Revelation: 6
If you remember, the first “commercial” in Revelation is chap. 7, the vision of the Jewish and non-Jewish saints, which comes between the opening of the 6th and 7th seal of divine judgment. 10:1-11:14 comes between the 6th and 7th trumpet blasts, and thus represents the 2nd “commercial” in this apocalypse.
Several elements in chap. 10 serve to heighten the anticipation of the coming 7th trumpet blast: the terrifying appearance and thundering voice of a mighty angel (10:1-3), the declaration of no more delays in God’s judgment (Rev 10:6), and John’s eating of the prophetic scroll and the command to prophecy its contents (Rev 10:9-11; cf. Ezek 3:1-3). Question: Why do you think John is commanded to “eat” the scroll?
The interpretation of chap. 11 has been disputed for ages: is everything literal, i.e., the temple and the 2 evangelistic witnesses, or should these things be understood symbolically? As I have discussed earlier (see my 1st blog entry for Revelation), b/c apocalyptic literature is, by definition, highly symbolic I interpret these symbolically; hence, 11:1-13 is a picture of the witnessing church: the church in Christ is the true temple (e.g., John 2:10-21; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 1 Pet 2:5), the church—Jews and Gentiles—represents God’s olive tree (Rom 11:17-18), and the church is armed with God’s Word (cf. Rev 19:15), which is like a fire when preached (cf. Jer 20:9), and filled with God’s Spirit so as to prophecy (cf. Acts 2:17-18). The church has been and will always be severely persecuted (cf. Rev 2:9-10; Acts 14:22), but will ultimately prove victorious in the Last Days. The 7th angelic trumpet blast, then, announces the victory of God: Rev 11:15! Final triumph rests with God. That is why God’s people prove victorious: b/c God has won, his people will!
12:1-14:20 speaks of various “signs” appearing. The people of God, has been symbolically described in 11:1-13, and the final victory declared (“D Day,” if you will) in 11:15-19. Chapter 12 symbolically yet tersely summarizes the story of the intense conflict between God’s people and their ancient foe. The vision describes how Satan fell from heaven, taking 1/3 of the angels with him in his rebellion (12:3-4, 9); he tried to destroy the Messiah right from his birth (12:4-6), but having failed he now chooses to make war against the people of God (12:10-17). This war against the saints will escalate in the Last Days with the advent of Satan’s extremely powerful henchmen, depicted as 2 beasts, 1 emerging from the sea, the other from the earth. Question: Do you think there is any significance that these beasts emerge from the land and the sea? Together with the dragon (i.e., Satan) they form an unholy “trinity”.
I believe that these chapters (as well as the rest of Revelation) speak of the future—not just the future with respect to the original, 1st-century readers of this document, but us today. These verses speak of a time when 2 powerful figures will arise on the earth and will yield tremendous authority over people (forcing them even to wear their mark: 666); they will be able to perform miraculous signs & wonders. Consequently, people will worship them. In stark contrast to the people of the earth who take the beast’s mark, God’s true people, typified by the “144000” will remain pure (Rev 14:1-5). Despite fiery opposition from the unholy trinity, the eternal gospel will continue to be preached, and the doom the beast and his followers declared (14:6-8), as Jesus sets to pour out the ominous wrath of God. But while divine judgment is being poured out on the earth (Rev 14:19-20), a party is going on in heaven b/c of it (Rev 15:1-4). Question: Why is the execution of God’s wrath something to celebrate?
Chaps. 16-18 describe the final outpouring of God’s terrifying wrath upon the earth. Not only does God judge the world generally, he executes judgment specifically against “Babylon.” Babylon didn’t exist in John’s day—the 1st-century equivalent of Babylon was Rome (cf. 1 Pet 5:13). Thus, scholars see these judgments as poured out against ancient Rome. Still, b/c the bible can use nations as “types”, in other words, future nations who embody power and values of a previous nation (similar to, for e.g., how Luke can refer to John the Baptist as “Elijah” [Luke 1:17]), given the future orientation of the previous chapters, I think it’s legitimate to see these judgments as being fulfilled in the End Times (in and around the time Jesus returns).
Having finally executed his judgments, Christ returns to earth to consummate his relationship with his bride, the church (19:7-10), and to cast Satan and his 2 henchmen into the Lake of Fire (19:20-20:10)—the same place those who don’t know Jesus personally will end up (Rev 20:11-15). Afterwards, the new heaven and the new earth are revealed, including the New Jerusalem (21:1-22:5). Of note is what happens to the temple: there is no temple, for the Lord and the Lamb are the temple (Rev 21:22). Furthermore, the heavenly bodies of Genesis 1 no longer exist b/c the glory of God—his majestic presence—gives light to all (Rev 21:23-24; 22:5). This—and this is only part (!)—is the glorious hope that followers of Jesus can look forward to!
And so, as CSI: NT comes to the End (finally!), I think it’s fitting that we, like the blessed Holy Spirit (22:17a), respond to Jesus’ promise to come back for us, by praying the words of Revelation: “Amen. Come Lord Jesus!” (22:20). AMEN.
Revelation: 5
While the physical setting of Revelation is on the island of Patmos (1:9), the visionary setting slides back and forth between earth and heaven: in chap. 3 Jesus comes to John and speaks to the local churches; in chaps. 4-5, John is taken up into heaven to the throne room of Almighty God. Beginning in chap. 6, the reader’s sights now turn back to the earth: God’s righteous judgments are about to be poured on its inhabitants. Question: Why do you think the scenes in Revelation oscillate between earth and heaven?
