|
About Jesus Steve Sweetman My Commentary On This Section - Chapter 1 We
translate our English word “revelation” from the Greek word
"apokalupsis" which in its simplest definition means to
"uncover or unveil." You can see that our English word
“apocalypse” is derived from this Greek word. So,
what follows in John's account is an uncovering of prophetic truth.
Even as I write that, it seems to me that the book of Revelation
itself needs some uncovering due to its difficulty to understand. From
a Prophetic Futurists view, a brief glance at John's account shows you
that what is uncovered are those few brief years prior to the return of
Jesus to earth. It is my
thinking at present that these last few years, or, seven years to be
precise, might be considered an age in itself.
That is to say, this period of time is separate and distinct from
the present Age of Grace and the Thousand Year Rule of Christ on earth.
We
tend to view the word "revelation" in terms of being a vision,
and that it is in the book of Revelation.
That being said, in terms of the Greek word
"apokalupsis," we should understand the word
"revelation" as an unveiling or an uncovering of something, and
thus, the visions of this book are meant to uncover things about the
future that have long since been covered over.
I, therefore, suggest that since the Lord is uncovering these
things for us we should take advantage of this uncovering and attempt to
understand what is being uncovered. I
also suggest that if this book is an uncovering we should know that it
should be easy to understand. We
shouldn't have to struggle over what is being uncovered, and therefore I
lean towards thinking that we should understand Revelation to be as much a
literal account of events as possible.
In my thinking, it makes no sense that Jesus would uncover events
by hiding them in symbols or allegories.
That being said, I do understand there is a symbolic element to
this book. The problem arises
when we attempt to distinguish between what is symbolic and what is
literal. The
first words of verse 1 are a bit confusing.
They read: "The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave
him." I believe this
phrase tells us that God the Father has given the revelation.
I understand the pronoun "him" to refer to Jesus.
Therefore God gave Jesus this revelation. The
word "of" isn't in the Greek text.
Some translations read the revelation "from" Jesus, not
"of" Jesus. I prefer
the word "of". In
context, it seems to make better sense than the word "from."
This
revelation is the "revelation of Jesus Christ."
First and foremost, then, this revelation shows us who Jesus is,
what He has to say, and what He will do.
This is the first important thing to understand about this book,
even beyond its prophetic importance.
Some
people actually view the prophetic contents of this book as being
secondary to what we learn about who Jesus is.
They downplay the prophetic nature of what John writes to major on
the character of Jesus. This
should not be the case. Yes,
it is the revelation of Jesus Christ, but it is clear that it is the
revelation of what Jesus Christ will do just prior to His return to earth
in judgment. You can't ignore
that. Another
thing to think about here is that the New Testament is full of the
revelation of who Jesus was while He was on earth, that is, the suffering
servant who would die for the sins of the world.
The book of Revelation now is the revelation, or, the uncovering,
of who Jesus is right now. He
is no longer the suffering servant but the Lord of all there is, and as
being Lord, He will accomplish that which we see in these visions.
For this reason we will see that the first vision is the vision of
what Jesus looks like, and in turn, that tells us something of His
character and present role in the Godhead.
What we see of Jesus in this first vision shows us very clearly
that He is in fact the Lord of all there is.
He has the final word in all matters spiritual and material. The
picture we have of Jesus in this first chapter is very different than the
picture we see of Jesus in the gospel accounts.
So, in one sense of the word, we have an unveiling, or uncovering
of the Jesus who now is. It is
this picture of Jesus that we must have in our hearts and minds today
because this is who Jesus is, not who He was, if in fact you can say it
that way. A better way to say
this might be that we see clearly Jesus' present and future
responsibilities in the implementation of God's will that differ from His
responsibilities while on earth.
He is no longer the suffering servant.
He is Lord of Lords and King of Kings.
He has no rivals and no competition.
The
Bible speaks about Jesus returning in the clouds at the end of this age.
