The Book of Revelation and History

I am speaking next week as the Bible Lecturer at Camp Wi-Ne-Ma on the Oregon coast near Lincoln City for the Week of Missions. This is a great privilege for me and I have been working on my messages very hard. The theme is “The Everlasting Gospel” from Revelation 14:6, and I will be teaching through the book of Revelation during the week.

One’s understanding of the book of Revelation is influenced by one’s understanding as to what the book has to say about history. When we relate to historical situations, we have four options: past history, present history, future history (excuse the oxymoron here), and non-history. All four of these are represented in the various approaches to Revelation. Here is how I understand them. Each of the four views is represented by a timeline diagram showing four events: the resurrection of Jesus in A.D. 30, the writing of Revelation in A.D. 96, our perspective in A.D. 2012, and the events of the end of time in the future (i.e., the second coming and final judgment).

1. The Symbolic View of Revelation: Revelation speaks of the eternal spiritual battle between God and the rebellious forces of demonic evil, but in symbolic form. It is like a giant parable, not tied to any history past, present, or future. This is the non-historical approach, as if the story of Revelation floats above historical timelines in an ahistorical manner. It can be represented by this diagram.2. The Futuristic View: Revelation is primarily prophecy of future events of the end of time, things that have yet to take place even today. This is the “future history” approach. There are many versions of this, including the highly detailed and structured systems of dispensational premillennialism (sometimes called the extreme futurist view). Revelation’s account of future events begins after the letters to the seven church, from chapter 4 to the end of the book. This view might be diagrammed like this:3. Panoramic Historicist View: Revelation reveals the unfolding history of the church (or world) including the rise of Islam and the Protestant Reformation. This is the “present history” approach, for we are in the middle of the story. This usually sees the Beast of Revelation as the Pope of Rome, and understands the culmination of the book as now at hand. This was popular among the later Protestant Reformers who often equated the church of Rome and the Pope with the Beast of chapter 13 and the Great Harlot of chapter 17. This view is mixed with the futurist view sometimes, but is most fully represented today by the Seventh Day Adventists. It is represented by this diagram:

4. First Century Historicist View: Revelation speaks of historical events of the first century in code or symbolic language (often borrowed from Daniel) and portrays primarily the spiritual battle between the persecuted church and the Roman Empire. This is the “past history” approach, for most of the book is in the past from our perspective.  In this view, the Beast of Revelation 13 as the Roman Emperor(s) and the Great Harlot of Revelation 17 as the Roman Empire. Usually the final two chapters are seen as future referring in this view, along with various other verses throughout the book. (This view is sometimes called “Preterist,” but that label has been co-opted by a small group who believe that all the events of Revelation took place before A.D. 70, so I have chosen the designation, “First Century Historicist View.) It may be diagrammed like this:

There are many, many variations on these views, but I think that all of the modern views I have encountered could be put into one of these four categories.

I hope to see some of you at Wi-Ne-Ma, especially my beloved former students. We will have a great week exploring the book of Revelation.

Mark Krause
Nebraska Christian College

Theological Mistakes: Antichrists, False Christs, and False Prophets

When Christians discuss the end times, a certain prophetic view seems to pervade most discussions. This is an interpretation of the book of Revelation we call the “futurist” view, that beginning with chapter 4, the book speaks of future realities, things yet to come. The advocates of this view may be further divided into dispensationalists and non-dispensationalists. A very basic way of understanding this would be to say that a dispensationalist sees a comprehensive view of the end times based on texts from many different books of the Bible. The most extreme forms see this as the primary purpose of the Bible: to reveal what will happen in the future drama of God’s actions in human history. This includes such things as a first resurrection, a second resurrection, rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem, a time of tribulation, the second coming of Christ, and the final judgment.

Central to many of these systems is the role of a great, evil eschatological figure who will deceive the nations of the world and establish himself as a world ruler. The defeat of this person and his forces of evil will be the final battle, the Armageddon prophesied in the book of Revelation.

This evil personage is often called the Antichrist, even the Antichrist of Revelation. Further study of this, though, reveals some interesting things. For one, the term “Antichrist” is never used in the book of Revelation. It occurs only in 1 John and 2 John. There it is used in the plural (antichrists) and the singular (antichrist). In these letters of John, this “antichrist” seems to be something present in his day and influencing the church he pastors.

Another thing we should notice is that the Greek prefix “anti” is not the same as the English prefix “anti.” This is another problem caused by transliteration. The Greek preposition “anti” has the sense of “substitute” or “replacement” and not so much “against” as the English “anti” does. A more literal translation of the Greek word antichristos would be “False Christ” or “False Messiah” or “False Anointed One.”

Scripture does predict a person who plays a decisive role in the end of time as a leader of the forces of evil. Both Revelation and Paul speak of this person:

• Man of Sin/Lawlessness, Son of Perdition (2 Thess 2:3)
• The Beast (Revelation 13:1-4), also known as Mr. 666 by some

But this person is never called the Antichrist in Scripture. Is this important? Probably not, but the misuse of this term in prophecy formulations and in Hollywood productions has long bothered me. I guess I am getting old. Next I will be yelling at the neighborhood kids to get off my lawn. Those meddlin’ kids!

Mark Krause
Nebraska Christian College

BTW: I am speaking as the Bible Lecturer at the Week of Mission Conference at Camp Wi-Ne-Ma on the Oregon coast July 29-August 3. My topic is “The Everlasting Gospel” and the lessons will be from the book of Revelation. I’m sure this topic will come up.

The Voice Bible: Reading Revelation

I blogged about the new Bible translation from Thomas Nelson, The Voice Bible earlier this week, and promised to get back to it after reading it devotionally for awhile. I was a little surprised at the number of responses I got, so I am going to do an update today.I read through the first half of the book of Revelation to get a better feel for how The Voice works, because this is the book I have most recently taught and it is very fresh on my mind.