The 1st set of divine judgments is the 7 seals. Notice there are “7”: there will also be 7 trumpets, 7 signs, and 7 bowls. Given, as I discussed in the 1st Revelation blog entry, that apocalyptic literature is highly symbolic, “7” may or may not be literal but certainly “7” would symbolize the completeness and perfection of God’s righteous judgments. The 1st 4 seals deal with the so-called “4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse” (6:1-8; the imagery is similar to that observed in Zech 1 and Zech 6). The 4 Horsemen are the Anti-Christ (6:1-2), War (6:3-4), Famine (6:5-6), and Death (6:7-8). God sovereignly allows these 4 to wreak havoc on the earth—and that havoc is an expression of God’s judgment. This is quite similar to how God used Assyria and Babylon—the destruction they caused—to judge his people Israel (cf., e.g., Habakkuk 1). It’s also parallel in thought to Paul in Romans 1: Paul says that b/c people have rebelled against God, God judges them by “giving them over” to their sinful ways (e.g., Rom 1:25-26). Thus, their enslavement to sin is an expression of God’s judgment upon them. Question: Why do you think God would judge people in this more passive (i.e., “giving them over”) kind of way?
The next seal deals with the martyrs of the faith (6:9-11). They are waiting for God to vindicate them—something the bible always promised—but they’re getting a bit impatient: hence, their question: Rev 6:10; a question (“How long?”) that the saints of old asked many times over (e.g., Ps 13:1-2; Ps 35:17; Ps 74:10; Hab 1:2). The 6th seal, the earthquake, symbolizes tremendous social and political upheaval, and a dawning recognition that divine reckoning is at hand (6:12-17); but 1st, a message from our sponsor . . .
Scholars identify chap. 7 as an interlude before the climactic scene of the 7th seal in chap. 8. The setting of the vision now moves from earth to heaven, where John is shown a vision of salvation and security. God pushes the pause button (if you will) in the execution of his mighty judgments (7:1-3) until he secures his elect, symbolized by the “144,000” (Rev 7:4). Numerous groups take this literally, but again, remember that all apocalyptic literature is, by definition, highly symbolic; hence, better to see this as symbolic of the completeness of God’s elect, for 144,000 is composed of significantly symbolic smaller numbers: 144,000 = 12 (associated with God’s people) x 12 x 10 (associated with strength) x 10 x 10. This group of people represents all faithful Jews who lived under the Old Covenant and all Jews (subsequent to the Old Covenant) who come to faith in Christ. The 2nd group represents Gentile believers (7:9-17). Notice the relative sizes of the groups: Question: Does the relative size of these 2 groups surprise you? Why or why not? And now, back to our regularly scheduled program . . .
I think the reason why “God shall wipe every tear from their eyes” (7:17) is b/c of the climactic 7th seal of divine judgment which is composed of 7 trumpet blasts (8:1-13). The drama of this 7th seal is underscored by the dramatic pause: everything—angels, living creatures, saints—stop for a “moment” of silence: 30 min. to be exact (Rev 8:1)! After the silence, the judgments are busily prepared (8:3-5) and then executed (8:6-13). These 1st 4 judgments represent an intensification of the judgments poured out through the 4 Horsemen in 6:1-8. But as terrifying as these judgments are, things are about to get worse for earth’s inhabitants: Rev 8:13.
The seriousness of the next 2 judgments is underscored by how much John writes about them: he covered the 1st 4 trumpet blasts in 7 verses (8:6-12); but it will take him an entire chapter to cover the next 2. The 5th trumpet blast of judgment consists of a horrible plague of locusts (9:1-12). That these locusts arise from the bottomless pit (9:2-3; cf. Rev 20:1-3), and that the king of this army is called “Destroyer” (9:11) might suggest that this army is demonic. In other words, this judgment represents God allowing Satan and his demons much greater access to and freedom to attack the earth than he has in the past. The 6th trumpet of judgment represents (I think!) the release of worldwide violence on the earth, which results in the death of 1/3 of the world’s population (9:13-21). 2 things to keep in mind here. 1st, all of this happens at God’s command/initiative (9:13-14). It’s important to think of these judgments in a vein similar to Paul’s thought in Rom 1 (as discussed above). 2nd, despite the absolute horror, most people remain unrepentant (Rev 9:20-21). Sin is so powerful and so completely morally contaminating and debilitating that unbelievers will not repent even in the harshest of circumstances (remember Jesus’ words in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus: Luke 16:27-31).
The 7th and final trumpet of divine judgment is about to sound; but 1st, a message from our sponsor . . .
Revelation: 4
In Rev 4 John’s vision moves from the local churches to the heavens, specifically, Heaven.
When John is taken up into heaven, he finds himself in the throne room of the Almighty. What is clear in this vision is the centrality of God—God is at the heart of heaven, and everything else revolves around him (Rev 4:2). After all, what’s the 1st thing John notices in heaven? It’s God on his throne. But don’t miss this: look at all the other things that vie for John’s attention (4:3-8): a huge emerald rainbow, 24 angelic elders, a fierce cosmic storm, 7 fire-blazing lamps, a huge crystal-like sea, and 4 weird living creatures (Rev 4:7-8)! Yet the 1st thing John notices (4:2) is God on his throne! God is that central to heaven; but he is also just as central to life here on planet earth (cf. Col 1:17)—although most people fail to recognize this b/c of unbelief.
In experiencing the centrality of God, John recognizes God’s immense glory, symbolized by the precious jewel/stone-like appearance of God on his throne (Rev 4:3). “Glory” refers to God’s significance and value: he is “more precious than silver … more costly than gold … more beautiful than diamonds”. John also recognizes God’s kingship (Rev 4:2, 4). The glory and majesty of God’s throne are enhanced by these 24 angelic beings whose own thrones surround God’s (they’re kind of the warm-up act for God). And notice how they respond to the King of kings: Rev 4:10. They fall on their faces before him! When royalty enters a room or the bride enters the wedding service you stand up; these angels don’t stand for God—they fall on their faces. How great is God?!
