Читать книгу Visions of the Lamb of God - Andrew Scott Brake - Страница 7

Nature of the Book

Revelation is one of the most intriguing books of the New Testament. It has long been my favorite for its exalted picture of Christ, its view of heaven, and the hope it gives to the church around the world. It has also, unfortunately, been a much-abused book by those who seek to know the timing of Christ’s second coming. Many have used Revelation as a guidebook for their own theories and, in doing so, have missed its exalted Christology and hope. The purpose of this commentary is to present a straightforward interpretation of Revelation that focuses on the Lamb, explaining its rich Old Testament background and symbolic nature.1

I take John, the apostle of Jesus, to be the most likely author (more on this below). John was a prophet, an apocalyptist, a pastor, and an apostle. Wrap all these concerns and genres together, and you get Revelation, a letter to the church in the midst of great trial. John wants to encourage the church to persevere and be faithful to Jesus to the end, both in light of what was happening at the time and also in light of what was to come.

John Christopher Thomas and Frank D. Macchia call Revelation the “most sensual document in the New Testament, filled with references to things, seen, heard, smelled, touched, and even tasted!”2 The book was meant to be heard while it was read aloud by its audiences, the congregations in Asia Minor and beyond. G.K. Beale calls Revelation, quoting D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, “a prophesy cast in an apocalyptic mold and written down in a letter form in order to motivate the audience to change their behavior in light of the transcendent reality of the book’s message.”3

Revelation leans into the Old Testament as a source text in both material and form. It takes much of its cues from Isaiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel, adhering more closely to the tradition of Old Testament apocalyptic literature rather than Jewish first-century works.

Grant Osborne argues that John is faithful, on the whole, in his interpretation of the Old Testament context, but that he transforms it deliberately by applying it to his contention that the nations of the earth are analogous to the nation of Israel in Zechariah.4 Beale’s concept of John’s position in relation to the Old Testament as both servant and guide is a helpful picture. For John, the cross and the resurrection are key to understanding the Old Testament, and reflection on the Old Testament leads to further comprehension of the passion event in light of the present and the future. In this way, symbiotically, the New Testament interprets the Old, and the Old Testament interprets the New.5

Symbols are everywhere in Revelation, and each symbol would have been understandable to the first-century reader. We should not play guessing games trying to figure out what the symbols could mean in our context (example: interpreting the locusts mentioned in Revelation 9 as helicopters), but consider what they meant in their own. There are four main numbers that carry symbolic meaning: four, seven, ten, and twelve. Usually, the meaning is associated with completeness. Four carries the meaning of the four corners of the earth, or the whole world.6

Examples include the four corners (7:1; 20:8), the four winds (7:1), and the fourfold division of creation (8:7–8; 14:7; 16:2–3). “The one who lives forever and ever” is mentioned four times (4:9–10; 19:6; 15:7). As to the number seven, John includes seven spirits, sevenfold doxologies, seven seals, trumpets, and bowls of wrath, and seven beatitudes. Several titles of God (e.g., Lord God Almighty, the one who sits on the throne) are mentioned seven times; Christ is mentioned seven times, Jesus fourteen times. Jesus is called a “witness” seven times. John speaks of Christ’s “coming” seven times. The “Lamb” is referenced twenty-eight times. These cannot all be coincidences.7

Beale suggests there are four levels of communication in Revelation: 1) a linguistic level, the record of the text itself to be read and heard; 2) a visionary level, John’s actual sensory experience; 3) a referential level, the particular historical identification of the objects seen in the vision; and 4) a symbolic level, what the symbols in the vision mean about their historical reference.8 Beale notes, “Symbols have a parabolic function and are intended to encourage and exhort the audience. They portray a transcendent new creation that has penetrated the present old world through the death and resurrection of Christ and the sending of the Spirit at Pentecost.”9

Author

John, the apostle of Jesus and the brother of James, the writer of the gospel of John, is the most probable author of Revelation. As for internal evidence, the author mentions his own name in Revelation 1:1, 1:4, 1:9, and 22:8. He calls himself a “servant” (1:1) and a prophet (1:3; 22:9). There have been several suggestions as to the identity of this John: 1) as mentioned, John the apostle; 2) the elder John; 3) John Mark; 4) John the Baptist; 5) another John; 6) Cerinthus (a gnostic); 7) someone using the name of John as a pseudonym.10 David Aune argues there are very few features that suggest that the author of Revelation was part of a Johannine community in any meaningful sense.11 But Aune is predisposed to accept the truth of source criticism and believes that large sections of Revelation are the work of an editor. I do not see this as readily. The genre John is using is quite different from the genre of gospel writing, which accounts for the differences of style, grammar, and vocabulary that Aune and others interpret as evidence for two different authors.

