Revelation Bible Study

Introduction 3

1. Four Different Views a Balance of Symbolism and Literalism

a. Its clear that there are some things meant to be understood literally and some
things meant to be understood symbolically in Revelation.
b. Each of the four schools of thought regarding Revelation has a different
understanding of the symbols, what they mean, which ones are literal, etc.

2. Historicist
a. This view teaches that the book of Revelation is a sort of symbolic history of the
whole course of Christian history from Johns day until the return of Jesus
b. Most popular view throughout history
i. Until late 1800s, almost every Protestant had this view
1. Now, only the Seventh Day Adventists hold to a modified Historicist
view
ii. All the Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Wycliffe, Huss, etc.) had this view
iii. Most major English commentators (Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, etc.) had
this view
iv. It was known as the Protestant view of Revelation
c. Oldest view
i. We dont know what the first Christians thought
ii. Our first commentaries are from 3rd century and are an early form of
Historicism
d. Basic Beliefs
i. Seven seals = fall of the Roman Empire in the West to the barbarian hordes
ii. Seven trumpets = fall of the Roman Empire in the East to Islam
1. 5th trumpet = Muslim hordes attacking Constantinople
iii. Seven bowls of wrath = aspects of the French Revolution
iv. The Beast (Revelation 13) is the pope
e. Day = Year Rule
i. When John writes 1 day, it really means 1 year
1. Locusts afflict men for 5 months (150 days), which correlates to 150
years of attacks from Muslims in Constantinople
2. Beasts blasphemy is 1260 days (meaning 1260 years), which
correlates to the Papacy arising in 600 AD and ending in 1860 AD.
Oops, but it didnt end in 1860, which led to most Christians
abandoning this view in the late 1800s.
ii. OT Evidence: spies in Canaan for 40 days, Israel wandered for 40 years
Ezekiel lay on one side for 390 days and then the other for 40 days,
representing a year of Gods judgment for each day
f. No Support Now
i. Almost no one (except Adventists) believes this view now, after the papacy
didnt fall in 1860
g. Strengths
i. There are some very strong correlations between the Fall of the Roman
Empire and the book of Revelation.
h. Weaknesses
i. Predictions about the papacy in 1860 didnt come true
 ii. The Day = Year rule is pretty arbitrary
i. Catholic Response
i. Obviously Catholics wouldnt have this view, so in their search for an
argument against Historicism, they promoted both Futurism and Preterism