In experiencing the centrality of God, John recognizes God’s holiness. The 1st/primary meaning of the Greek and Hebrew words for “holiness” is “to be set apart or separate from”. Holiness, then, refers, at least in the 1st instance, to God’s transcendence or otherness. The transcendence/otherness of God comes through loud and clear in this vision (4:3b-8a). The 1st thing John notices in heaven is God on his throne, but look at all the barriers between John and God—i.e., all the things that “separate” John from God: before John can reach God, he has to get through the 24 kingly angels on their thrones (when you ring the doorbell at the White House, does the President answer the door, or the butler?); he has to get through a fierce electrical storm (think scary movies); a sea (think the globe: seas separate countries); a blazing fire (think forest fire); and to top it off, 4 weird but awesome looking living creatures. And not surprisingly, the angels who surround God sing of his holiness (Rev 4:8).
In experiencing the centrality of God, John also recognizes God’s worthiness (Rev 4:10-11). Only God and God alone is worthy of our worship and our devotion. He is worthy of this by virtue of who he is—he is God (4:2-8)—and by virtue of creation (Rev 4:11): he alone has the power to create, and he created all things to reflect his glory and majesty (cf. Ps 19:1-2; Isa 43:7). Question: Do Christians and non-Christians, then, have the same or different purpose before God?
The 2nd part of this heavenly vision (chap. 5), looks at the other magnificent work of God: redemption. God the Father has a book of seals or judgments that need to be executed; but only someone “worthy” (cf. Rev 4:11) can open this book to execute these divinely appointed judgments (Rev 5:2). Yet no one—no angel, no living creature or otherwise—is found worthy (5:3-4) . . . That is, until Jesus, the “Lion of the tribe of Judah” appears (5:5). His appearance—“looking as if slain”—refers to his crucifixion; and notice where Jesus stands in relation to God’s throne: he is, literally, “in the middle of the throne” (5:6a), not around/outside of it like the rest. Question: What does this imply about Jesus? The answer to this question is affirmed by what happens next: the 24 angelic kings fall on their faces before the Lamb (Rev 5:8), and they begin to sing a song of praise to Jesus (Rev 5:9-10). This song is clearly a song of redemption: by completing God’s work through the cross Jesus has created a people, a “kingdom of priests,” whose reason-to-be is the glory and praise of God. Being able to worship God is a high, holy, and happy calling—so the rest of heaven decides to join in on the celebration, with Jesus, of course, being the focus of heaven’s praise (Rev 5:11-14).
This joyful scene will change dramatically, as the vision moves from heaven to back to the earth and the execution of God’s seals/judgments.
Revelation: 3
Having appeared to John, the risen Christ now speaks to the 7 churches (chap. 2-3).
I’ve heard some pastors claim that each church represents a different era in church history: Ephesus represents the apostolic church, Smyrna the post-apostolic period, and so forth, with Laodicea symbolizing the modern/contemporary church. There are 2 problems with this claim (besides the fact that it’s simply not true!). 1st, it ignores the historical context. The order of these churches corresponds exactly to the order that a letter would have circulated from 1 church to another in that day. So, there is no magic to their sequence. 2nd, the people who make this claim say that Rev 3:15-16 describes the church today; but the problem with that assertion is that it only describes the Western church—it does not describe the persecuted church in Africa or Asia, or many other non-Western segments of Christianity where there’s an undeniable passion for Christ. Here, then, is 1 of the biggest examples of, what I had mentioned in the 1st Revelation blog entry, the Western (i.e., US, Canadian, et al.)-oriented and thus false interpretation of Revelation!
The structure of each of these letters is identical: the church is named, Christ is described, the church is evaluated, and a final charge is given. The description of Christ represents a snippet of the fuller vision of Christ in chap. 1. Christ reveals himself to each church in a way that corresponds to the need of the particular church. Question: Why do you think in each letter Christ addresses the “angel of/in the church”? Who or what is the “angel” of these churches?
I’m not going to survey every church, just the first and the last (cf. 1:17c, no pun intended).
The 1st letter is addressed to the church at Ephesus. The Ephesian church was perhaps the most important church of its day: it was located in a large city; the city occupied a key location in the country; and its list of previous pastors was impressive: Aquila and Priscilla, Paul, Timothy, and, according to church tradition, the Apostle John. Christ appears to this church as the 1 who holds the church in his hand, and who walks in their midst (Rev 2:1). In other words, Jesus is the sovereign protector of the church; yet, he is not simply “somewhere out there”—he is close by, seeking intimate fellowship with those who seek him. The thrust of the letter is basically this: the Ephesian church had worked hard at being doctrinally pure, but in its pursuit of doctrinal purity it had lost its passion for spiritual intimacy with Christ (Rev 2:2-4). 1 of the reasons Christ knows this is b/c he had been there, walking amongst the Ephesians! Christ thus counsels them to remember the ways things used to be (i.e., what it means to be “in love” with Jesus), and repent of the way things are: repent of passionless, lifeless, joyless, mechanical, autopilot Christianity (2:5). Christ takes passionless, status quo Christianity very seriously: if the church fails to repent of it, he will remove the church (Rev 2:5)—he does, after all, hold it in his hand, to do with it as he pleases! Question: What does this “removal” look like? Is it physical? Is it spiritual? Does this removal relate to Jesus’ words in Matt 5:13?
