What Are the Interpretive Keys to Unlock the Apocalypse?

Nothing in scripture 'establishes' the seven churches as 'Church Ages' in the scritpures. Yet in hind-sight we can see a very uncanny and almost exact portrait like resembelance to the Church ages, Even though they are Literal Churches being addressed.
I think think they have a dual purpose for not only that day and age of believers (thus the literal churches addressed) but also the very specific and prophetic Nature of thing that would come to pass which have not yet come true (like all of the life in the ocean dieing, Israel having another Temple to sacrice in, and the coming of Jesus Christ amoung MANY others).
I think those churches to us reveal not only 'potential' (though not specifically scriptural church ages) it also reveals the kind of churches we will see during the the time this prophesy comes to its fulfillment.

I am coming to the conclusion of a year long Verse by Verse study of Revelation on Wednesday Nights. (and I am GLAD we are coming to close ) We are in the later part of chapter 19. I believe that when you go verse by verse you can not help but see the chronology set forth by God. It reveals itself what is figurative language and literal and where it can be seen as a mixture. I try to always give the various ways people interpret the scriptures so they can decide for themselves what they will believe regarding passages and the whole.

 

I personally found William Hendriksen very helpful. Two things to remember when reading this book. 1. The book of Revelation is full of Old Testament symbolism. Therefore a good knowledge of the OT is useful. 2. It is written for a people who were often suffering under extreme persecution. This book will not yield its secrets to those who are only curious. But many who have found themselves under persecuting powers do find themselves encouraged by its contents. For the main thrust of its message is complete victory over all that is evil. This is the reason Hendriksen entitled his comentary of Revelation, "More than Conquerers".

 

I agree, you don't have to go back and forth in the book. The only place it ascribes looking back is where the beast tried to kill the child (Jesus) of the woman (Israel) to establish the continuity that has been going on regarding the the Satan trying to over throw God and His people. It is self-evedint and no need to back track anything since it lays it out for you.

As I said, I am going verse by verse and have not needed to go forward or backward to say "this goes here, but this doesn't happen till later over here, ext..." It stays consistant and chronological especailly when you look at the destruction that comes in waves with each wave worse then the last one and the people perishing and under judgment (knowing it is going to get worse) still will not repent. Oh, how true the saints rejoicing over the Judgment of World in ch 19.

 

1. The Holy Ghost

2. The Holy Ghost.

3. The Holy Ghost

 

Personally, I would NOT recommend this one. Spent a lot of time with it some years back, and the workbook as well. Got some big flaws IMO. If you do decide to read this one, I would also suggest you get "The Rapture Question" by Walvoord. Seems like there was another one written after Rosenthal's that dealt with his in a pretty substanstial manner, but cannot recall.

 

Hi, TCGreek.

Time for my two yen. I just read the whole thread and see a couple of things I could add.

(1) No one has yet mentioned 1:19, which to me is the exegetical key to the book: what John saw (ch. 1), what then was (ch. 2-3) and what was yet to come (ch. 4-22). Since I've never seen any reason to reject the traditional date of 96 (attested to by external evidence), then chapters 4-22 are all still future. I've never seen anything but speculation on a date before 70 A. D.

(2) For a great book on prophecy, try The Millenium Bible by Biederwolf. It is essentially a commentary on all Bible passages on the 2nd coming (both OT and NT), quoting from various other commentaries and discussing various views. The Revelation commentary is about 180 pages. You can find it very cheaply second hand on Amazon.

 

If you want a reasonably balanced pre-trib perspective, this is a very good book.

http://www.ministryhelps.com/second-coming-of-christ-p-10.html


BGTF

 

Two other positions tha should be 'factored in' this mix of the three positions you have named, are what are known as "historic millenialism" and "preterism".

Personally, I would be considered Pre-mill, I guess, but prefer to merely "call it as I see it'. For me, from my limited study, that comes out in a pre-millenial fashion.