3. Preterist
a. This view teaches that everything in Revelation has been fulfilled in the past
i. Preterists dont all agree about all the details about what parts mean what
past events
ii. Main Preterist view today says that it is about the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD
iii. One Preterist view says the first half (ch. 4-11) is about the fall of Jerusalem
and the second half (ch. 12-19) is about the fall of Rome
b. Relationship with Matthew 24 (Olivet Discourse)
i. A literal reading of Matthew 24 would be about the fall of Jerusalem and the
destruction of the Temple in that generation
ii. Revelation and Matthew 24 have much in common
iii. Mark and Luke have their versions of Matthew 24, but John has none. Why
not? Perhaps because he had already written the book of Revelation, which is
about the same thing
c. Fall of Jerusalem is a significant point in Gods history with mankind
i. God created a new covenant and therefore the old is obsolete (Hebrews
8:13). The destruction of the Temple and the fall of Jerusalem were signs of
the end of the old covenant.
ii. Jesus described the siege of Jerusalem as being so important that it would
fulfill all that was written (Luke 21)
iii. The Jewish religion and the system of sacrifices, etc. were exactly the same
for 1400 years. That was the way God ordained for worship to happen.
1. And suddenly in 70 AD, everything changed.
2. The fall of Jerusalem marked the clear end of one way God was doing
things and the beginning of a new way, a clear finish to the old
covenant that had held firm for 1400 years
d. The date of writing is crucial
i. If its written in 96 AD, then Revelation doesnt predict the fall of Jerusalem in
70 AD
ii. If its written in Neros day (before 68 AD), then it could be predicting the fall
e. Revelation emphasizes that the time is soon
i. Many times Revelation urges its readers that the events are going to be
fulfilled very soon
1. Revelation 1:1 things which must shortly take place
2. Revelation 1:3 the time is near
3. Revelation 1:19 write the things which you have seen and the things
which are, and the things which are about to take place (Greek says
about though most modern translations say shall)
ii. Mark of the Beast is 666
1. John says that wise readers should understand who the Beast is, based
on his number (Revelation 13:18), so he must have been someone
alive and known at the time of the readers
iii. Revelation 22:10 The angel tells John not to seal the words of the prophecy,
for the time is at hand
1. This is very different from what the angel told Daniel, when he said to
seal the book because the time had not yet come (Daniel 12:4,9)
 2. According to 1 Peter 1:10-12, Daniels prophecy was about the birth of
the church
3. Daniel was writing about things that would happen in 500-600 years,
and the angel told him, Seal it up because its not for this time. So if
500-600 years is long enough to seal a message, the fact that the
angel told John to not seal it because the time was at hand would imply
that its fulfillment would be sooner than in 500-600 years.
a. It wouldnt make sense for the angel to say, Dont seal it
because things will happen soon, if he meant it would be in
more than 2000 years.
4. Maybe the things are at hand from Gods point of view? That doesnt
make sense because the book was written to human readers, who
would understand soon and at hand as meaning something sooner
than what was understood in Daniels prophecies.
iv. If the book really is about 70 AD, then the things really were about to take
place soon
f. Strengths
i. It makes sense of the passages talking about a near fulfillment
ii. It makes the book directly relevant to the original readers.
1. If the Futurist view is correct, its not directly relevant to the original
readers or even for us (unless were living in the last days when the
events are supposed to be fulfilled)
2. If we get raptured out of here in ch. 4 (as most Christians believe),
most of the book (everything after ch. 4) is irrelevant for every
Christian throughout all of history
iii. It agrees with the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24), which seems to clearly be about
the fall of Jerusalem
iv. There are some very powerful parallels between Revelation and the history of
the Jewish War with Rome, concluding with the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD
v. Passages about the Emperor, the number 666, etc. make sense
vi. It reads the book as a work of Apocalyptic literature should be read,
symbolically
g. Weaknesses
i. Requires the book be written before 70 AD, which is not the current majority
view of theologians though past theologians believed it was written before
70 AD
ii. If the book is about the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, as Preterists say, then the
original readers should have understood that, and then when it happened,
they would have seen that Johns prophecies were true, which would make it
easier for the book to be accepted as canon early on. But many churches
didnt accept it as canon. So perhaps its not about the fall of Jerusalem at all.
1. In reality, the book of Revelations journey into the canon is different
from that of any other book. Most books that took a long time to be
accepted started off with a lukewarm reception and then slowly, over
time, were accepted by more and more people.
2. Revelations journey was opposite from most books. Our evidence goes
back as far as 125 AD, and very early on, it was accepted by almost
everyone, more than any other New Testament book (Papias, Justin
Martyr, Irenaeus, the Muratorian Fragment, Hippolytus, Clement of
Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen). This is astounding!
 a. Theologian BW Bacon wrote about it, There is no book in the
entire New Testament whose external attestation can compare
with that of Revelation, in nearness, clearness, definiteness, and
positiveness of statement (The Making of the New Testament)
3. However, in the early 200s, the theologian Gaius raised objections to
the book on the grounds that he believed the idea of a Millennial
Kingdom was a Gnostic teaching and therefore the book was probably
a forgery developed by Cerinthus.
4. This later doubt led to other churches beginning to doubt its
authenticity, until the synods of Hippo in 393 AD and Carthage in 397
AD, when it was formally accepted as Canon.
iii. Critics claim it was developed by Catholics, though this is not entirely true
1. Since most Protestants were historicists claiming the Pope is the
antichrist, the Catholics promoted both Futurism and Preterism
2. A Jesuit named Luis de Alcazar (1600s) published a book claiming
Revelation was about both the Fall of Jerusalem and the Fall of Rome (a
Preterist view).
a. Its true that the Catholic Church promoted his book and his
understanding of Revelation
b. But hes not the first to teach Preterism
3. Earlier non-Catholic Preterist teachers:
a. Andreas (500) wrote a commentary on Revelation of which we
only have a small portion, quoted in another book. In this
quotation, he says Revelation 6:12-13 is about the fall of
Jerusalem.
b. Arethas of Caesarea (540) wrote a commentary on Revelation
quoted by other writers. He stated the whole book was about
the fall of Jerusalem.
c. Eusebius (325 AD) early Christian historian who applied the
Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24) to the fall of Jerusalem
i. He doesnt talk about Revelation though. Why not?
Because it was not yet accepted as canon by the
churches and Eusebius himself never accepted it as
canon.