See Acts 1:9. The
coming of Jesus is actually an unveiling or uncovering of Jesus to a world
that has not seen Him. So,
when the text states that this book is the Revelation of Jesus Christ,
understanding the meaning of Revelation to be an unveiling, I believe
John's account is the unveiling of the hidden Jesus to the world at the
end of this age. This
unveiling is seen in two aspects. The
first aspect is what Jesus does as He enters the affairs of men and
nations in judgment. The
second aspect is His actual return to earth.
This book, especially chapter 1, does unveil to us the nature of
Jesus, that is to say, who He is, but beyond this unveiling, Revelation is
all about the unveiling of Jesus as He returns to earth.
This clearly means that you can't downplay the prophetic nature of
this book as some attempt to do.
The
last part of the first sentence says that this revelation of Jesus was
shown "to His servants what must soon take place."
The nature of this uncovering of Jesus is concerning His
intervention into humanity and the affairs of nations, which would
"soon take place," thus the prophetic nature of the revelation. The
word "servants" here is important because those who belong to
God and Christ are indeed servants of God and Christ.
That is how we should consider ourselves.
That being said, the word "servants" as it is used here
might well refer to Jews on earth during the specific time to which the
this book is directed. That
assumes you believe in a pre-tribulation rapture of the church prior to
the events of Revelation. It
also assumes that you believe the book of Revelation is primarily
dedicated to Jews, and especially those Jews living at the end of this
age. If
you notice, I left out a couple very important words in the quote in the
last paragraph. I did so
because most commentators and readers of the book of Revelation do the
same thing. The quote really
is worded this way: "The revelation of Jesus Christ who God gave to
Him to show to His servants …"
Notice to whom the revelation was given.
It was given to "Him," and in context, "Him"
refers to Jesus. This
revelation was first given to Jesus and then Jesus passed it on to His
servants. This might help
explain something. People
often can't figure out why Jesus said that not even He knew the day or the
hour of His return. See
Matthew 24:36. I believe
He does know that now, even though He didn't know it while He was on
earth. He knows it now because
He was given this revelation that He now passes on to the apostle John.
The
words "soon take place" are relative.
What this phrase exactly means is a matter of debate, or so I
think. Some say that the word
soon should be seen as "very soon," as in, John’s lifetime.
For these people, they have to look in history past to find the
fulfillment of what’s found in this revelation.
Some would thus suggest that the Book of Revelation has been in the
process of being fulfilled ever since the book was first penned.
If
"soon take place" is seen through the eyes of God, the word
"soon" is almost irrelevant.
Soon to God should not be seen as the same as soon to us.
God exists outside of our time and space environment, so this is
why "soon" is somewhat meaning less to Him.
So, just when the events of this book take place might be a matter
of interpretation, that is, does the word "soon" refer to
God’s time or our time. I
believe that soon should be thought of in terms of God's time, but that
still might not end the debate. There
is another way to view the word "soon," and this is how I view
it at present. Some Bible
translators understand the word "soon" to mean quickly because
it is translated from the Greek words "tachos" which means
"swift" or "quickly."
Therefore, when Jesus comes, He will come quickly.
The Bible certainly does say that this will be the case at the end
of this again, but once again, the word "quickly" can be
somewhat relevant. What is
quick to Jesus might not necessarily be quick to us. All
of the above being said, I note Zephaniah 1:14.
It speaks of the Day of the Lord, that is, the tribulation period
that the book of Revelation concerns.
It reads: "The great day of the Lord is near - near and
coming quickly." Zephaniah
wrote these words somewhere around 620 to 610 B C, and here we are, well
into the 2000's. I don't think
we can make a firm prophetic case for any position concerning the word
"soon" as seen here. Verse
1 also tells us that this revelation was sent by an "angel."
The Greek word translated as "angel" can also be
translated as "messenger." For
this reason some suggest that the messenger might even be the Holy Spirit,
but I believe the messenger was in fact and angel.