The use of Greek is one of the biggest differences between the book of John and Revelation. The grammar in Revelation is unique, sometimes strange, and frequently Hebraic. But many of the solecisms (using grammar in a seemingly inappropriate way) appear deliberate, perhaps for theological purposes or influenced by the visionary experience that must have been so difficult to describe. At times, John wants his readers to make associations with Old Testament texts and uses the Hebraic form of the Greek to alert the reader to the connection.

Some scholars believe there are differences in theology. But these can be explained by the different context and genre. Is there only a God of love in the gospel of John and only a God of wrath in Revelation? This is a false contrast, and to say this shows a lack of understanding of the character of God. In fact, only in John and Revelation is Jesus called logos in the New Testament. Some scholars also argue that the realized eschatology of the gospel is not compatible with the final eschatology of Revelation. But it has long been accepted that the eschatology of the gospel of John is inaugurated. The different emphases of each book mean a different perspective, but from the same author. There is, instead, a similar overall message in both John’s gospel and Revelation: God seeks to bring the world to repentance. Zechariah 12:10 is quoted in John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7, using the same Greek word (ekkenteo), which is not used by the Septuagint and is not found elsewhere in the New Testament.12

Osborne notes that Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 81.4), Irenaeus (Against Heresies 4.20.11), Tertullian (Against Marcion 3.14.3), Clement of Alexandria (Paedagogus 2.108), and Origen (De Principalis 1.2.10) all believed John the apostle was the author. Marcion was the first to reject John’s authorship. Dionysius doubted it, as well as Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Chrysostom. Dionysius thought “another unknown John” wrote it; Eusebius believed there were two Johns at Ephesus, with the apostle John writing the gospel and the Elder John writing Revelation. It is uncertain whether using a pseudonym was practiced in the early church, which seems to limit the field of likely candidates.13 William D. Mounce holds that the strong external evidence points to John the apostle’s authorship.14 Beale feels it is possible that John the apostle wrote the book, but that another John could have written it. He does not see the issue as important but is sure that the author at least identified himself as a prophet (1:1–3; 10:19; 4:1–2; 17:1–3; 21:9–10; 22:6–7).15

Given the strength of both the internal and external evidence, as I stated, I do think John the apostle is the author. For purposes of simplification and clarity, I’ve referred and will continue to refer to the author as “John” throughout this book.

Date

There are two major theories regarding the dating of the book: the time of the emperor Nero or the time of the emperor Domitian. Beale provides a helpful list of arguments for both a late date (95, Domitian) and an early date (pre-70, Nero).16

Evidence for a Later Date

In Revelation, John makes frequent mention of the rituals of the imperial cult and persecution against the church. People began to worship emperors prior to the time of Domitian (see 13:4–8, 15–16; 14:9–11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4). Hard evidence of the persecution of Christians because they resisted imperial worship comes in 113 AD during the reign of Trajan in a letter written by Pliny to Trajan. Pliny mentions people who had apostatized “many years earlier [. . .] a few as much as twenty-five years ago”17; in other words, during Domitian’s reign. If Domitian’s only motive was to purge aristocrats, using Christianity as an excuse to charge some of them, Christians would still have viewed this as persecution, especially those that were charged. Beale notes further that later Christian tradition supports the idea that Domitian’s persecution may have focused on Christians in the higher classes. Eusebius writes that members of Jesus’ family were brought before Domitian because “they were reported as being of the family of David”18 and because they were identified with the movement of Christians. This also shows that Christianity, as a sub-set of Judaism and acknowledged as a religion in the Roman Empire, was beginning to be set apart.

