Two Tips for Reading the Book of Revelation

In all of my reading of articles and books and listening to different lectures on Revelation there stands out at least two—let’s call them tips—toward a better reading and understanding of that most ominous book of the Bible.

These two guides again, and again, have helped me, not to understand everything in Revelation—far from it—but to do what I can to allow the book to be what it is. The reason Revelation is often misunderstood and then, ultimately, caricatured is because we don’t allow Revelation to be what is is. Instead, we make it into the book we’d like it to be, which—as is always the case—does little else than pull us further away from what Revelation has to say for itself.

So, in an effort to let Revelation be Revelation, allow me to offer to you two tips for the next time you turn the page to this most exciting book of the Bible.

Tip #1: It is called Revelation, not The Destruction of All Things at the End of the World.

The first three words of Revelation—in Greek—are Apokalupsis Iesou Christou. In English, “The revelation of Jesus Christ.”

It’s that first word—apokalupsis—where we get our first bit of help in understanding the story Revelation is telling. The Greek word, apokalupsis, is rightly translated as revelation, but it could be translated as apocalypse—provided apocalypse still meant what it used to mean. The reason most, if not all, major English Bible translations have revelation over apocalypse is because apocalypse has come to mean something different in English than apokalupsis meant in ancient Koine Greek. Contrary to the meaning of apocalypse today, apokalupsis does not mean the destruction of all things at the end of the world. Instead, it means to make something known that was not yet made fully known (i.e., a revelation).

So, before anyone turns the page to the first words of Revelation, we must get rid the assumed idea that this book is going to tell us about how the world is going to end. This is difficult because, if we come to the book with this specific understanding of the main theme, a lot of the events in Revelation end up fitting into that theme quite nicely (plagues, riders on horses, one with a sword, blood, a beast, a dragon, etc.). It’s the same self-fulfilling prophecy we see with those going to the dentist or getting their blood drawn. Fortunately, a trip to the dentist rarely—if ever—turns out as bad as we sometimes think it will.

I suggest we allow the first three words of this amazing book to shine a light forward through its pages. Let’s read Revelation as if it is actually telling the story of how Jesus is going to reveal and be revealed to the world because, of course, that’s what Apokalupsis Iesou Christou means.

Tip #2: Before Revelation can have any meaning and application for us, today, it must have a meaning and application to those to whom it was immediately written, back then.

How many times have you heard someone—perhaps even yourself—use Revelation as a key to interpret “end-times events” in our present day?

I submit it’s nearly the constant drumbeat of popular-level interpretations of this book. This is a problem, though—a huge problem—because if Revelation didn’t really start to make sense and find meaning until our day, what in the world were people doing with it for nearly 2,000-years before us?

In the same way we ought not make Revelation tell the story we want it to tell, we ought not read it as though it was written primarily to us, now. When John penned these words, while exiled on Patmos, he was surely writing them for the people of his day—for the church of his day. It would be amazing to me to think of John finishing the final words of Revelation—“The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.”—and thinking to himself, “Wow. I don’t understand anything of what I’ve written, but I hope someone, a long time from now, will be able to figure it out!”

No. When John finished Revelation he knew that what he had been shown (an apokalupsis) was something important for his believing brothers and sisters of his day. This is, of course, what is mentioned at at the very beginning of the book: “…which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place” (Rev. 1:1b).

Now, we can debate what the word soon means in the mind of God (and John), and how it ought to be interpreted in the context of the book as a whole, but what we can’t say is that the book had no immediate relevance to the readers—and the early Christian church—of the first-century. Revelation was a book for its time—then—and, by the grace of God, remains a book for our time—now—just as it will remain a book for those after us.

In order to remain on the right track for understanding what is contained in Revelation, we must do our best to remember that whatever meaning we think we’ve found within its pages, must be compatible with what the readers of John’s day found, too.

A Moment on the Scriptures: "Don't be afraid..."

He figured he was dead when the risen Jesus appeared before him.

John’s life was as good as over when he was exiled to live out the rest of his days alone on the island of Patmos. What was he supposed to do by himself? Was this somehow a curse of God? How could God have abandoned him to this sort of fate?

Then comes the revelation.

John was witness to the living, risen Jesus on the island with him. It was miraculous, but it wasn’t without fear. John, himself, tells us what he was thinking and feeling as he saw Jesus.

“And when I saw him, I fell to his feet as dead, and he placed his right hand on me saying:” (Rev. 1:17, MT).

Like those of old who had angels appear before them, John thought his life was over when Jesus appeared before him. This, however, was not the case. Instead of dying, John feels the hand of Jesus on him. But this isn’t the end of his encounter.

John is afraid. And Jesus is going to deal with that.