So, it seems to me that the Father told this revelation to Jesus
and then Jesus told it to an angel to pass it on to John to record. John
says that the messenger came "to His servant John."
John, as well as other first century Christians, viewed themselves
as servants, something that we might want to think about these days.
I think at times we think of ourselves too highly as Christians,
when in fact we are merely servants, or slaves of Jesus.
When it comes to New Testament thinking concerning being servants
of Jesus we should know that the first generation Christians believed they
were what was called a bond servant. A
bond servant was a servant by choice.
We as Christians should thus view ourselves not as servants by
force but servants by choice. We
willingly become a servant to the Lord Jesus Christ.
Verse
2 tells us that John testified to everything he saw.
John didn’t leave anything out.
He wrote it all down for us to read. What
did John see and testify to? He
says that he testified to "the word of God and the testimony of
Jesus." There are two
things here that can almost be seen as one thing.
Jesus gives a testimony to John in this revelation, and the
testimony of Jesus is in fact the Word of God as well.
You really can’t separate the two. In
verse 3 John tells us that those who read, hear, and take to heart this
prophecy will be blessed. Why
does John say this? The
reason is "because the time is near."
If one takes heed to the message of this book he, will surely be
blessed. John
says that the time is near. This
is one reason why many believe the word "soon" in verse 1 means
that the events of Revelation would soon take place after this book was
written. Many
second-century believers believed this to be true.
I remind you, the word "soon" in verse 1 can be
understood as "quickly," as in, "when Jesus comes, he will
come quickly." If the
words "soon" and "near" are in reference to time, it
will determines one's thinking concerning the timeline of Revelation.
For this reason, many Prophetic Futurists understand the seven
letters of chapters 2 and 3 to be periods of church history that soon took
place after John penned his account. For
others, these two words suggest that all of Revelation took place in the
first century. Those holding
to this position have to date the writing of Revelation in and around 66 A
D and not 95 A D as I tend to believe it was written.
Yet others, believe the prophetic revelation began soon after the
letter was penned and has been in the process of being fulfilled, right up
to our present day and then beyond. The
Book of Revelation is not a book to avoid.
Many often do avoid reading the book because it is way too
difficult to understand. If we
read, hear, and take it to heart the things we read in the book, we will
be blessed. Some avoid the
book because of its difficulty, while others avoid it because they place
prophecy low on the list of importance of theological issues.
The fact of the matter is that we should take this book to heart,
and if we do, in one way or another, we will be blessed.
I
understand that prophecy is difficult to understand, and how can we not
avoid it when we don’t understand it.
The answer is found in something Jesus told His disciples near the
end of His earthly life. He
told them that what He was presently telling them would not be understood
by them until those things took place.
See John 16:33. When
they did take place, they would remember the things He told them, and
then, they would believe. The
same should apply to us. If we
have some kind of knowledge of this book even though we have little
understanding, when the things are being fulfilled, we’ll understand and
believe. It is thus imperative
that we take the book of Revelation seriously.
There
is one important thing to know and understand when trying to figure out
this book, and that is, if you know your Old Testament, you will have a
better grasp on the book of Revelation.
Many, if not all of the symbols and concepts in Revelation are
explained in the Old Testament. It
is said that there are at least 285 quotes or allusions in this book that
are taken from the Old Testament. You
can thus certainly see how important the Old Testament is when reading the
Book of Revelation.
Greetings
And Doxology (ch. 1:4-8) In
case you missed it in verse 1, it is the Apostle John who wrote the book
of Revelation. He is
understood to be the same John that wrote the gospel of John.
If he penned this account in or around 95 A D as is traditionally
understood by most Prophetic Futurists, he would have outlived the rest of
the twelve apostles by twenty to thirty years.
In
verse 4 John says "grace and peace from …"
The word "from" tells us that John was acting as Jesus'
representative in this letter. This
is what the term "in the name of Jesus" means.
