proponents: George Eldon Ladd, Walter Martin, John Warwick Montgomery, and Theodore Zahn.

Postmillennialism:

The postmillennialist believes that the millennium is an era (not a literal thousand years) during which Christ will reign over the earth, not from an literal and earthly throne, but through the gradual increase of the Gospel and its power to change lives. After this gradual Christianization of the world, Christ will return and immediately usher the church into their eternal state after judging the wicked. This is called postmillennialism because, by its view, Christ will return after the millennium.
...

• Major proponents: Rousas J. Rushdoony, Greg L. Bahnsen, Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., David Chilton, and Gary North.

Amillennialism:

The amillennialist believes that the Kingdom of God was inaugurated at Christ's resurrection (hence the term "inaugurated millennialism") at which point he gained victory over both Satan and the Curse. Christ is even now reigning (hence the term "nunc-millennialism" — nunc means "now") at the right hand of the Father over His church. After this present age has ended, Christ will return and immediately usher the church into their eternal state after judging the wicked. The term "amillennialism" is actually a misnomer for it implies that Revelation 20:1-6 is ignored; in fact, the amillennialist's hermeneutic interprets it (and in fact, much of apocalyptic literature) non-literally.
...

• Major proponents: Meredith Kline, Richard Gaffin, Robert B. Strimple, Gregory K. Beale, and John Murray.

Much more information at Four Views on the Millennium - Study Resources (blueletterbible.org)

 

[JasonF]

I don't see clearly the Bible speaking of Jesus returning before his second coming, can anyone sure what that is based on.