Clement, writing in 96 AD, alludes to “the sudden and successive calamitous events which have happened to ourselves”19. What is clear is that from both secular and religious sources, there is some evidence of a hardening of Roman policy and persecution toward Christians who chose not to participate in the political and religious life of Greco-Roman society—in particular, the imperial cult. There is no evidence that the Neronian persecution in Rome extended to Asia Minor, the location of the seven churches in Revelation. This was a local persecution of the Christians in Rome that did affect other Christians in the empire, but not extensively in Asia Minor. And though emperor worship could have been an issue in Nero’s time, it fits more closely with what was happening during the reign of Domitian. In Ephesus, for example, a giant statue of Domitian was erected that may be what Revelation 13 references, where believers are put to death for not worshipping the “image of the beast” (13:15). This kind of local evidence in Asia Minor of imperial cult pressure does not exist for the pre-70 AD date.

The conditions of the churches in Asia Minor also point to a later date. The spiritual condition of Ephesus, Sardis, and Laodicea was low. The Laodicean church, for instance, is described as quite wealthy. But the city experienced a devastating earthquake in 60–61 AD, and the city and church would have needed time to recover from this economic loss. The “synagogue of Satan” (2:9; 3:9) best fits a Domitian context. And the church of Smyrna may not have been established yet in the sixties.20

If it is true that 13:3–4, 17:8, and 17:11 refer to the myth of the reappearance of Nero (Nero redividus), which speaks of the demise of the beast and his later revival, only a later date makes sense. Nero died in 68 AD. Surely two years would not have been enough time for the myth to take hold.

The reoccurring “Babylon” theme in Revelation is another date indicator. In Jewish literature, Babylon refers to Rome after 70 AD because the Roman armies destroyed Jerusalem and the temple, just as Babylon had done in the sixth century BC.

The earliest testimonies of church leaders date Revelation at the time of Domitian as well. These include Irenaeus, Victorinus of Pettau, Eusebius, and possibly Clement of Alexandria and Origen.21

Aune also notes that the use of the phrase “the twelve apostles” in Revelation 21:14 is not attested before 80 AD.22

Evidence for an Earlier Date

Beale’s list of arguments for an early date (pre-70) are not as convincing.23 Yes, the temple seems to be still standing in Revelation 11:1–2. But this assumes a literal reading of the text, referring to the first-century Herodian temple. Like the rest of Revelation, chapter 11 is rich with symbolism based on Ezekiel 40–48. Some in favor of an early date have identified the seven hills in 17:9–10 that are described as kings as specifically Roman emperors, the last being Nero. But I don’t think John is referring to seven literal kings of the Roman empire. For a further discussion, see my exegesis of chapter 17.

Some suggest that, together, the name values of Nero and Caesar in Hebrew letters add up to 666, which, in conjunction with 13:18, would mean an earlier date. But should we be playing number games? Was John that familiar with gematria (giving numerical value to letters) that he would hide the meaning of who 666 is? (I include more on this in my discussion of chapter 13.)

Final Thoughts on the Date

According to Thomas and Macchia, John seems to be intentionally concealing the date he was writing. If this is so, they say, it is in keeping with the spirit of the text to respect John’s intentional ambiguity and look more closely at the intention within the text.24 I don’t see a compelling reason why John would purposefully want to conceal the time of his writing. I think it’s clear that the evidence points to a later date, written by John when he was quite old. If he was a teenager when he joined Jesus as a disciple, that would put him in his eighties or so in 95 AD.

Recipient

The list of churches in chapters 2–3 helps us to know the audience. It seems like the letter was meant to be read and then circulated to each church. Beale believes the “focus of the book is exhortation to the church community to witness to Christ in the midst of a compromising, idolatrous church and world.”25 I think Beale is mostly right. He emphasizes the apostate believers too frequently as the recipients of some of the rebukes and warnings. But there is definitely a presence in the churches of those who have fallen away or have compromised.

Methods of Interpretation

Osborne provides a helpful summary of some of the historical methods of interpreting Revelation. I will explain them below, and then explain the position of this commentary.26

1. Historicist: This is the classic dispensational view, that the seven churches represent different periods of history. The historicist view is also associated with the prophesy movement that sees every detail of Revelation fulfilled in current events. This view was held by Joachim of Fiore (twelfth century). Franciscans followed him. The Reformers (Martin Luther, John Calvin) saw the Pope as the antichrist in the sixteenth century.