We act on Jesus' behalf as Christians, as His representatives to
our surrounding culture. We,
thus must, live in accordance with His name. This means that all we do
must not disgrace Jesus or His name. It
means that all we do, we do in obedience to the way He wants things done.
The
word "grace" was commonly used among the Romans and Greeks as
they began a letter. The word
"peace" was often used by Hebrews as they began their letters.
So, John had both the Jews and the Gentiles covered in his
introduction. John
then states that he is writing these verses to seven churches as most of
our English translations put it. I
prefer to use the word "assemblies," or the phrase "the
Community of Christ," because it better represents the text, the
language in which the text was written, and John's understanding of
church. I prefer this because
of the definition of the Greek word "ekklesia" that our English
texts translates as "church."
This can give one a completely different understanding of chapters
2 and 3 as I will point out later. These
community of believers exist in Asia Minor, which is present day To
further my thinking on the Greek word "ekklesia" and the English
word "church," I will say the following. The word
"church" is translated from the Greek word "ekklesia."
This word simply means a gathering of people, and in this case, a
gathering of people who belong to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ. It is a gathering of
people, a group of people who have been chosen out of the population at
large for a specific reason. A fishing guild, a government senate, or a
ladies knitting group, would have been considered an ekklesia.
This word was not a religious word.
The
problem with translating "ekklesia" as "church" is
that it makes us understand church in terms of today's western-world
church. I believe that is a
mistake for a few reasons. One
reason is because our modern concept of church does not reflect the New
Testament's concept of church as being the Body of Christ, or, the
community of those who have handed their lives over to the Lord Jesus
Christ, who together, accomplish God's will on earth.
Much of today's church knows little about the community aspect of
church in the way the New Testament teaches. The
above being said, there is another problem translating
"ekklesia" as "church" and that is we assume those
being spoken of here are those in the New Testament church.
If you translate "ekklesia" here as "community of
God's people," and, if you do the same in chapters 2 and 3, it will
give a whole different meaning to how to understand these verses.
The community of God's people doesn't necessarily mean the New
Testament church. It could
well mean the community of Jews living in the time when the visions of
this book will take place. This
assumes one thinks that the Book of Revelation was written to Jews in the
end of days, and not to New Testament style Christians.
At the moment, I am leaning towards the view this book was written
to Jews at the end of this age, but I admit, I could be wrong on that.
One thing I believe I can say is that the immediate group of people
to whom this book would have been delivered were New Testament Christians
in these seven specific cities. Because
of the false doctrine of Catholicism that has been predominant over the
centuries that states You
will note the number seven, as in these seven churches, and the seven
stars and lampstands. The
number seven in the Bible is seen as the number of completion by most
scholars. For example, seven days make a complete week.
Many scholars suggest these seven communities of God represent
seven churches of history, seven churches that complete the church age,
which ends in the return of Jesus. This
has been the traditional thinking for centuries, maybe as far back as the
third century. That being
said, there is no internal evidence to prove this way of thinking.
There
is controversy over the significance of the messages to the seven
churches, or, the community of God's people.
First of all, if you take things literally, you would have to say
that God wanted to say something specific to these particular people who
lived in seven specific cities when John wrote this book.
I do believe that the immediate message of Revelation was directed
towards those people, but not all believe as I do on this point.
There
is a secondary significance that most would agree upon, and that is the
words of the letters of chapters 2 and 3 can be applied to any church of
any age. There are lots of
things for us to learn from these letters, even if we were not the
immediate recipients of the letters. So,
for any of us who have an ear to hear, as the text states, we should take
serious note of these letters, which we will later. In
the second half of verse 4 we see that John speaks on the behalf of Jesus,
where this revelation originated. He
says: "from Him who is, and was, and is to come."
Here we see the eternal nature of God and of Jesus.
The Greek word "ion" is translated many times as
"eternal" in our English New Testament.
It is not used here. Some
suggest, because of the basic meaning of "ion" that eternity is
not really eternity, but only an age or a number of ages.
