What Are the Interpretive Keys to Unlock the Apocalypse?

[TCGreek]

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.

1. I'm sorry, I should have added, "to begin with."

2. Yes, when I'm reading on a subject, I usually line up a few books to read.

3. Yes, Macarthur is one of my favorites, so definitely I'll get around to him. I notice his The Time Is Near, something like that. I plan to get that one too.

4. The reason why I wanted to start to with Osborne is because of a certain freshness (2002), his own working with the Greek and his use of Beale and Aune.

5. But I'm planning to go through a few of them. I must admit that I'm really slow on Walvoord. I came across the Puritan Hope, but I'll defer for now.

 

[EdSutton]

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.

FTR, John of Japan, I had not read your post, when I posted mine, mentioning Rev. 1:19 as one of the keys to understanding the book of the Revelation. Just so no one thinks I answered as I did, because of your post, which I actually did not read until a few minutes ago.

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

I'm sure there will be lots of advice from folks that know much more than I but I would start by a study of the Book of Daniel and Matthew chapter 24.

Another book to have on hand is Things to Come by J. Dwight Pentecost. Pentecost details most of the popular positions.

Beyond that I would say plan on spending a lot of time on this study. Try to take as much literally as possible.

I'm getting ready to do an in-debth study of this book also. I have a commentary which is A-mil (the NICNT), I'm in the process of selecting a companion volume that is pre-mil. I just finished reading Revelation through 2 times and now I'm going back to Daniel before I start my study of this book. I wish you well with your study.

Tom

Let me here second Things to Come, by J. Dwight Pentecost. While Dr. Pentecost is fully dispensational and a pre-tribulation, pre-millenial rapture believer, himself, he does fairly, I think, present some other positions. I definitely would recommend for anyone to read this book, if at all possible.

And I'll second reading and studying the book of Daniel and Matthew 24 and 25, as well.

Ed

 

[John of Japan]

FTR, John of Japan, I had not read your post, when I posted mine, mentioning Rev. 1:19 as one of the keys to understanding the book of the Revelation. Just so no one thinks I answered as I did, because of your post, which I actually did not read until a few minutes ago.

Ed

Mondai ja nai. ("No problemo.") :smilewinkgrin:

 

[rjprince]

Everyone keeps mentioning Daniel and Matt 24-25. DONT FORGET LUKE 21. Matthew does not give Jesus' answer to the first question, "When shall these things be..."

Luke gives Jesus' explanation concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. If you do not read Luke, you are missing part of the story. Of course, IMHO, that is one of the reasons why so many people get the whole future thing wrong to start with, not looking at the whole story. That and Israel, but that's on another thread...

 

[grahame]

Everyone keeps mentioning Daniel and Matt 24-25. DONT FORGET LUKE 21. Matthew does not give Jesus' answer to the first question, "When shall these things be..."

Luke gives Jesus' explanation concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. If you do not read Luke, you are missing part of the story. Of course, IMHO, that is one of the reasons why so many people get the whole future thing wrong to start with, not looking at the whole story. That and Israel, but that's on another thread...

The commentator Adam Clark comments on Matthew 24-25 as referring entirely to the Destruction of Jerusalem.

 

[Jkdbuck76]

Frankly speaking, I've stayed away from the book of Revelation for several reasons in my teaching and preaching:

1. I didn't know where to start with all the symbolisms.

2. I didn't know what was the best date on the book.

3. I didn't know what to take as literal and what to take as figurative.

What are the interpretive keys to unlocking this blessed book?

I don't think you should avoid the whole book b/c of the symbolism used. Why not preach on the letters to the 7 churches? That is certainly relevant.

Why not preach about the first few paragraphs that talk about how the revelation is OF CHRIST (the Son of Man). Maybe preach about the very last two paragraphs.

If you don't know the symbolism, then stay away from it.

My advice: don't let what you don't know prevent you from excercising what you do know.

Oh, and by the way, the beast coming out of the sea is Prince Charles of Wales:laugh:

 

[rjprince]

The commentator Adam Clark comments on Matthew 24-25 as referring entirely to the Destruction of Jerusalem.

I am not surprised. Don't use Clark much anymore. Too much spiritualization of clear texts, IMO, of course.

In spite of Clark, read Matt 24-25 and Luke 21 to see if you think I may have a valid point...