The 7th letter is addressed to the church at Laodicea. This city/church was nowhere near as prominent as Ephesus. Christ appears to this church as the sovereign Lord (“the Amen”; cf. Isa 65:16), the one who is perfectly faithful and trustworthy, and who is the ultimate authority in life (“the beginning/source of creation”). Christ’s complaint against the church is encapsulated in Rev 3:15-16. To understand what he means you need to know a bit of the historical background. Laodicea was closely situated between Hieropolis and Colossae; the former city was well known for its hot springs, the latter for its fresh, spring water. The hot springs were considered therapeutic (think hot tub), while the spring water was refreshing for the weary traveler (think ice cold water fountain). To be “hot”, then, meant you ministered in a healing, therapeutic way; to be “cold” meant you ministered in a refreshing way. The Laodiceans were neither: they were lukewarm, and consequently made Christ sick to his stomach (Rev 3:16; the Greek literally means “to vomit”). The language is metaphorical—like the rest of Revelation (and all of apocalyptic literature).
Again, the historical background illumines Jesus’ reaction to the church. Laodicea had a natural water fountain whose source was in Colossae; but by the time it had made its way to Laodicea, the water was undrinkable b/c it had absorbed much of the minerals in the ground it ran along to reach Laodicea. To someone not from the area, they would drink it, expecting their thirst to be nicely quenched, but they would immediately spit it out b/c it would’ve tasted no better than rotten milk! Gross or what? Essentially, Jesus tells the church that b/c they’re useless—in terms of being a ministering body—they make him want to vomit! So, he’s not talking about them losing their salvation. . . . But yikes anyways!
The reason the church has become useless is b/c they are entrenched in pride (Rev 3:17). While not as prominent a city as, say, Ephesus, Laodicea was a wealthy one; e.g., 30 years earlier, when the city had been levelled by an earthquake it needed no outside aid to rebuild itself! Civic pride had spilled over into spiritual pride, and this pride had blinded them to their deep, spiritual need, thereby reducing the church to a state of spiritual uselessness before Christ. Christ therefore counsels them to admit their need for him—to see their true need—and to trust in Christ and his riches rather than continue relying on themselves, and their own abilities and resources (3:17); after all, Christ is the sovereign Lord, completely worthy of their trust (Rev 3:14). Christ thus urges them to repent—despite their terrible waywardness, he still loves them (Rev 3:19), and he desires to experience renewed spiritual intimacy with them (3:20) . . . Something, I’m sure, we all could use more of!
John’s vision will now move from the cities to the heavens.
Revelation: 2
Scholars have come up with different conclusions about the structure of Revelation. For the sake of personal convenience, I’m simply going to follow the one offered by some old profs of mine, Drs. Carson and Moo (and Leon Morris): the prologue (1:1-20), messages to the 7 churches (2:1-3:22), the vision of heaven (4:1-5:14), the 7 seals (6:1-8:5), the 7 trumpets (8:6-11:19), the 7 signs (12:1-14:20), the 7 bowls (15:1-16:21), the triumph of God (17:1-20:15), the new heaven and earth (21:1-22:5), and the epilogue (22:6-21).
The prologue opens with a brief introduction and salutation (1:1-8). As numerous commentators have noted, blessing awaits those who read (and hear—most people where illiterate in that day) this book and who do what it says (Rev 1:3). Similar to what James teaches (Jas 1:22, 25), it’s not simply a matter of reading God’s Word: it’s about doing God’s Word! Doing God’s Word gives evidence that you believe it to be true. In his salutation John offers tremendous words of praise to Jesus. In 1:5-8 he refers to him as the “faithful witness”, the “first-born from the dead” (cf. Col 1:15), the “ruler of the kings of the earth”, and the “alpha and omega . . . the Almighty” (cf. 1:17b). Lofty praise for a lofty God! Question: If Jesus wasn’t the 1st one born/raised from the dead, then in what way can he be called the “1st-born from the dead” (1:5a)?
In vv. 9-20 John receives a vision of Jesus that clearly forms the basis of the messages to the 7 churches (as we’ll see), and in some ways, it also forms the foundation for the rest of the book. John tells us that he received this revelation while he was in exile on Patmos Island. I once heard somebody say that John was there b/c the authorities tried to kill him (as they did the other Apostles) but he just wouldn’t die—so they did the next best thing: they got rid of him geographically! Remember in the previous blog entry I spoke of the 4 overarching themes in Revelation? Well they call coalesce in Rev 1:9: tribulation, kingdom, perseverance, and witness. John is a witness and messenger of these truths and he wants the church to follow his lead.
1 of the neat things about the book of Revelation is that is frequently uses the Old Testament. Most modern readers don’t realize this. Typically, we think that if a NT author uses the OT he cites it, e.g., Matt 1:22-23; Gal 4:30. While this is true it’s only part of the picture. B/c the NT authors were so steeped in the teaching, the language, and the traditions of the OT, often they’ll use the OT implicitly, without ever explicitly citing it, knowing that their audience will catch the allusion. Thus, for example, John 1:1 begins, “In the beginning”. Given what follows, viz., the Word was creating the universe (John 1:3), it’s clear that John, without explicitly invoking the OT text, is alluding to Gen 1:1, which also begins with, “In the beginning,” and continues with the story of creation. This type of thing happens all the time in the bible. Question: Why do you think NT authors do this? Some scholars believe that Revelation uses the OT more than any other NT book. If so, then clearly it uses it in this more implicit way. John’s use of the OT begins in his salutation in 1:7-8 and it continues in his vision of Jesus.