They think this because that is what "ion" means.
It means an age. With
this in mind, they say that the One
important fact to know is that first century Greek had no clear cut word
for eternity. Therefore, the
New Testament uses "ion upon ion," or, "age upon age,"
idiomatically to represent eternity. Knowing
this should dispel the heresy that the John
goes on to say that the following revelation is from the "seven
spirits" and Jesus Christ. The
question to be asked is this: "Who are the seven spirits?"
An alternative reading can be "sevenfold Spirit."
If you consider the alternative reading as some translations do,
then you view these seven spirits as the Holy Spirit who has seven aspects
to His nature. Some suggest
that this can be seen in Isaiah 11:2 where there are seven aspects of the
Spirit’s nature mentioned. They
are as follows: the Spirit of the Lord, wisdom, understanding, counsel,
might, knowledge, and fear of the Lord.
This is a very common interpretation. If
you consider this to be seven distinct spirits, then you believe that
there are seven spirits before the thrown of God, and that this reference
is not to the Holy Spirit. I
personally believe the translation could easily be "sevenfold"
Spirit, which tells me that this is the Holy Spirit.
I don’t believe we see any other Scripture that even suggests
that there are seven spirits before the throne, but this in itself is not
proof enough. You can’t
defend a point from silence. Some
suggest that these seven spirits are seven angels since angels are spirits
as seen in Hebrews 1:7 and elsewhere.
I don't see it that way but I certainly can see how other would see
it that way. In
verse 5 John says that the seven spirits stand before the thrown. Concerning
Jesus, he says that He is a faithful witness, the first born from the
dead, and ruler of the kings of the earth.
Jesus is the most accurate witness to the things of God in the
entire universe, whether it is the physical or spiritual universe.
When reading the first five verses of the Book of Hebrews you will
note that Jesus is the exact representation of who God is. He
is, in fact, God's mirror image. The
word "first" does not necessarily mean that Jesus was first in
the sense of being born first. Most
commentators believe the Greek idiom for first means "the
source." Jesus is the
source of all things. That
being said, He was also the first one to be raised from the dead into a
new glorified body. We will
follow Him at the day of resurrection when we as believers will inherit a
glorified body as Jesus presently has. Jesus
is also the ruler over all the kings of the earth.
This may be hard to understand at this moment, but the Bible
clearly teaches that Jesus is the final authority in the universe.
Right now, He is over all kings, prime ministers, and presidents,
even if these people don’t know it or recognize it.
Jesus is more active than we think in the political affairs of man
and their nations. We can
certainly say that He will have the final word of authority in the end.
Verses
5 through 7 are what theologians have called a “doxology.”
Our English word "doxology" comes from a Greek word that
means "to speak glorious things of someone or something."
In this sense of the word a doxology as it refers to God means to
speak about Him in glorious terms. John
is speaking glorious things about both God and Jesus in these verses. John
says: "to him who has loved us and has freed us from our sins by His
blood." This is the crux
of salvation, that is, God becoming a man.
The man Christ Jesus lived the perfect life on our behalf and died
as punishment on account of our sins.
This is the love of Christ Jesus.
The word "blood" here is in reference to Jesus' death.
We should know that Jesus' blood was no different than any other
person's blood. In itself, it
has no mystical significance. Most
scholars and medical people do not believe that Jesus shed all of His
blood while on the cross. So,
when we the word "blood" in relation to Jesus' blood we must
think in terms of His death, not necessarily in terms of Him shedding His
blood.
We
should think about what "freed us from our sins means."
I think I can safely say that Jesus has freed us from the penalty
of our sins, which is eternal damnation in the Once
the Holy Spirit enters our lives, our names are transferred into the Book
of Life, which we will see later in our study.
There is no sin associated with our names that are written in the
Book of Life.
