Andrew Meredith’s Reviews > Paradise Restored: A Biblical Theology of Dominion > Status Update

The Book of Revelation opens with these words: "The revelation of Jesus Christ that God gave Him to show His slaves what must soon take place. He sent it and signified it through His angel to His slave John" (Rev 1:1).

There are three words in opening verse of Revelation that provide important interpretive keys for rightly understanding the whole book. They are (1) "soon," (2) "signify," and (3) "revelation."

(1) "Soon" (τάχος) is so often ignored or explained away by modern commentators who want to read the book "literally" (or, more accurately, with their imaginations on overdrive) for future events. But this is not the only time it is stated that the prophecies of the book are happening "soon" (22:6-7, 10-12, 20). Indeed, Revelation was written because "the time is at near" (1:3; 22:10).

The last cited verse above (22:10) is especially relevant to our discussion here due to it's intentional contrast with Daniel. After being shown "the time of the end," Daniel is instructed twice by an angel to "seal up" the testimony: "But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the time of the end” (Dan 12:4). "Then he said, “Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the time of the end"" (Dan 12:9). The time of the end was too far ahead, and thus Daniel was not to share all that he had seen and heard just yet.

That was almost 600 years before John wrote Revelation, but look at what the angel tells John: "And he said to me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near"" (Rev 22:10). So, though Daniel lived at a time when the foretold events of the end were too far ahead for him to expound upon them yet, 600 years later for John the events were now "near" that John should write all that he saw.

All this to say, on a relative timescale of 600 years, the foretold events of Revelation, or at least the vast majority of them, happened "soon" after John wrote the book. If we are then jumping 2000 (3x600+) years into the future (as both amillennials and premillenials do), we are doing our hermeneutics wrong.

(2) Frustratingly, "Signify" (σημαίνω) is often ignored in modern translations (even otherwise solid word-for-word ones). It's especially egregious here because σημαίνω plays a key role in John's other writings (e.g., John 12:33; 18:32; 21:19; etc.). In each cited case, the word is used of Christ "signifying" a future event by a more-or-less symbolic indication, rather than by a clear and literal description.

The events and images of Revelation, then, are "signified." They are to be interpreted literate-ly by their clear connection to the rest of Scripture (e.g., the Old Testament). This is actually quite easy to do, because The Book of Revelation depends on the OT much more than does any other NT book. It is positively crammed to the brim with OT quotations and allusions, which means that the OT is the clear key to understanding the Book. Our modern failure to appreciate this crucial fact is the main cause of our inability to understand what John was talking about in his book.

Let's prove this assertion here by examining just one well-known and much-abused symbol "the Mark of the Beast."

In Revelation 7, 9, 14, and 22, John sees God's people sealed on their foreheads with His Name, but in Revelation 13:16 he sees the worshippers of the Beast receive a rival mark on their right hands and foreheads. (Note that even internally, the mark of the Beast is set up as an intentional counter to what God is doing.)

Now much conjecture and ink has been expended to determine what this mark is - everything from star tattoos, to 666, to SSNs, to cell phones, to flags, to the Catholic Eucharist, etc. - all without the slightest notion of any Biblical signification whatsoever.

But what if we start with Scripture instead of our fancies? Where in the Old Testament do we see people marked on their hands and/or foreheads?

Well, we can see that Israel's High Priest (their representative before God) was marked on his forehead with gold letters declaring him "Holy to Yahweh" (28:36), and even more directly, we see that all God's faithful are "marked" specifically on their hands and foreheads with His Law (Deut 6:6-8 cf. Eze 9:4-6). This mark/sign, of course, wasn't literal, but it signifies that both their heads and their hands were bound as God's servants to do His will (obey His Law). These faithful receive God's blessing and protection (faith = allegiance). Those with the King's mark receive the King's favor.

So, with this understanding in place, the mark of the Beast is clearly seen to be a binding to an antichristian law or (perhaps more accurately) a general lawlessness, a mar/sign of their allegiance to the Beast to serve him (we'll talk about who he is later because there is really no doubt) over and against allegiance to Christ.

(3) This leads us to our third and most important point. "Revelation" (apokalupsis) means "a revealing." The book was meant "reveal" events and to be understood by its original audience! "No one who knows his Bible need despair of reading this book with profit." - Benjamin Warfield. (This alone should rule out wild fever dreams of Apache helicopters and nuclear bombs!)

Here we must grapple with when the book was written, because that will help us know who the original audience was. The biggest question (facing Christian scholars) is whether it was written before or after AD 70 (the Fall of Jerusalem). The evidence for a pre-70 dating is very, very strong (Indeed, 100% convincing once one actually examines it).

[Andrew's Thought Bracket: Here Chilton gives a number of arguments for a pre-70 AD dating, which I agree with, but if you are interested in this specific question I would point you toward "Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation" by Ken Gentry Jr. It's quite scholarly and left no doubt in my mind.

The strongest arguments to me are the internal arguments, that is the evidence arising within the book itself. Things like: the Temple still standing not having yet been given to the Gentiles to destroy and trample (Rev 11), the obvious reliance of much of the book on Matthew 24, the presence of Emperor Nero ("666"/"616") who died in AD 68, the timing of the events lining up perfectly with Daniel 9:24-27, and the (to me) convincing related argument that all Scripture was written by the Jews (the people given the oracles of God; Rom 3:2) during the Old Covenant period, and after the destruction of the city and the sanctuary, "the vision and the prophecy" was "sealed up" (Dan 9:24).]