The picture of the risen Christ in John’s vision in 1:9-20 is awe-inspiring, to say the least. Clearly, Jesus didn’t’ look like this 60 years earlier—if he did, no one would have rejected him and everyone would have followed him from the beginning; or, he would have scared everyone off! As is the case with most of what you read in Revelation—like all other works of ancient apocalyptic literature—it is symbolic. Jesus is called the “son of man”—undoubtedly an allusion to the figure in Dan 7:13, who is worshiped as God. Jesus’ white hair would also allude to the same figure in Dan 7:9, and would symbolize his ancientness or eternality; consequently Jesus refers to himself as “the 1st and the last” (cf. John 1:1-2). Thus, Jesus is God! He wears a robe (not b/c he just woke up) and a girdle b/c he is our great high priest (cf. Heb 3:1), and in the bible priests wore priestly robes and girdles (see Exodus 39). Jesus’ fiery eyes symbolize his omniscience; this combined with his bronze feat (strength, stability), this thunderous voice (authoritative declarations), and sword-like tongue symbolize that Jesus is the Judge, who is willing, able, and divinely appointed to judge the whole world. Finally, the 7 lamp-stands and stars represent the Church: and Jesus holds His Church in his hand, and he also walks among the individual churches. He is thus always aware of everything that goes on in the church (good and bad), as we’ll see, and he protects his Church from evil: before it gets to the church it must pass through the hand of Jesus 1st! When Jesus speaks to each of the churches in chap. 2-3, he will do so by describing himself in terms of this vision, as we shall see . . .
Revelation: 1
Whenever I’ve asked different youth groups what book of the bible they want to study, their answer is always the same: Revelation (although it’s typically mispronounced “Revelations”—but there’s no “s” at the end). Clearly, it’s the most popular book but also probably the least understood. So, I think it’s worthwhile to spend at least a little time discussing some of the background of Revelation.
Revelation takes its name from Rev 1:1: “The revelation of Jesus Christ”. The Greek word for “revelation” is the one where we get our English word “apocalypse”: hence, the book is also known as the Apocalypse of John. To understand how Revelation works, you need to understand how its genre works. Remember many blog entries ago I talked about genre: the bible is full of different literary genres (e.g., gospel, poetry, letter), and every genre has its own set of rules for interpretation. So, for example, you wouldn’t read a narrative the way you would a poem, or vice versa. Question: Why not? Well, Revelation is an example of a genre called apocalyptic literature. Other ancient examples include: 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch (1 Enoch predates Revelation by a lot while the other two are approximately contemporaneous with it). If you read apocalyptic texts, they tend to read the same way—b/c they are, after all, the same genre.
There are a lot of different characteristics of apocalyptic literature and much could be said here, but I’ll simply outline the ideology and purpose of apocalyptic texts. In terms of ideology: apocalyptic literature presupposes the existence of angels and demons; they presuppose that history consists of divinely determined periods, that the End is imminent, that it will involve cosmic catastrophes as well as future salvation of the righteous, and that a coming messiah will play a crucial role in bringing about the End. Equally as important, the purpose of apocalyptic texts is to encourage a group that finds itself in serious crisis (typically, they are experiencing severe persecution from the authorities).
The upshot of the 2 preceding paragraphs is twofold. 1st, when interpreting Revelation you have to remember, it’s not a unique book in terms of its style, or in terms of its broader themes and beliefs (e.g., many of the motifs and much of the imagery of Revelation can also be found in 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch). 2nd, while its truths transcend time and place, John wrote it, in the 1st instance, to encourage believers who were undergoing increasingly intense persecution. He had these people in his mind and on his heart as he wrote every word. I say this b/c many Christians—especially the bible teachers you see on TV or hear on the radio who focus on the end times—ignore this latter point, and they make it sound as if John could have cared less about those 1st-century Christians (some of whom he knew personally), b/c he really cared about us Christians living today—and “us” really meaning Western Christians (Americans, Canadians, British), rather than all 21st-century Christians. Consequently, these folks offer a very Western-oriented interpretation of Revelation. Thus, a lot of the stuff they assert about Revelation is, hmm, to be polite about it, off!
In terms of authorship, Revelation was written by a Christian prophet named “John” (1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Conservatives believe that this John (a common name even then) was the same author as the one behind the anonymously written 4th Gospel, and the 3 letters. Other scholars believe that, while not the Apostle John, the author was nonetheless from his circle: hence, the styles, themes, and vocabulary are pretty similar. Regardless, John was probably a Palestinian Jew in background, as evidenced by, for example, his poor Greek (suggesting it was a 2nd or 3rd language for him), and by his familiarity with Jewish temple and cult. In terms of a date for Revelation, most scholars agree that its final form was composed near the end of Emperor Domitian’s reign, c. AD 95, at a time when Christians were being harshly persecuted by Roman officials. I say “final form” b/c the book likely also contains earlier traditions dating to the 60s, e.g., the use of “666” as a code for Nero. It was probably written for the churches residing in/around the region of Ephesus, based on the sequence of churches listed in chaps. 2-3 (I’ll say more about this in a later).
A basic outline of Revelation would be thus: prologue (1:1-3), letters to the local churches (1:4-3:22), visions of heaven (4:1-11:19), visions of earth (12:1-22:5), and epilogue (22:6-21). The major, overarching themes of the book are tribulation, perseverance, kingdom, and witness. Not only do these 4 words recur throughout the book, much of Revelation is a representation of the meaning these 4 words convey . . . As we shall see . . .
Jude
So what of this little letter, situated right next to the very last book of the bible?