As Jesus places his hand on John, he says to him: “Do not be afraid.”

Why? Why shouldn’t John be afraid?

Thankfully, Jesus continues and gives us the reasons why: “I am the first and the last and the one who is living, and I was dead and behold, I am the one who is living forever and ever and I have the keys of death and of hades” (Rev. 1:17b-18, MT).

Notice, first, what Jesus does not say to alleviate John’s fear. He doesn’t point John to the world, nor does he point John to John.

Instead, Jesus eases John’s fear by speaking to who he (Jesus) is.

Jesus is the first and the last.
Jesus is alive.
Jesus was dead, but now he is alive forever.
Jesus has the keys of death.
And, Jesus has the keys of hades.

The reasons for John to not be afraid then, remain the same for us now. Jesus was the hope for John, and he remains our hope today.

A Moment on the Scriptures: The Kingdom of Our Lord

According to the Bible, what’s the promise given to those who bow the knee to Jesus with regard to the world we now live?

Heaven is often the answer that’s given. The promise often given to Christians is to leave this place and find our home—our true home—with God in heaven. There, in that place, there will be no more pain, no more sorrow, no more tears. In heaven, everything will be as it should be—perhaps, as it was meant to be.

Is heaven, though, really the promise that the Bible sets before those who have trusted in Jesus?

In chapter 11 of the Book of Revelation, John writes of the seventh angel sounding his trumpet. Along with this trumpet blast is an announcement from loud voices in heaven. Their announcement is that, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever.” (Rev. 11:15b, NIV)

Note that, the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of God. This is the promise. The world will be God’s. He has made it and it will be redeemed in Jesus. This is a not a promise that we will leave this planet to enter heaven somewhere else. This is a promise that heaven will be here on earth and Jesus will rule here forever. This is the unification and redemption of all things. Heaven and earth brought back together as was the design in Genesis 1 and 2 in the garden.

See what John writes in Revelation 21: “Then I saw ‘a new heaven and a new earth,’…And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them…God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

Exegetical Meditations (28)

“I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.” (Revelation 20:4-6, NIV)

Have you ever gotten into conversation with someone over what it will be like when Jesus comes back?

The conversation can be wild. Fun, no doubt, but it can get wild, because of the massive amount of interpretation going on with just a few verses. The question, I think, we ought to be asking ourselves before, during, and after those conversations is something like, “How can I think and talk responsibly about something in the Bible when there’s so much disagreement?”

Years ago theologian Dr. Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984) wrote a book on the interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis entitled, “Genesis in Space and Time: The Flow of Biblical History.” And, in it, he asked a great question. His question was something like what’s the least that Genesis 1-3 must mean in order for the rest of the Bible to make sense?

His question comes from a similar relationship with a section of Scripture where many interpretations are “found” and disagreements have children. Dr. Schaeffer wanted to cut through the fog to get at what was important in order to make sense of what Genesis taught in relation to the rest of the Bible. The same principle holds when dealing with a passage like Revelation 20:4-6.

This section of Scripture comes smack in the middle of the infamous “millennial passage”—Revelation 20:1-10. Questions abound.

When will Jesus return?
How will he return?
What will the state of the world be when he returns?
Is the “millennium” a literal 1,000 year period or is it figurative for a “long time”?
How many resurrections are there?
Are the resurrections spiritual or physical or some combination?

These are just a small sample of the questions that come out of this section and, as you can imagine, disagreements multiply as you listen to and read interpreters of this passage. So, what should you and I do when we come to this section of Revelation and perhaps when we have conversations about it?

I think we should employ the advice Francis Schaeffer gave for Genesis. What’s the least that Revelation 20:1-10 (or in this specific case, 4-6) must mean for the rest of the Bible to make sense?

• There are souls of those who have lost their lives because of the testimony they gave about Jesus and about Scripture.

• Those souls did not worship the beast.

• They were brought back to life and reigned with Jesus for a period of time.

• Jesus is with those who had lost their lives on account of him.

Now, clearly there’s much more to say about this passage than what’s listed above. But, I wonder if you or I were in a conversation with someone about this small section of Scripture and we said we saw these truths within the text, would they disagree with us? I can’t imagine they would, and this then gives us all a good place to set our feet to move forward together and perhaps have a further conversation if it’s necessary.

A brief note on looking for the least.
Dr. Schaeffer’s instruction to look for the least and my endorsement of it should not be taken to mean that the smaller details within a particular text are not worth it or are somehow less important. Obviousness and clarity do not directly relate to importance. A lot of times very important things take work to find and come with big disagreements. Looking for the least—within difficult passages in particular—means we’re searching for solid ground. Once the solid ground is found, I say get after it for the rest of what’s there—disagreements and all!