Lesson 4
The Terminology
The “millennium” refers to the 1000 years mentioned in
Revelation 20:4, where it is described not as a reign of
Christ but rather as a reign with Christ.
“Premillennialism” takes the 1000 year period literally
and teaches that the return of Christ will occur prior to
the millennium (hence the “pre” in its name).
“Postmillennialism” takes the 1000 year period literally
and teaches that the return of Christ will occur after the
millennium (hence the “post” in its name). Under this view,
the final coming of Christ would be preceded by a 1000 year
period of peace. Understandably, this view is not very
popular anymore. (Alexander Campbell’s Millennial Harbinger
was post-millennial.)
“Amillennialism” takes the 1000 year period
figuratively, noting that it a power of 10, which denotes
completeness.
The first thing we should note about premillennialists
is that they base almost their entire understanding of the
Bible (by their own admission!) on one verse from
Revelation 20! Remember, we should interpret difficult to
understand verses by using easy to understand verses — and
their are many easy to understand verses that prove
premillennialism false.
Brief review of the tenets of premillennialism
(1) The Restoration of the Levitical Priesthood
Premillennialists teach that the Levitical priesthood is
going to be restored during the millennium. This view
arises from a misinterpretation of Ezekiel 44.
But what does the Bible say?
The role of the Levitical priests was to offer the
sacrifices for sin that were demanded by the Law of Moses.
Jesus’ perfect sacrifice put these people out of business
permanently (Hebrews 10:12, 18).
The Levitical system was imperfect, weak, and useless
(Hebrews 7:11, 18) and was set aside by Jesus Christ
(Hebrews 7:18).
The coming of reality in Jesus Christ meant that the
shadow of the Levitical system was removed forever.
(Premillennialists say that all of the shadows will
return.)
Further, Jesus could not be a priest if the Levitical
system were still functioning. Under the Law of Moses
(Numbers 18), only Aaron’s sons could be priests. The Law
of Moses and the Levitical system cannot be separated—one
cannot exist without the other (Hebrews 7:12). In addition,
the old and new covenants cannot coexist (Romans 7:1–6).
The first covenant was taken away so that the second could
be established (Hebrews 10:9–10). Jesus cannot be priest on
earth under the Levitical system (Hebrews 8:4).
(2) The Restoration of the Sacrificial System
Premillennialists teach that bloody sacrifices for sin
will be restored during the millennium. This view arises
from a misinterpretation of Ezekiel 43–45 and Zechariah
14.
But what does the Bible say?
Animal sacrifices were never able to cleanse the soul.
They simply shadowed the coming sacrifice that would
provide true cleansing. Jesus’ sacrifice was all
sufficient. His perfect once-for-all sacrifice meant that
future sacrifices were unnecessary (Hebrews 10:17–18).
Those who have remission of sin have no further need of
sacrifice.
The premillennial view undermines the sufficiency of
Christ’s sacrificial atonement. Paul wrote in Galatians
2:21 that “if justification were through the Law, then
Christ died to no purpose.”
(3) The New Covenant is not in force now
Premillennialists teach that the new covenant of
Jeremiah 31:31ff is not yet in force and that it will not
come into force until the millennium. Walvoord says that
the new covenant applies only to Israel and has no relation
with this present age.
But what does the Bible say?
In Luke 22:20 Jesus says “this cup is the new covenant
in my blood.”
In Hebrews 9:15 we read that Jesus is the mediator of a
new covenant.
In 2 Corinthians 3:5–6 Paul writes that “our sufficiency
is from God; who also made us sufficient as ministers of a
new covenant.”
The problem of sin is the motivation behind both
covenants. The new covenant provides forgiveness through
the blood of Christ. Walvoord claims that Christ’s blood
produced two new covenants.
The new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is the covenant that we
are under today. This covenant provides salvation and
forgiveness through the blood of Christ and there is no
need for any other covenant.
Premillennialists have trouble explaining the need for
their theories. Either Christ is all sufficient or he is
not. If he is, then why do we need the restoration of the
Old Testament shadows?
(4) Jesus is not presently ruling over Israel
Premillennialists deny the complete Lordship of Jesus.
They insist he is not presently ruling over Israel.
Walvoord and Lindsey both claim that although Jesus has
the right to rule the earth, he is not exercising that
authority at this time. For proof they point to the mess
that the world is in.
But what does the Bible say?
Psalm 29:10 reminds us that God reigned (and rained!) at
the time of the flood even though the world was in a mess
at the time.
Paul told the Ephesians in Ephesians 1:21 that Jesus is
“far above all rule and authority and power and dominion”
in this age. In Revelation 2:26–27 Jesus claims to have
already been given the authority over nations that was
prophesied in Psalm 2:8–9. In Revelation 1:5 we see that
Jesus is the ruler of the kings of the earth.