Let me mention a few things regarding its social-historical background. In terms of authorship, conservative scholars maintain that it’s the brother of James (v. 1), i.e., another of Jesus’ step-brothers (cf. Matt 13:54-55). If this was the case than the letter could have been written as early as the 50s although I think most scholars from this camp would consider the letter to have been written by a disciple of Jude after this date: so some time in the 80s. If the letter was written pseudonymously, then scholars tend to date it to the 80s/90s. It’s difficult to ascertain the original audience of this letter, but it was probably a predominantly Jewish-Christian church living in predominantly Gentile surroundings, perhaps somewhere in Asia Minor. As for the occasion: Jude seeks to combat the influence of the false teachers who have invaded the church and, having rejected all moral and church authority, have sought to spread their incipient teaching of immorality.
The simplest outline of the letter would go something like this: opening and appeal (vv. 1-4), background for the appeal (vv. 5-19), the appeal and closing remarks (vv. 20-25).
1 of the reasons I find Jude’s letter neat is b/c of Jude 3: Jude essentially says, ‘uys, when I sat down to write this letter, I was planning to talk to you about our great salvation, but immediately the Holy Spirit led me in a different direction: to write to you to encourage you to fight for your faith’ (i.e., fight against false teachers and their heresies). It’s like God called an audible on Jude as he approached the line of scrimmage to write his letter! Consequently, rather than getting a letter sounding more like, say, Romans, we got what we now have.
Jude explains the reason why they need to fight for the faith by describing the spiritual lineage of the false teachers troubling his flock (vv. 5-19). Jude begins by describing how these people have snuck into the church yet and spread their doctrine of immorality (Jude 5). They believed and taught that sexual immorality was completely compatible with faith in Jesus (as some expressions of Gnosticism did). Question: How do you think they (or even some people today) attempt to rationalize a sexually immoral lifestyle as being “OK” for Christians?
Although they’ve snuck in and have seemingly become entrenched in the church, God will weed them out and deal with them—he has a proven history of doing so: God judged the angels who mated with humans (v. 6; cf. Gen 6:1-5), and he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their sexual misconduct (v. 7; cf. Gen 19). Jude clearly considers these fallen angels and S & G as the spiritual forerunners of the false teachers infecting his church. Not only do these heretics teach sexual license, they reject all matter of spiritual authority (vv. 8-9). They are thus ignorant (Jude 10), and will inevitably follow in the path of their spiritual ancestors before them: Cain, Balaam, and Korah (v. 11). Jude describes them as empty and void of any real substance (Jude 12); and their end—destruction—has been divinely appointed (vv. 13-15).
Not only has the bible outlined these people in advance, but the Apostles warned the churches that such people would arise within the church (Jude 17-18; cf. Acts 20:28-30; 1 Tim 4:1). Typically, these false teachers cause schisms in the church b/c of their worldliness (and their commitment to worldly values) and b/c they are in fact void of the Holy Spirit—i.e., they’re not Christian (Jude 19; cf. Rom 8:9)! Question: What do you think a “Christian” without the Holy Spirit would look like?
Having spent the bulk of his letter giving reasons for his appeal, he now closes out his letter with his appeal. Syntactically, the centre of his appeal is v. 21a: “Keep yourselves in the love of God.” The “love” he refers to is the love of fellowship not God’s elective love (which is mentioned in Jude 1). God’s elective love is unconditional—a true child of God can never be cut off from this; but fellowship love is conditional: if you screw around, God, for his part, gets angry and disciplines you (cf. Heb 12:6), while you, for your part, can no longer hear or feel God—b/c you’re out of fellowship with him (cf. Isa 59:1-2)! Question: What are some other symptoms that a Christian is out of fellowship with God?
The surrounding clauses modify the main command. In other words, how do you keep yourself in the love of God? You do this by: building yourself up in your faith (v. 20a), praying in the Spirit (v. 20b), and anxiously looking ahead to and living in light of Jesus’ 2nd Coming (v. 21b). Additionally, believers must help those who are struggling with false teaching (vv. 22-23). For varying reasons, some people find it easy to discern and jettison false teaching while others do not (what might some of those reasons be?): so have mercy but be cautious (cf. Gal 6:1). But while we are responsible to “keep” ourselves in God’s love, ultimately, God is the one who “keeps” us in his love (v. 24). In other words, b/c God keeps us there we can keep ourselves there (cf. 1 John 4:10, 19).
Next up: the “end.”
2 & 3 John
Since 2 and 3 John are so short I’ll survey each in this 1 blog entry.
2 John is the 2nd shortest text of the NT (3 John is the shortest). As we’re about to see, 2 John largely reinforces the teaching of 1 John. Some of the more common words in 2 John include “love”, “truth”, “abide”, and “commandment”—words which should sound familiar since they appear frequently in 1 John.
Unlike 1 John, which has no self-ID, the author of 2 John identifies himself as the “elder”; and he addresses the “chosen lady and her children” (v. 1)—in other words, likely a sister congregation to the one addressed in 1 John (cf. 2 John 13).
John is pleased that, despite the schism described in 1 John, these believers continue to follow Jesus faithfully. Therefore, he urges them to love each other (2 John 5-6), for love flows naturally from obedience b/c loving others is part of what it means to be obedient to Christ. By loving each other the believers will distinguish themselves from the spirit of deception at work in the world—a spirit that denies the person of Jesus Christ (2 John 7). Deceivers and false teachers distinguish themselves by “going too far” in their teaching (2 John 9). In other words, they might begin well, but they finish badly; and it’s how you finish that counts (cf. 1 Cor 9:24-27; Phil 3:12-14; Jas 1:12)! John admonishes the believers not to allow such people into their “house”—“house” here means church (remember: early Christians often met in homes, e.g., Rom 16:5). So, having someone like this over to your home for the purpose of evangelizing/debating them would be OK; but in no way should they ever be allowed to preach/teach in a small group or church setting. Question: Why not?