In
verse 6 John says that He has "made us to be a kingdom and
priests." According
to the Greek text this phrase should read that we are a kingdom of
priests, not a kingdom and priests. There
is a difference in the two phrases. God's
people can be considered as both a kingdom, or a nation, as well as
priests of God.
John
says that we "are priests."
In Old Testament days God established priests to represent us to
Him and Him to us. We are now
all priests. We don’t need
to have a man set aside as one who represents us to God or God to us.
We can come to God on our own.
Doctrinally speaking, this is called "the doctrine of the
priesthood of the believer."
Over
the years man has tried many times to go back to Old Testament days.
We have tried to establish an Old Testament style priesthood in the
name of church authority. The
abuse of pastoral leadership by some dictatorial leaders is not right.
No Christian leader can claim that they stand before us and God. We
are all priests. This places
Catholicism in error. As I say
this, the book of Hebrews tells us that Jesus Himself will be our high
priest forever. We are
priests, but Jesus will always be our high priest for eternity.
He will always represent us before God.
Just why we will need a high priest in eternity, I’m not sure. John
adds the reason why we are a kingdom of priests.
He says "we can serve God the Father."
That is the main purpose of our lives.
As Christians we exist to serve God, not ourselves.
In this sense of the word, we are priest of God because priests are
those who serve. When
speaking of a kingdom of priests we should understand that this is an Old
Testament concept. The
last part of verse 6 says: "to Him be glory and power for ever and
ever. Amen."
Note the words "for ever and ever."
The RSV Greek Interlinear New Testament uses the words "ages
of the ages." This is
probably the best way that the common Greek language of the day could
express the concept of eternity. Glory
and power is found in Jesus, and will be for ever and for ever, without
ever ending. We
see in verse 7 that Jesus is coming in the clouds and that every eye will
see Him. These words should
remind us of what the angels told the disciples in Acts 1:11 when they
said that "this same Jesus … will come back in the same way you
have seen Him go into Heaven." Jesus
departed from this earth by ascending into the clouds and disappearing.
He will return from the clouds at the appropriate time. Some
of those who like to over symbolize the Book of Revelation say that these
clouds are not literal clouds but clouds of saints and angels. They
say this because of Hebrews 12:1 that speaks of a great cloud of
witnesses. I suggest that if words mean anything at all, we should
understand the word "clouds" here as being real clouds, not
people, especially in light of Acts 1:11.
That being said, I don't make a big deal over those who may
spiritualize the word "clouds" in this verse.
Verse
7 states that "every eye will see Him."
This question is often asked: "How
can every eye see Jesus return because the earth is a globe?"
How can one see His return in North America, if He returns in the Some
suggest that every eye will see Jesus' return through our modern high-tech
devices. There are a few
problems with this. One is
that I do not believe Jesus needs our modern high-tech devices.
Beyond that, Jesus' return to earth will be an immediate surprise.
No one knows the day or hour of His return. There
will be no warning, so how can those in charge of television and the
internet know how or when to focus on His return, a return that many don't
even believe will take place. That
being the case, why would they be waiting to publicized it.
Besides, will every last person on earth have these devices to
watch Jesus' return?
John
says that "even those who pierced" Jesus will see His return.
This adds an additional element to the return of Jesus.
Those who killed Jesus will not be living on earth when Jesus
returns. I believe it is
simple to figure out. The
return of Jesus will be so majestic and all powerful that even the
spiritual world, the angels, and the physically dead who presently exist
in Hades will see Him return. Obviously
Jesus does not need our high-tech devices to show His return to earth.
He is quite capable of doing it all on His own.
John
then says that "all the people on the earth will mourn" because
of Jesus’ return. I believe
all will mourn out of fear and awe. Many
will mourn from great sorrow as well since they have rejected Jesus.
Even Christians may mourn at this moment out of great awe and
respect, and maybe even a sense of fear.
Imagine a big 747 jet, or a large wide body airplane flying 100
feet above your head. The
noise would be extremely loud and maybe even painful.
