The Power of the Beast

Introduction

The Book of Revelation

This book could more accurately be called “The Revelation of, or from, Jesus Christ.” The last book of the New Testament and the end product of biblical prophecy tells us what is ultimately to happen to mankind, mainly with events that will occur prior to the Second Coming of Christ. It also talks about the establishment of the millennial kingdom and the new heavens and the new earth.

An uninformed person might liken the book to a puzzle. This is the viewpoint of many of today’s Christians, who are confused by the symbolism and even scared by the portrayals of destruction. For this reason, some believers avoid a serious study of the book. John Calvin, unexplainably, wrote no commentary on Revelation, although he wrote one on almost all the other New Testament books. A former Presbyterian once told me, “We avoided Revelation like the plague.”

There is no question of the interest in the future today. There is a booming business in fortune-telling, science fiction, tarot cards, horoscopes, and “certified psychic” hotlines. Many become deeply involved in the occult, all in an effort to find out what will be or to ultimately influence events in the future. But the future is only known and declared by God, who “declares the end from the beginning” (Isa. 46:10).

The name of the book in Latin is revelatio, an unveiling, and in Greek, apokalypsis, the removing of a veil. If the veil is removed, what is under it can be seen. So God intended for us to understand this book. Some call it the Revelation of Saint John. It is actually “the Revelation of Jesus Christ.” It is the unveiling of his intentions both for the earth and heaven for his redeemed saints for time and eternity. The book has been unsealed according to Revelation 22:10. A distinct blessing is promised to the person who reads and to those who hear the words of this prophecy (Rev. 1:3).

The figures and symbols of the book, which furnish the basis of its interpretation, are found elsewhere in divine revelation but can be understood only by comparing scripture to scripture. All the other lines of both Old Testament and New Testament prophecy seem to converge in the book of the Revelation. Four times, the writer identifies himself as John (1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). The early church believed it to be John the Apostle. A different style does not prove a different author. The nature of apocalyptic literature, the fact that the author was a prisoner on Patmos, and the fact that the revelation was given in a vision could account for the differences in style.

Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Hipolytus, Tertullian, and Vircotinus declared John the Apostle to be the author. During the second half of the third century, we find that Dionysius, the bishop of the church in Alexandria, was the first to question whether John the Apostle was the author of Revelation. It is said that he was concerned about a teaching of that time—of a literal millennium on earth, much like Origen, also from Alexandria. This was something he did not believe in, so Dionysius attempted to discredit that teaching by denying that John was the author of Revelation. He noted that there was a difference in style and vocabulary between the Gospel of John and the Johannine epistles and Revelation. Strangely, Dionysius believed the epistles to have been written by John the Apostle. These same objections have come down to us today in almost exactly the same form that Dionysius used. Of course, if one decides one person is not the author, one must come up with another who could have been, so Dionysius speculated that there were two Johns living in Ephesus when Revelation was written.

Building on Dionysius, Eusebius theorized that Revelation was written by a “John the Elder.” There is some dispute as to whether this person really existed. This rests on a controversial statement which Eusebius attributes to Papias.

The “differences in style” argument still forms the main objection today. No one denies that there are differences between the Gospel of John, the Johannine Epistles, and Revelation. But are they significant if one takes into account that the subject matter is so diverse? It might be possible to argue that the different literary style of Revelation could be attributed to John’s use of an amanuensis when he wrote the gospel and the epistles like Paul did (Rom. 16:11), something which would not have been possible in exile on Patmos.

Commenting on the similarities between Revelation and John’s other writings, Guthrie writes, “It should be noted, incidentally, that in spite of linguistic and grammatical differences the Apocalypse has a closer affinity to the Greek of the other Johannine books than to any other New Testament book.”

As far as the date is concerned, there seem to be two theories: some date the book to the reign of Nero (ca. AD 68), others to that of Domitian (ca. AD 96). Some who adopt the preterist interpretation of Revelation hold to the earlier date. They rely on several passages, which they feel affirm their theory that this prophecy was for the period prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Somehow, they find in the destruction of Jerusalem something to do with the Second Coming, although Jesus was never there, unless this is taken in a spiritual sense only.

The early church believed not only that John the Apostle was the author, but that he wrote it near the end of the reign of Domitian. Irenaeus is quoted as affirming this.

Others who believed Revelation was written during the reign of Domitian were the church fathers Clement of Alexandria, Victorinus, Origen, Jero