Now for 3 John. Unlike 1 & 2 John, which are addressed to groups of people, 3 John is addressed to a single person: Gaius (somewhat similar to Paul’s shortest letter, Philemon, which IDs specific recipients). Now, I’ve heard many a “prosperity” teacher (aka “health & wealth,” “name it and claim it”, “blab it and grab it”) use 3 John 2 as “proof” that it’s God’s will that Christians should always be rich and healthy. Unfortunately, (but predictably), these folks ignore (N.B. “ignore”, the verb form of “ignorant”) the historical background to the NT and to Graeco-Roman letter writing in particular, b/c if they didn’t, they would never arrive at such a cock-&-bull interpretation of the verse (that’s 1 of the reasons why I did so many blog entries on the social-historical background of the NT [e.g., “NT Origins”]). The wishful greeting of v. 2 is exactly that: a wishful greeting—a completely common place feature of Graeco-Roman letter writing, especially when writing letters to individuals.
Similar to 2 John, John is glad to hear that Gaius continues to walk faithfully according to the truth (3 John 3-5). He has also been faithful to support missionaries in their evangelistic ventures—something, John says, everyone should do (vv. 6-8). But unlike Gaius, who faithfully receives missionaries, Diotrephes not only rejects them, he actually tries to kick them out of the church (3 John 9-10)! Clearly, Diotrephes “has not seen God” (v. 11), meaning, his actions betray a heart of unbelief: he is not a Christian! By way of contrast, Demetrius is committed to doing good and is therefore “of God” (vv. 11-12), i.e., he belongs to God/is true follower of Christ. Demetrius, then, is worthy of emulation, while Diotrephes—who obviously would love to be imitated and followed—is not. I find it interesting that John publicly names names. Question: Is there a place today for publicly naming names from the pulpit?
Next up: the next to last book of the bible.
1 John: 2
Many of John’s community departed from the faith (2:19) having been led astray by the false, Gnostic teachers (1 John 2:26). Gnostics taught that in order to be truly saved you needed—their secret teachings, for no one else knew the secrets of salvation. John flatly denies this in 1 John 2:27. He does not mean here that teachers aren’t needed in the church—that is, after all, what the Apostles were and how God designed the church (Eph 4:11-12). Rather, what he means is that believers don’t need the “secret teachings” the Gnostic leaders are selling!
The largest section of letter is 3:1-5:13, where he instructs his followers in how to live as children of God. It is by God’s love that believers are being transformed into the likeness of Jesus (3:1-3). Notice: this transformation is a process: it begins at conversion and continues throughout the life of the believer, finally culminating at Jesus’ 2nd Coming (1 John 3:2). Rather than leave this thought in the abstract, John describes Christ-likeness is practical terms. Being like Jesus means that believers don’t practice sin or unrighteousness (3:4-9). This does not mean that Christians never sin—it means that sinful behaviour or lifestyles does not characterize them. To be brutally honest and crystal clear: take Charlie “Tiger Blood” Sheen, for example. He could claim to be a follower of Jesus, but his lifestyle would clearly betray the truth in his heart—that God is simply not there (1 John 3:9). Being like Jesus means that believers love rather than hate their fellow brothers/sisters—for hatred is actually indicative of unbelief (3:10-15). For John, biblical love is not a feeling but an action: self-sacrifice in order to meet the needs of others (1 John 3:16-18). To love others is to fulfil Jesus’ commandments (3:23-24).
True believers become like Jesus because they are “born of God”, that is to say: the Almighty, Triune God lives inside of them through the Holy Spirit. As Jesus said, many confess “Lord, Lord,” but not every confessor is a true believer (Matt 7:21-23); all such confessors are false believers. 1 of the traits of false believers is their errant view of Jesus; e.g., they don’t believe that Jesus actually came in the flesh (1 John 4:2-3). There was a range of Gnostic beliefs in this regard: some believed that Jesus’ human form was not real flesh and blood—it only looked real (kind of like an ancient hologram); other believed that the “Christ” was not a person but only a spirit who came upon a person (Jesus). For John, both these and similar sort of views are categorically wrong! Hence, it’s imperative that believers test and discern which teachers and leaders teach the truth and which ones teach lies (1 John 4:1).
Now back to love (4:7-21): John states that believers love because God himself is love (4:8). Thus, to be “born of God” is to be born of his love. The supreme illustration of the kind and the magnitude of God’s love is the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross (1 John 4:9-10). This supreme act forms the basis of our love for others (4:11). Our love for people is not supposed to be based on our own, personal love for them, or based on their worthiness to be loved by us. No. Our love for other people is squarely based on God’s love for us (1 John 4:19)—something Jesus taught time and again (e.g., Matt 18:21-35). Not to love in this way and yet still claim to be a Christian, only makes you a liar (1 John 4:20).
B/c true believers are born of God they can overcome the world and all of its entrapments (1 John 5:4; 4:4). Being born of God—i.e., being a true believer—depends on faith in Jesus (5:4). Good works never justify someone before God; only faith in Christ (good works come as a result of faith in Christ). Faith in Jesus depends on a right confession or understanding of Jesus: believing that he is nothing less than the Son of God, that he came by water and blood (i.e., he came in the flesh), that the Spirit of God testifies of him, and that he alone possesses eternal life (5:5-12).
In concluding his letter, John assures his community of a number of things. 1st, he assures them of their salvation (1 John 5:13); those who left the church were not saved, but those who remain are. 2nd, he assures them of answered prayer (1 John 5:14-15). Question: According to John, what ultimately determines answered prayer? Are there other factors? Finally, he assures them once again of the correct understanding of Jesus: he is the Son of God, he is the (one) true God, and he is eternal life (1 John 5:20); anything less than that is sheer idolatry (5:21).