2. Preterist: In this view, the details of the book relate to the present situation in which John lived, rather than a future period. Three main options of interpretation fall in this category: 1) those who say the situation related to the Roman Empire and the book is written about Roman oppression and the fall of the Roman Empire (R.H. Charles, Leonard Sweet, Jurgen Roloff); 2) those who say that the persecution was a perceived crisis rather than a real one, but the church was still called to follow God. The problem of the book is compromise, and the solution is true worship of Christ (Adela Yarbro Collins, John L. Thompson, Gerhard Krodel, James Barr); 3) those who think the book was written before 70 AD and prophesies the fall of Jerusalem as God’s judgment upon wicked Israel for rejecting the Messiah and persecuting the church (Kenneth Gentry, D. C. Chilton), and that the beast is Rome, and the kings of the east are Roman generals.

3. Idealist: In this view, the symbols do not relate to historical events but to timeless spiritual truths. The millennium is not a future event, but more conceptual. This view is part of the amillennial position. The final cycle of the book encourages the church to carry on (William Hendriksen, Anthony Hoekema, and Philip Hughes are Idealists).

4. Futurist: In this view, chapters 4–22 refer primarily to events in the future that will take place at the end of history and usher in the end times and the return of Christ. There are two branches to a futurist view: dispensationalism, the belief that there are seven dispensations (or periods in history), and we are currently in the sixth (the church age). Revelation, according to dispensationalism, describes the seventh age, where the church is taken out before the travail of the last days, and Israel is reinstated. The second branch is classic premillennialism, which holds that there is only one return of Christ and the church must endure and be faithful through suffering and persecution before Christ’s return.

5. Eclectic: This view combines more than one of the views above, avoiding the weaknesses of particular views. (Leon Morris, George Ladd, George Beasley-Murray, J. Ramsey Michaels, Alan Johnson, H. Giesen, Mounce, and Beale all subscribe to this view). I lean towards the eclectic view as well, with the proviso that we acknowledge Revelation was written in a definite context to seven specific churches while also looking ahead to the future final conflict between the forces of Satan and the people of Christ.

Themes

The following themes stand out in the book of Revelation:

1. God: the one who was and is and is to come (1:4, 8; 4:8; 11:17; 16:5). He holds the world in his sovereign control. He is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. (1:8; 1:17; 22:13; 21:6; 22:13). This title is also used of Christ (1:17; 22:13). Jesus receives worship along with God. And Jesus and God seem to sit side-by-side and to share the throne and the right of judgment. This parallels Jesus’ teaching in John 5–7. Another title used for God is the Lord Almighty (1:8; 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7, 14; 19:6, 15; 21:22), a title which contextually carries the implication of omnipotence and God’s rightful place as master and creator. The divine passive is used frequently (6:2, 4, 8, 11; 7:2; 8:2, 3; 9:1, 3, 5; 11:1, 2; 12:14; 13:7, 14, 15; 16:8). Nothing happens outside the sovereign plan of God.

2. Jesus, the Lamb (Revelation 5:6–6:17; 19; 22)

3. Jesus, the warrior (Revelation 1:9–20; 7; 12; 19). As Jesus overcame through his death and resurrection, so also the saints can overcome (Revelation 6; 12; 13; 19–20).

4. The church must be patient and endure and, in doing so, overcome trial (Revelation 2–3; 19–21).

5. Satan’s defeat (12:9; 20:2, 8, 10). The false trinity will fight the church of God but will ultimately be defeated (13:16–17; 17–18; 19–20).

6. Theodicy: a defense of God’s character and judgment27

7. God’s judgment reveals his righteous character (6:16–17; 11:18; 14:10, 19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19; 19:15).

8. Christ comes as judge (1:16; 2:12, 16; 19:15, 21).

9. God’s judgments come because of the depravity and rejection of those on the earth. The evil of the nations is emphasized, and it is that guilt that is the basis for their judgment. God’s judgments execute his righteous judgment as sin turns against itself, and God’s judgments are proven through his vindication of the saints (6:10; 17:14; 18:24; 15:2; 20:4).

