Expert: Scott Talbot - 9/24/2008

Question
QUESTION: Would you please give me an outline of the most prominent views of interpreting the book of Revelation?  For instance, I know that some view the whole book in seven segments, each of which shows the entirety of the gospel age - Christ's first coming through Christ's second coming.

ANSWER: Hi Ryan,

It's nice to hear from you.

To give you a detailed overview of every view for interpreting the book of Revelation would be beyond the scope of this service. However, I can give you a brief synopsis, along with what I believe to be the best view for understanding Revelation.

Amillenniallism - The 1000 year reign of Jesus Christ on earth, mentioned in Revelation 20, is viewed by some to be allegorical or symbolic. Rather than believing in a literal, 1000-year earthly rule of Christ, adherents to amillennialism believe that this passage is referring to the rule and reign of Christ in the hearts of men.

Post-Millennialism - Adherents to this view claim that Christians (true believers) will be raptured after the millennial kindgom has come to an end.

Pre-Millennialism - This view states that Christians will be raptured prior to the 1000 year reign of Christ on earth. The next stage in the series of end-time events is the rapture of the church, followed by a 7-year Tribulation. At the end of the Tribulation, Christ returns, overthrows the rebellious kindgoms of the world, and establishes His 1000 year reign. After this comes the final judgment, followed by the Eternal State, characterized by a new heaven and a new earth.

To further complicate things, Pre-Millennialists are divided into 3 camps--those who believe that Christians will be raptured prior to the Tribulation (pre-tribulation), those who believe that Christians will be raptured in the middle (mid-tribulation), and those who believe that Christians will be raptured at the end (post-tribulation).

I personally believe that the pre-tribulation rapture of the saints, and a pre-millenial view of end time events, is the correct view. I could document this thoroughly with Scripture (Revelation, Daniel 9:20-27, Paul's epistles, etc.)

As for an outline of Revelation, God gives us the outline in Revelation 1:19--What you have seen (past); What is now (present); and What will take place later (future). Chapter 1 deals with the past; Chapters 2-3 with the present (present for John and the original recipients); and Chapters 4-22 with the future.

Some interpret the letters to the 7 churches in chapters 2-3 as being representative of the "Church Age." However, I believe that this is reading too much into it, and it represents a desire to "spiritualize" these chapters rather than understanding them in their literal sense.

One rule for proper interpretation is to allow the passage to speak for itself. Understand it at face value, and use the literal interpretation, unless there is clear evidence from the passage and/or other related passages of Scripture that a passage is meant to be understood in another sense--e.g., parable, symbolism, metaphor, figure of speech.

I hope this helps. Feel free to write back if you would like to discuss further.

Scott

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: How much does the apolyptic nature of the book influence your rule of "understand it at face value, and use the literal interpretation"?  Obviously, John provides some clear meanings for the symbols in the vision, but when he does not, are we not to assume symbolism runs throughout the vision?

ANSWER: Ryan,

When we interpret the Scriptures, we need to do so the way we would any other piece of literature. We need to allow God to speak for Himself, and understand what He says in a "normal" fashion. This means allowing for symbolism, when it is clearly symbolism. But, when there is no clear indication of symbolism, it's best to understand it in its literal sense.

For example, in Genesis 1, God tells us that He created the universe in 6 days. He uses the term, "day," repeatedly, and He even refers to "evening and morning" to drive home the point that a literal day is being spoken of. Some believe that the 6 days being referred to are actually eons--long periods of time--during which God accomplished creation via evolution or some such thing. However, God chose to use the word, "day," and there is nothing in the context to lead the reader to believe that He meant anything else, other than what we all understand to mean "day."

Another example is in Revelation 20, where we're told about the Millennial rule of Christ on earth. As we discussed earlier, some believe that this period of 1000 years is actually an indefinite period of time. This is faulty hermeneutics, because five times the phrase, "thousand years," is mentioned. Why would God say 1000 years if He didn't mean 1000 years? If there's something in the passage (or anywhere else in Scripture) that would give us good reason to believe that we might have the liberty to interpret this another way, then let's examine the evidence. But, in the absence of any indication to the contrary, it's best to understand the interpretation to mean exactly what God said--1000 years.