Psalm 110 depicts Jesus as sitting at God’s right hand
and ruling in the midst of his enemies. This passage is
quoted many times in the New Testament as having been
already fulfilled. What does Walvoord say? He claims that
although Psalm 110:1 and Psalm 110:4 have been fulfilled,
the remaining verses in Psalm 110 have not been
fulfilled.
What is the Extreme Preterist Approach?
The Extreme Preterist Approach is also called Realized
Eschatology, the 70 A.D. Theory, or Max Kingism. I
generally will not spend too much time on what could be
called “crackpot” theories, but since this one originated
in the Lord’s church, I think we should spend some time
discussing it.
Max King claims that although the kingdom came on the
day of Pentecost following the ascension of Christ, it did
not come with power and glory until A.D. 70. Max King
claims that the event commonly referred to today as the
“second coming of Christ” has already happened, and it
occurred with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Max King claims that both the Christian and Jewish
faiths were in operation from the day of Pentecost until
A.D. 70. When the temple was destroyed, the church (the
body) was resurrected—it had been buried under Judaism for
40 years.
Max King claims that there is no resurrection of the
body and that Christ will never return to claim his people.
All prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70 and there is not a
single prophecy that has not been fulfilled.
It is tempting to disregard this as just so much
nonsense, but we should be careful. First, there are many
sincere members of the church who have been lead astray by
this false doctrine, and I personally know of two
congregations that have been divided because of it. Max
Kingism denies several of the basic tenets of the Christian
faith; namely, the resurrection of the body and the final
judgment.
So that we can confront it when (and if) we see it, I
want to quickly go over several key reasons why this
approach is wrong.
Its biggest mistake is that it violates one of the
interpretive rules we discussed earlier: Similarity of
language does not prove identity of subject. There are many
judgments in the Bible (Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, Edom,
Jerusalem, Rome, and the final judgment), but the same
language is used to describe each. King focuses on the
Jerusalem judgment in the New Testament and assumes that
all judgment language refers to it.
We often confuse the judgments ourselves, and King
exploits this to get his foot in the door. I will be the
first to admit that many passages that we often take to
refer to the end of the world actually refer to the end of
Jerusalem. (Matthew 24:1-34, for example.) However, this
does not mean that all such verses refer to the end of
Jerusalem. (Our confusion sometimes causes us to think that
the apostles mistakenly thought that Jesus was going to
come again within their lifetimes. The apostles were not
mistaken about the date of Christ’s return! They were
inspired by God!)
Max Kingism is based on the premise that the focus of
Revelation is the fall of Jerusalem. This idea is contrary
to all of the evidence — both internal and external — and
is one of its weakest links.
There are numerous verses that can be used to respond to
this false view. Acts 1:11, for example, tells us that
Jesus will return in the same manner as he left. 1
Corinthians 11:26 tells us that the communion proclaims the
Lord’s death until he comes. 1 Corinthians 15:25–26 tells
us that death will be destroyed when Christ returns. 2
Timothy 2:17–18 reminds us that those who deny the
resurrection can overthrow people’s faith, and sadly that
has happened with Max King and his followers. And we could
go on and on.
God’s word is not decided by majority vote, but we
should be concerned when we come up with something that no
one has ever thought of before. Novel theories about the
Bible are generally wrong theories about the Bible. Max
Kingism is such a theory.
What is the Preterist or Contemporary Historical
Approach?
The Preterist or Contemporary Historical Approach
applies the book primarily (or completely) to the conflict
between the Church and Rome.
Some taking this approach apply the book to the conflict
between the Church and Jerusalem, but that theory is
seriously flawed. The villain in this book is Rome, not
Jerusalem. We will see why as we work our way through the
text, but let’s pause to consider one reason right now.
A coin minted during the reign of Vespasian (the time
when Revelation was written) depicts the goddess Roma
sitting upon the seven hills that surrounded the city of
Rome. Chapter 17 depicts the villain in Revelation as a
bloodthirsty harlot sitting upon seven hills. If you lived
in the first century, if you had that Roman coin in your
pocket, and if you read Revelation 17, who would you think
John was writing about? How could there be any answer other
than Rome?
The preterist approach does not violate John’s claim
that the prophecies in Revelation were to come to pass
shortly. This approach makes the book meaningful to its
initial readers in that it gives comfort and assurance of
victory to those being persecuted. According to this
approach the book is not primarily eschatological— that is,
it is not primarily concerned with the end of the world,
but is instead concerned with the end of Rome.
The remainder of the course will provide an extended
description of this approach.
Can We Be Certain About Anything in Revelation?