Next up: John’s littler letters.
1 John: 1
1 John is part of what NT scholars refer to as the “Johannine Corpus”—texts thought to be written by the Apostle John (and/or 1 of his disciples)—the other texts being the Gospel of John, the letters of 2 and 3 John, and Revelation.
This body of texts was written within a 10-15 year period. In terms of the socal-historical background, mainstream Johannine scholars tend to understand the history of the Johannine community like this. Originally, the community was a group of Palestinian Jews who became believers and followers of Jesus. In time, however, unbelieving Jews opposed the group (b/c of Jewish Christians’ view of Jesus), and sought to expel them from their synagogues (where they were still meeting). Some of the believers reacted against this threat by concealing their views of Jesus, and so continued to worship in the synagogues; others reacted strongly against unbelieving Jews and began to view them with extreme hostility. This was the situation at the time the Gospel was penned. By the time the letters were written, a segment of the Johannine community had rejected the larger Johannine community and gone their own, separate way. 1 John, then, is an open treatise directed to the whole assembly written to convince the congregation to remain true to John’s teaching. 2 John is a letter to the community written to reinforce 1 John; and 3 John is a personal letter written to an individual to help that person deal with the continuing conflict.
In terms of authorship, while only Revelation explicitly claims Johannine authorship (Rev 1:1), the close similarities between these 5 texts suggest that “John” stands behind the others as well. What kind of similarities, you ask? Well, if you were to sit down and read all 5 texts consecutively you would see similar motifs: light—darkness, truth—lie, new—old commandments, “abiding” (in Christ), and “witness”/“testimony”; and similar vocabulary: words/expressions like “word”, “love”, “life”, “true”/“truth”, “children of God”, “born of God”, “believe”/“faith”, and “knowledge”/“know”. Still, there are some important differences—but I’ll leave that to you to find!
Perhaps the simplest outline of the letter would be: introduction (1:1-4), living in the light (1:5-2:29), living as children of God (3:1-5:13), and concluding remarks (5:14-21). OK, so let’s follow the flow of John’s thought.
Right from the introduction, John puts Jesus front and centre (1:1-4). 1 of if not the chief reason members of John’s community left the fold was over Jesus, viz., the nature of his incarnation. Those who left doubted, on the 1 hand, that Jesus actually came in the flesh, i.e., the body he had was not real but only appeared to be real. Later theologians came to call this belief Docetism, which part of Gnosticism—a strand of Christianity that espoused secret, revelatory knowledge. John counters this false view by asserting the physicality of the Christ event: John, as well as others, not only heard and saw Jesus with their physical ears and eyes, they actually touched his body with their physical hands (1 John 1:1; cf. John 20:27-29). On the other hand, those who left disputed the deity of Jesus (as Gnosticism does). Again, John rebuffs this notion: Jesus is the eternal life (there can only be 1), and he was with God the Father in eternity past, i.e., like the Father, Jesus is eternal (1 John 1:2; cf. John 1:1-2).
John continues to affirm Christ’s deity and reveal its implications in the next section of the letter (living in the light [1:5-2:29]). John states that God is light, without a single spot of darkness (1 John 1:5). In other words, God is perfectly morally pure and is unstained by sin. Consequently, those who have genuine fellowship with God will walk in his light, i.e., in moral purity (1 John 1:6). Jesus shed his blood to cleanse believers from their sins (1 John 1:7). To deny that we have any sin problem whatsoever is to deny the work of Christ—who is God (1:8-10). Hence, to appropriate Jesus’ cleansing sacrifice for the sins we commit, we need simply to confess our sin to God (1:9). Question: Is there a different between confessing our sins to God and repenting of our sins?
John goes on to delineate briefly some of the entailments of Jesus’ cross work. Because of who Jesus is and what he accomplished on the cross, he is our Advocate (2:1) in other words, in the courtroom of God’s justice Jesus is our high-powered, undefeated attorney who represents us before God the Judge (hallelujah for that!). Jesus’ sacrifice served to propitiate God (2:2), that is to say, his sacrifice turned away God’s holy wrath. The OT (as well as Revelation) paints a fearful picture of the fierce wrath of God. Paul says we needed saving from God’s wrath (Rom 5:9), and Jesus did exactly that with his sacrifice on the cross. Hallelujah!
The word “know” pops up repeatedly in this little letter. “Know” in the bible, particularly as it relates to people and God, is quite different from how we typically use “know”. For us, “know” essentially means “to know about”; in the bible, however—especially as far as John is concerned—“know” means to “know personally and experientially”. John teaches that true knowledge of God, i.e., to know God personally and experientially, invariably leads to a virtuous life; and Christian virtue manifests in keeping God’s Word (1 John 2:3-6), and loving fellow Christians (2:7-11). Many people claim to know God, but, judging from the lives they lead, they only know about God—they don’t know him personally or experientially. Consequently, they disobey God’s Word (2:4), their heart is full of hatred for (some) Christians (1 John 2:9), they love the things of the world more than they love God (2:15-16); they even walk away from the truth (1 John 2:19), or as Paul says, they’ve shipwrecked their faith. Not surprisingly, immoral behaviour is preceded by false beliefs about Jesus: these “believers” deny that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22), and by thus, they show that God is not in/with them (1 John 2:23). Question: Does John view these “believers” as Christians who lost their salvation or as people who were never truly saved in the first place?
These motifs will carry through into the next section of John’s letter, as we’ll see.