One more example. Revelation 2-3 include letters to 7 churches. Some believe these to be references to 7 periods of history in the present Church Age. But I think that is an incorrect view. The word, "church," is used over and over again. Reference is made to specific churches in specific geographical locations. "Church" means "a local assembly." To understand these "churches" as anything else but literal "churches" is to read into the passage and twist its meaning and intent.

The problem with "spiritualizing" or "allegorizing" Scripture is that, when one takes license to re-interpret a passage with an underlying meaning, we can make any passage of the Bible say whatever we want it to say. Rather than its being the authoritative word of God, it becomes putty in our hands--something we can mold into whatever we want. Then man becomes the ultimate authority, not God. Does this make sense?

Now granted, there are other far "trickier" passages in Revelation--passages that deal with prophetic events. It is sometimes difficult to know exactly what is being spoken of. Are we to understand these literally, or treat them as symbolic?

First, it's important to understand that John wrote what he saw. He may have had visions of things future without knowing exactly how to explain them. So he described them as best he could. Consider Revelation 9:7-11, where John tells about "locusts [that] looked like horses prepared for battle." Some speculate that these may be some form of military helicopter ... though this may be pushing things a bit. We may not yet know exactly what they are. We only know that John reported what he saw and described it in terms he understood.

Second, we also need to understand the purpose of prophecy. Prophecy is designed primarily for those who witness the fulfillment of that prophecy, or for those who can look back and see its fulfillment. When God foretells events through a prophet, it's His way of "signing His name" to those events. In other words, when the prophesied events unfold, and one can see that those events match up perfectly with the predictions God previously gave, there can be no doubt that it is of God. When these events take place, God wants mankind to know that He is behind it all. The fact that prophecy is being fulfilled will demonstrate this to them.

Future prophecy can have value for us who have not yet seen its fulfillment. It can give us a glimpse of future events and a partial understanding of God's plan. But we can only speculate as to the exact manner in which some of these prophecies will unfold. It may be interesting to speculate about such things. But we will not fully understand all the details until the prophesied events take place. However they unfold, it will be clear to the onlookers that prophecy is, indeed, being fulfilled.

So how much of John's visions is symbolic, and how much should be understood literally? It's hard to say. What's important, however, is that the prophecy will serve its purpose in the end, and the witnesses to these events will understand.

If this does not make sense, then pick out a specific passage that you're wrestling with, and we'll take a closer look at it. It's better to deal in specifics rather than just generalities.

Scott



---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thanks for your continued willingness to help me.

One specific I think of is the harlot on the beast.  Is this not a picture of Rome - city on seven hills?  If so, can we see this as a reference to ancient Rome or is it better understood as a symbol for a coming kingdom that will be like ancient Rome?

Answer
We know that this is not a reference to ancient Rome, because ancient Rome no longer exists. However, let's look at some other prophetic Scripture. In Daniel 2:31-35, we read about Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the large statue representing world empires. Its feet of iron and clay contain iron that is represented in the legs. The iron represents Rome, and the iron and clay represent another empire that somehow has elements of Rome in it. Whatever that may be, there will be clear ties to Rome.

The dream about the 4 beasts in Daniel 7 also represent 4 world empires. The 4th beast had 10 horns, and a horn that grew up and replaced 3 of the original 10 horns. The 4th beast represents Rome, and the events surrounding the horns represent powers growing out of the original empire. It has elements of the original, but is distinct.

Compare these prophecies to Revelation 17, and it helps to form a more complete picture of what will happen and what is being referenced.

There is still much speculation about the identity of the woman on the beast. Is there an actual woman in the limelight representing a world power or philosophy? Is this an empire that has characteristics common to the original Roman empire? Is Babylon somehow involved? (See verse 5.) Could it be a European union? Perhaps the Roman Catholic Church?

Again, we can speculate, but we may not be able to predict exactly how these prophecies will be fulfilled. What we know is that, WHEN the prophecy is fulfulled, it will make sense when compared to Scripture, and those who care to do the research will know that this is from God. Events will come together in exact fulfillment of these prophecies, even though we may not fully understand it yet in foresight.