First, I want to remind us all of an important factor: with every Bible translation or edition, we must learn to read/use it the way the editors intended it to be used if we are to get the most out of it. The quick way to do this is to read the preface to the translation, although most of us dread doing this, fearing we will be overwhelmed with arcane, boring minutia. The editors of The Voice explain their system well, so if you are intending to use this Bible, you should invest 30 minutes in reading what they have to say.

This brings out several intended features for The Voice. We may not like what they have done for various reasons (including our stubbornness), but I think this major project deserves the respect that goes beyond knee-jerk reactionism. For example, if you notice that The Voice goes beyond the literal translation “brothers” to give the inclusive (and more inline with the author’s intention) “brothers and sisters,” and you immediately dismiss it as liberal deviancy, stick with your current translation.

As with each book in the Bible, The Voice editors begin Revelation with a meaty introduction from their writers. For Revelation, this includes some historical background, but mainly has a summary of the book (almost a précis), giving help for the 21st century reader. We also notice a color scheme unlike anything I have ever seen in a Bible translation. We find many things in a bold, sans serif font that is a light brown color. It looks something like this. This font is used for added headings for the sections. In Revelation, it is also used for words that have been inserted to tell the reader who the speaker might be in a quotation. For example, Revelation 5:9 looks something like this:

Then they sang a new song:

Four Living Creatures and 24 Elders:
You are worthy to receive the scroll: … (etc.)

I find this to be helpful. Another way this special font is used is for an occasional insertion of an interpretive note inline with the text (not a footnote). For example, after Revelation 1:16, The Voice has this comment:

The Son of Man is none other than the
risen Jesus shining in glory, moving
among the lampstands.

As I said before, The Voice sometimes feels like a study Bible on steroids, but I happen to agree with this comment, and I like the fact that it is unmistakably presented as something other than the words of the text.

Overall, I will admit that reading The Voice in the book of Revelation brings an excitement to the text that I find missing in meticulously literal translations. I think we should feel excitement when reading this book, for it is the grand book of worship and a narrative drama unlike anything else in the Bible.

Let me leave you with one last observation,The Voice’s translation of the first part of Revelation 6:16:

They pleaded with loud suicidal requests to the rocks and mountains.

The Voice’s method remains transparent, they want the reader to know the word “suicidal” has been added. There is no Greek word behind it (I’m not even sure what that Greek word would be, autophoneuo?). Do we, the readers, need to be told that what follows (a quotation identified as from People of the Earth) is suicidal in intent? Perhaps not, but it is a request to be put to death. My desire for literal translation squirms within me, but I will admit I like this verse. The editors identify their addition with the italics, they are not trying to fool or trick me.

More to come on The Voice.

Mark Krause
Nebraska Christian College

Theological Mistakes: “Apocalypse Now”

One of the most famous films from the 1970s is Francis Ford Coppola’s “Apocalypse Now.” It is an adaptation of Joseph Conrad’s novella, “Heart of Darkness” to a fictional situation during the Vietnam War. It is a disturbing film, full of insanity and graphic portrayal of evil. My purpose today is not to critique the film, but to use it as an example of the fallacy of transliteration.

Regular readers of this blog know that I have a (mild) obsession with the mischief created when Bible translators “transliterate” a Greek or Hebrew word rather than “translate” it. To me, when they opt for transliteration, they create a new word that is immediately unhitched from the original Bible word, and (like any English word) can now take on its own meanings and connotations. I recently blogged about a new, supposedly “transliteration-free” Bible,The Voice, that failed the transliteration test when it came to John the Baptist and his baptizing. I have thought since then that it was to much to expect them to render this guy’s tag as “John the Dunker” or “John the Immerser.” We wouldn’t want to lose John’s Baptist heritage, after all.

What about the word “Apocalypse?” This is a transliteration of the Greek noun apokalypsis. This word and its verbal counterpart appear over 40 times in the New Testament, so this is not a rare or unusual term. It also is found over 70 times in the LXX (the Greek Old Testament). Its meaning is simple: “uncovering.” In the LXX it is used for the concept of “nakedness,” the state of being uncovered (see 1 Samuel 20:30).

When it comes to the New Testament, this word is expresses the idea of things about God that are “uncovered.” Jesus, in Matthew 10:26, says,

So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.

The parallel construction of this saying shows that the author considered “be disclosed” (apokalypsis) to be equivalent to the idea of “be made known.” In other words, he uses the word to describe a revealing, an uncovering of something that had previously been hidden.

This brings us to Revelation 1:1:

The revelation (apokalypsis) from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John …

This is the only place in the book of Revelation that this word is used, and it is given in the opening to describe what kind of book it is. It is an uncovering of God’s secrets, a revelation of things soon to take place, an apocalypse for the benefit of its readers.

Why is this important? Unlike Coppola’s highjacked use of the word, there is no connection between “apocalypse” and “horrible, evil, bloody war.” To refer to nuclear holocaust as an “apocalypse” is a misnomer fueled by the fallacy of transliteration. Yes, the book of Revelation does portray cataclysmic events, both as figurative expressions of the wrath of God and as perhaps as predictive of some type of gigantic war against the forces of evil and the conquering army of the Lamb. But the idea of the book is not war, it is victory for those who remain faithful and true. It is full of worship and promises for those who were being persecuted under the Emperor Domitian, some even dying for their faith. We have allowed the book of Revelation to be synonymous with the horrors of war in popular imagination.

So, to all of you apocalypse = war folks out there, find your own word. And yes, I’m talking to you, video game creators.

Mark Krause
Nebraska Christian College