Chesterton: “What we suffer from today is humility in
the wrong place. Modesty has moved from the organ of
ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction;
where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be
doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth;
this has been exactly reversed. . . . We are on the road to
producing a race of man too mentally modest to believe in
the multiplication table.”
One must be careful about presenting dogmatic answers to
anything about Revelation. However, several points should
be made in this regard:
-
It is possible to make some dogmatic assertions
about what this books says. The third verse of the book
says that those who read and understand this book will
be blessed. Clearly, God meant for us to understand
this book. Just because we can’t be dogmatic about
everything does not mean we can be dogmatic about
nothing.
-
We must have an open mind—but as Chesterton observed
an open mind is only good when it clamps down on
something solid.
At times, however, we will have to settle for presenting
several different interpretations, each of which could be
true. Our inability at times to state with certainty what
something means does not mean that we cannot state with
certainty what it does not mean. In fact, on occasion we
may find ourselves proceeding by the process of
elimination.
Many of the Old Testament prophecies had dual
fulfillments–one that was immediate and one that was
fulfilled later by Christ. In our study, we will seek to
explain the immediate fulfillment without denying that
there may be some secondary meaning. One should be careful
however in this regard since secondary meanings are much
harder to identify since such meanings generally have
little to do with the immediate context of the book.
Is Revelation Relevant?
This book deals with the persecution of God’s people by
government authorities. Is this relevant today? Are
Christians facing persecution today? They certainly are
outside of the U.S.A. Is it possible inside the U.S.A.?
Those who don’t think that the tide has changed in this
country have not been watching the tides! Politicians used
to align themselves with Christian positions in order to
get elected. Now they oppose those Christian positions in
order to get elected.
Could we face government sponsored persecution here? Not
all government opposition to religion is as blatant as the
former Soviet Union, which actually distributed booklets in
the 30’s entitled Teach Yourself to be Godless. But here,
freedom of religion has become freedom from religion.
In Europe, a preacher was jailed for simply proclaiming
what the Bible has to say about homosexuality. Could that
ever happen here? Could Christians ever be prosecuted for
violating so-called hate crime laws?
Before World War II, Germany was the virtually unmatched
fertile soil for religious worship, theology, sacred music,
and evangelism. It was the birthplace of Luther and the
Reformation. Even today, German is a required language for
those seeking advanced theological degrees. The peaceful
Amish and the Mennonites are of German origin. As we know,
the scene in Germany changed rapidly in just a short period
of time, and it did so because of economic turmoil.
Hitler’s rise to power can be traced directly the stock
market crash in the U.S. If you ever wonder whether the
love of money really is the root of all evil, I encourage
you to study the history of Hitler’s rise to power.
We tend to see the church and the government in the same
way that the early church saw themselves and Rome. What can
we do? The church is so small and the government is so
powerful? The church is more important and more powerful
than the U.S. government! We make a mistake when we look to
the government for our salvation—it has no salvation to
give. The government should be looking to the church and
not vice versa. We have God on our side! We have the power
of prayer on our side! We need to see the world as God sees
the world!
If the book does not appear very relevant today then
perhaps we should be thankful that such is the case.
Perhaps our prayer should be that this book not become very
relevant to us.
Chapter One
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to
show to his servants what must soon take place; and he made
it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who
bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of
Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. 3 Blessed is he who
reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are
those who hear, and who keep what is written therein; for
the time is near.
We are about to proceed through the text a few verses at
a time, and we should recall the truism that dissection is
not infrequently the death of beauty. If this book is an
oil painting from God (as it is sometimes described) then
we need to do more than just analyze each individual
brushstroke. We need to keep the entire painting in mind,
and we need to frequently step back so we can see the
entire painting.
Verse 1 tells us that the revelation in this book was
from Christ, that it was received by John, and that it
concerns things that must soon take place. Many “liberal”
commentaries reject the notions that this revelation is
from Christ and that John received and recorded it, and the
“conservative” commentaries rightly castigate them for
disbelieving the opening words of the book they purport to
explain. But many of those same “conservative” commentaries
then proceed to ignore the equally clear statement in the
same opening verse that this revelation concerns things
that must soon take place! Why don’t we just believe ALL of
verse 1?
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ” means that the
Revelation is given by Jesus Christ, not that it is a
Revelation about Jesus Christ, although it certainly does
have much to tell us about Jesus Christ.
The Greek word for Revelation is Apokalupsis where “Apo”
means “away from” and “kalupsis” means a “veiling.” Thus,
the Revelation is an unveiling. The message of the book is
not hidden or veiled, but rather is unveiled. It may have
formerly been a mystery, but no longer. This book unveils
the struggles through which the church would pass and
unveils its ultimate triumph under Christ.