Outline

1:1–8 Prologue

1:1–3 Who is the author?

1:4 Who is the recipient?

1:5–8 Who is the focus of the book?

1:9–20 Vision of Jesus

2:1–3:20 Jesus’ message to the churches of Asia Minor

2:1–5 To Ephesus

2:6–11 To Smyrna

2:12–17 To Pergamum

2:18–29 To Thyatira

3:1–6 To Sardis

3:7–13 To Philadelphia

3:14–20 To Laodicea

4:1–5:14 Vision of the throne-room

4:1–8 The throne of God and the song of the four living creatures

4:9–11 The song of the twenty-four elders

5:1–5 The call for someone worthy to open the seals of the scroll

5:6–10 The Lion/Lamb of God and the song of the creatures/elders

5:11–12 The song of all the angels

5:13–14 The song of every creature

6:1–17 Seals 1–6 are opened

7:1–17 First Interlude (a picture of the end)

7:1–8 The 144,000

7:9–117 The number beyond count

8:1–5 The seventh seal is opened

8:6–13 Trumpets 1–4

9:1–21 Trumpets 5–6

10:1–11 Second Interlude (the little scroll)

11:1–14 Third Interlude (the two witnesses)

11:15–19 Trumpet 7 (a picture of the end)

12:1–17 The sign of the woman and the dragon

13:1–18 The two beasts

13:1–10 The beast from the sea

13:11–18 The beast from the earth

14:1–20 The Lamb and the angels

14:1–5 The Lamb and the 144,000

14:6–7 The first angel

14:8 The second angel

14:9–16 The third angel and the “one like a son of man”

15:1–8 The vision of the seven angels/plagues

15:1–4 The justice and righteousness of God

15:5–8 The opening of the sanctuary

16:1–21 The seven bowls of wrath

17:1–18 The sign of the prostitute and the beast

18:1–24 The fall of Babylon

19:1–21 The consummation of the Lamb’s victory

19:1–8 The wedding supper of the Lamb

19:9–21 The final victory of the Lamb

20:1–15 The millennial kingdom and the final doom of Satan

20:1–3 Satan is bound

20:4–6 The millennial reign

20:7–10 The final defeat of Satan

20:11–15 The final judgment

21:1–22:5 A new heaven and new earth

21:1–8 The vision of a new heaven and earth

21:9–27 A new Jerusalem

22:1–5 A new Eden

22:6–21 Epilogue

1. See Osborne, Revelation, 12. Osborne believes that Revelation has three genres: apocalyptic, prophetic, and epistolary. It must be understood that the book is not just a casebook for identifying future events and setting up prophesy conferences, but a theological work addressing the churches in their present contexts through prophesies of the future.

2. Thomas and Macchia, Revelation, 2.

3. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 39.

4. Osborne, Revelation, 26.

5. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 97.

6. See Osborne, Revelation, 17, and Bauckham, New Testament Theology, 29–37.

7. Osborne, Revelation, 17.

8. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 52–53.

9. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 59.

10. Osborne, Revelation, 2.

11. Aune, Revelation 1–5, lvi.

12. See Revelation 5–6; Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 14.

13. Osborne, Revelation, 2–4.

14. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 31.

15. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 35–36.

16. See fuller discussion in Beale, The Book of Revelation, 5–20.

17. See Pliny the Younger, Epistles 10.96-97, as footnoted in Beale, The Book of Revelation, 5.

18. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 7, referencing Eusebius, History of Eusebius 3.20.

19. Clement in the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians 1.1, in The Church Fathers. The Complete Ante-Nicene & Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers Collection, Kindle edition, Loc. 1880.

20. See also Osborne, Revelation, 9.

21. The fact that these church leaders were chronologically close to the later date gives more credence to their testimony.

22 Aune, Revelation 1–5, lxx.

23. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 21–26.

24. Thomas and Macchia, Revelation, 34.

25. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 33.

26. For a fuller description of different methods, see Osborne, Revelation, 18–22.

27. See Osborne, Revelation, 38–40.