I would say that I understand more (or at least I think I do), about Revelation than I do about most other books of Scripture. And although I am very interested in Bible prophecy, that is not the overridiong reason for this. I have had a singular privilege to go through the entire book of Revelation under five different pastors. I had a three hour Bible college course on Daniel/Revelation. And I was privileged?? to get to be a "graduate intern assistant", under the same Prof. in the same course, after receiving my B.A. degree, while working toward a Th.B., which I incidentally never finished, mostly because of experiences I had during this internship. Interns were required to prepare teaching lessons, just as if we were to teach the course, and some of my POVs conflicted with some of those of the Professor, who also happened to be the President of the school. And both he and I, as well as the other intern (who has since gome home to the Lord from cancer, a few years ago, at around the age of 55), took a pre-tribulational, pre-millenial stance. But as he did not agree with me on some of the details, he frankly, was not willing to allow me to teach the course in his absence (standard practice in the school, and I did teach in my other interned course), and had guest speakers, whom he could 'control', so that his POVs would not be contradicted. He also gave me a 'manufactiured grade', which was quite a bit lower than I thought I deserved. After one semester of that, which I considered less than honorable, I decided not to continue in that pursuit, lacking only a few hours to the Th.B. degree. I am saying this, not to brag in any way, but to tell you where I am coming from.

Back to Revelation: The book of the Revelation is the only book in Scripture that promsies a specific blessing to read, hear, and keep its words.

I happened to have pastors who used four different versions, at times (the ASV, KJV, NIV, and NKJV), and I also used the ASV, KJV, NKJV, and a New Scofield 1967) when going through it. But all the versions promise the same blessings. To me, that is the first key -to read, to hear, and to keep. The more one reads [and studies (II TIm. 2:15)];hears it preached; and keeps it, the more one will understand it. Make sense so far, after the above 'rabbit trail', of my own experiences?? It is a revealing, from the Lord Jesus Christ, himself, unto John. And one has to "get into it". Again, this is the first key, IMO.

The second key, IMO, is found in Rev. 1:1b.

That is the word "signified". The book of Revelation is full of "signs", hence loaded with symbolism. One, after following the above, will come to more and more understand which is symbolism, and what the symbols are. Remember this. "'Inspiration' is 90% 'perspiration'."

Third and final basic key, IMO, is found in Rev. 1:19-20.

There is a difference between the three 'phases' given in v. 19 of past "the things which you have seen" (IMO the vision of Ch. 1);" the things which are" (IMO, the seven churches and what they "signify"); and "the things which will take place after this" or 'meta tauta', in the Greek language (IMO, the things beginning with Ch. 4:1, and following.) This phrase of "meta tauta" (or 'after this') occurs several times in the subsequent chaptters, as well, and I believe that this is a progression of the chronology of the book, as it proceeds along. There are some parenthetical passages which do not advance the chronology, but they should become more and more obvious, in this light. I believe one has already spoken to this.

Finally, don't get too hung up on the date. Although I believe Revelation was written circa 95 AD, that is not that important to the book, again, IMO, whether it is, say, 95 , 85, or 75.

There you have my three keys. Hope some of this helps. Keep at it. :thumbs:

Ed

 

I use the context to decide by. If the event is symbolic, likely the timing is symbolic. I think Larkin sees 10 years in this case by comparing 10 years of particularly severe persecution. And "hour" seems to mean period of judgment and so the half hour silence" in Rev 8:1 tells me that the unsealing happens about midtrib and the ensuing silence moves the action part of the 7 seal half way through the trib to the end thereof where I find it in Rev 16:21.

skypair

 

I seconde Macarthur's work on Revelation.

Last year, there was a poster Me4Him who put together some solid charts on this thread, and others...

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=12198

 

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, go with JUST ONE!!! Does he have a theological bent? WE ALL DO! Do not read from just one side. READ THE BEST YOU CAN GET FROM SOMEONE WHO TAKES THE OTHER POSITION!!!


That I why I ordered and just started on "The Puritan Hope"! If Murray makes arguments I have not considered in ways that I cannot counter, I may just change my position! My comittment is not to any particular "school" or "system". I happen to think pre-mil is accurate and that a- and post- are not. If Murray has some better arguments, I will consider them, fully and deeply. That's why I bought it and why I am reading it!

Do not do Revelation without reading MacArthur at least. I would suggest Walvoord, too, but at least MacArthur. Unless you have already decided that you are not willing to examine a work by someone who may hold a position you are not willing to consider. As far as the translation, translate it yourself as you work through it! With a grad degree in Greek, you should be able to handle that.

I only have about 16 hours in Greek myself, a long time ago and I have not kept up like I should have, but I can work my way through it well enough to do a little bit of translation. There are some incredible tools available today, interlinears, parsings, etc. You know that, don't go with just one writer because he did a translation of the book.

Don't go with just one writer EVER for ANY reason! Read the other side. How can you take your solemn charge to faithfully preach the Word any less seriously than that? I would suggest using 6 good commentaries at least, all the way through the book.