This same word translated “revelation” is used elsewhere
in the Bible but is used only here in this book. In
Galatians 1:11—12, we see that Paul received the gospel by
apokalupsis from Jesus Christ. In Galatians 2:2, Paul says
that he went up to Jerusalem “by Revelation” to preach. See
also 1 Corinthians 14:6 and Ephesians 1:17.
The story of the Bible is one of revelation, with the
ultimate revelation being Jesus’ perfect revelation of the
Father. In John 14:9, Jesus said, “Have I been with you so
long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen
me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the
Father’?” In God the Father there is no Christ-unlikeness!
If you want to know how God the Father would react to
something or someone, look in the gospels to see how Jesus
reacted. When you see Jesus, you see the Father. He reveals
him perfectly.
It is a wonderful and comforting thought to know that
God reveals. God wants to us know; He wants us to
understand; He is not in the business of hiding things from
us. Men, by contrast, try to hide from God as in the
Garden, and they try to hide their evil deeds. When Christ
comes, he will “bring to light the hidden things of
darkness.” (1 Corinthians 4:5) In Revelation 6:15, we will
find people who say to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on
us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the
throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.” God reveals; Man
hides. What a contrast!
As we have already noted, the time frame given here is
crucial to understanding the book. John was shown things
that must “soon take place” in verse 1 and was told that
the time is near in verse 3. In other contexts, the
interpretation of those clear statements would present no
difficulty, and yet here for some reason they are almost
universally ignored and rejected.
The Greek word eggus meaning near or soon is used in
verse 3 (and in 22:10). Here are some other verses in the
New Testament where that same Greek word is used:
• Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig
tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth
leaves, ye know that summer is nigh. 33 So likewise ye,
when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near,
even at the doors.
Matthew 26:18 And he said, Go into the city to such a
man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at
hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my
disciples.
John 2:13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and
Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
Romans 10:8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee,
even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of
faith, which we preach.
Ephesians 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes
were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. ... 17
And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and
to them that were nigh.
Philippians 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all
men. The Lord is at hand.
Again, the usage of the term elsewhere seems clear.
Under what theory of interpretation should we take an
opposite meaning when the word is used here in verse 3? The
time is near! It is not far off! Those who pride themselves
in interpreting each word of the Bible literally should
start with this word!
The things in this book “must” take place. God has
spoken and Rome has been judged. Those judgments must now
take place.
In verse 3, a blessing is given to those who read and
keep the book. This book is meant to be understood!
Otherwise that blessing is just an empty promise!
In fact, there are seven blessings in this book:
• Those who read, hear, and obey are blessed in verse
3.
• Those who die in the Lord are blessed in 14:13.
• Those who are awake and watchful are blessed in
16:15.
• Those who are invited to the marriage supper of the
Lamb are blessed in 19:9.
• Those who share in the first resurrection are blessed
in 20:6.
• Those who keep the words of this book are blessed in
22:7.
• Those who do what God commands are blessed in
22:14.
There are a remarkable number of “hidden sevens” in this
book. By one count there are 29 different words that occur
precisely seven times in this book. The word “signified”
(“made it known”) in verse 1 is one such word, and it is
also a clear link to the gospel of John, which uses the
same word repeatedly to describe the miracles of
Christ.
Notice that John refers to “he” who reads and “those”
who hear. Typically, a public reader would have read the
revelation in front of an assembly, and in doing so, both
were blessed. I think there are some lessons here for us.
First, we know the importance of public Bible reading. (1
Timothy 4:13) But, second, the readings are intended to be
a blessing for both the reader and the listeners! Sometimes
our readers seem so bored with what they themselves are
reading that I wonder how any blessing can flow from their
dull monotone to what seems to be an equally bored group of
listeners! How can the word of Almighty God be boring? And
yet we sometimes make it appear so.
It is a great privilege to hear God’s word read in our
own language. Not everyone enjoys this privilege. The
scripture reading is one of the most important parts of our
worship service, but like every part of our worship we need
to give it our very best. The secret to spiritual renewal
is time with God’s word.
4 John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to
you and peace from him who is and who was and who is to
come, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne,
5 and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the
first-born of the dead, and the ruler of kings on
earth.
The seven churches addressed here and in Chapters 2-3
were not the only churches in Asia. In particular, Colossae
(Col. 1:2), Hierapolis (Col. 4:13), Troas (2 Corinthians
2:12; Acts 20:5), and Miletus (Acts 20:17) also had
congregations. Why then single out these seven?
Some suggest that these seven churches were the centers
of seven postal districts. Others feel that John must have
had some special relationship with these seven churches.
Still others feel that since the number seven is used 54
times in this book in a manner that often depicts
perfection or completeness, this may have been John’s way
of addressing the book to all churches. I think the latter
is most likely.
Next Lesson