4. Futurist
a. This view teaches that the book of Revelation is a prophecy about events that will
all take place at some point in the future. Everything should be taken as literal,
except for things that obviously cannot be literal.
b. Most people have heard this view and no other one
c. Synopsis
i. Ch. 1-3 Events happening in the time of John
ii. Ch. 4:1 Rapture of the church takes place
iii. Ch. 4-19 Future events that will happen in a 7-year period called the Great
Tribulation
1. Some Futurists believe the Tribulation is only 3.5 years
2. Tribulation ends with the Second Coming of Christ
iv. Ch. 20 a future Millennial Kingdom that Jesus establishes at His return
v. Ch. 21-22 a future New Heavens and New Earth that God creates after
Jesus 1000-year reign
 d. Advantages
i. Currently, its the most popular view, though it wasnt always the case
1. If a lot of respected pastors, leaders, writers, and teachers believe it, it
must be true, right? How could it be wrong if so many people believe
it?
2. But just because most people believe something, it doesnt make that
thing true 200 years ago, almost all Protestants believed the
Historicist view, which clearly wasnt true.
ii. It takes everything literally, which is comforting as people who believe the
Word of God
iii. It harmonizes reasonably well with some current events
1. Of course, you can convince yourself that there are correlations
between Revelation and anything you want, and Futurists have been
doing that from the beginning (mistakenly)
a. For instance, Futurists throughout history have said that any
number of people were the Antichrist the Pope, Barak Obama,
Ronald Reagan, Mikhail Gorbachev, Vladimir Putin, Adolf Hitler,
Napoleon Bonaparte, Juan Carlos I of Spain, Bill Gates even
Danny DeVito! So far, none have been correct.
e. Disadvantages
i. Futurism makes the book mostly irrelevant to most Christians throughout
history
ii. Futurism fails to see the book as Apocalyptic literature, which is meant to be
read symbolically, not literally
iii. Futurism has no answer to the fact that the book itself says the events will be
fulfilled soon
iv. The history and development of Futurism is somewhat dubious
1. We have no evidence of what the first Christians thought about
Revelation
2. Some prominent theologians of the 2nd century (Irenaeus, Justin Martyr,
Hippolytus) taught a Futurist understanding of Daniel (and possibly of
Revelation)
3. The Shepherd of Hermas (an extra-Biblical writing from the early 2 nd
century that was rejected by all the first churches) contains references
to a beast and escaping tribulation, which perhaps is an affirmation of
Futurist teaching.
4. In the Middle Ages and Reformation period, no one believed or taught
Futurism
5. In the 1580s, Futurist theology was developed and promoted
throughout Catholicism by Jesuit priests Francisco Ribera and Robert
Bellarmine.
6. In the early 1800s, another Jesuit, Manuel De Lacunza, wrote another
Futurist commentary of Revelation, which brought the teaching to
Protestantism via Edward Irving, a Scottish Presbyterian who was very
influential in the pre-Pentecostal movement.

5. Spiritualist / Idealist
a. This view teaches that the book of Revelation isnt describing any specific events
but is only an allegory for the Christian life and Jesus victory over Satan.
 i. The visions are not describing any actual events but dramatic symbols to
describe Christian ideals / principles
ii. The book is a work of fiction like Pilgrims Progress, one that dramatizes true
Christian theology / ideals
b. What are these ideals?
i. There is warfare between Christ and Satan
ii. Christians are involved in this war
iii. God is sovereign over the nations
iv. Christ is victorious over Satan
v. Martyrdom will not destroy the church but grow it
c. Advantages
i. This view makes the book relevant to all people of all times, because the
truths are always relevant and can apply to anyones life at any time
d. Disadvantages
i. This view ignores the fact that the book itself is very clear that there is a
specific fulfilling of the prophecies coming soon.
e. Mixing with other views
i. The Spiritualist / Idealist view is easily adapted to mix with Preterist or
Futurist views
ii. Some might say the book is about the fall of Jerusalem (Preterism) but the
lessons we can learn of Gods faithfulness and Jesus victory are for all people
of all time (Idealism)
iii. Others might say the book is about the Great Tribulation and Jesus return
(Futurism), but the lessons of Gods victory and power are for all people of all
time (Idealism)