The earth beneath your feet would shake and fear might pass through
your heart. This would be
nothing in comparison to the return of Jesus. Verse
8 says: "I am the Alpha and the Omega…"
Alpha and omega are the first and the last letters in the Greek
alphabet. The pronoun
"I" is in reference to Jesus.
It thus appears that Jesus, and maybe not the angel, is speaking
directly to John. Whatever the
case, Jesus is the first and the last.
He existed before the beginning and will exist after the end.
He is in fact God in glorified human terms.
The
verse continues: "says the Lord God."
If the pronoun "I" here refers to Jesus, then, the Lord
God means that Jesus is God. He
is God over all things and He is Lord over all things.
We
should note that the term "Lord God" is an Old Testament Hebrew
designation that Jews will understand during the time when Revelation is
being fulfilled. This is yet
another reason why some believe Revelation; including the so-called
churches of chapters 2 and 3, in the end, refer specifically to Jews at
the end of this age. Verse
8 ends with: "who is, who was, and who is to come."
Once again we see the eternal nature of Jesus 4.
One
Like A Son Of Man (ch. 1:9-20)
In
verse 9 and 10 we see that John was on the The
general consensus is that John was in prison for the sake of the gospel
message he preached. He said:
"I John, your brother and companion for the sufferings…"
John, like many other Christians at the end of the first century,
was experiencing great persecution because of the gospel of Christ.
It was one of ten periods of time of persecution sponsored by the Roman
government during the first three hundred years of church history.
There
are some Bible scholars that say that John was not on this island because
he was in prison. They suggest
that the Greek construction of this sentence says that God sent him there
to receive the vision. He
wasn't sent their in chains by the Roman authorities.
They compare John being sent to Patmos like Paul was sent to John
also adds the words, "and the kingdom and patient endurance…"
John was part of the In
context, we might note that the In verse 10 we note that John was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day. There is much debate over this verse. Some might debate what "in the Spirit" means, but as I understand it, John was in prayer, enveloped by the Holy Spirit. I would say that true Christians know what it is like to be in the Spirit. The term "Lord's Day" or "Day of the Lord," however, is the main source of debate.
Many,
if not most people today, would view the Lord's Day in this verse to mean
the Sabbath, or in our day, Sunday. I
suggest that it might mean something altogether different.
The term "the Lord's Day" finds its roots in the Old
Testament where it speaks of a time of world-wide judgment that brings
humanity and creation to an end as we presently know it.
In that sense of the word, the Lord's Day in this verse might refer
to the end of this present age, which, is what the Book of Revelation is
all about.
The
term "Lord’s Day" was apparently used in secular Roman society
at the time. The term referred
to the first day of the week when taxes and other obligations were paid to
the Emperor and the Roman government. This
might support the notion that John was referring to the Lord’s Day being
in Roman terms, that is, the Emperor’s Day.
Sunday,
as being a special religious day of the week took much time to evolve.
It wasn't until we get our way into the 300 A D that Sunday became
clearly designated as the Christian Sabbath.
Sunday being the Christian Sabbath began to take shape in and
around 150 A D. There doesn't
appear to be any evidence that Sunday was known as the Lord's Day when
John wrote Revelation, whether that was in 95 A D, or especially in 66 A
D. As a matter of fact, the
first known mention of the Lord's Day as applied to Sunday wasn't until
175 A D. We
should say something at this point concerning Sunday.
Nowhere in the New Testament does it actually teach that Sunday
should be a special day. You
might want to see what Paul says in Romans 14 where he wrote about special
days. He understood that there
was some controversy and differences on this point and he told his readers
that they needed to be convinced in their own thinking.
It is implied in Romans 14 that Paul believed that every day was
equal, that every day was special, that every day was the Lord's Day.
The
point I’m making is that the New Testament does not teach or have a
doctrine concerning the Lord’s Day. The present Lord's Day teaching in
church evolved outside of the pages of the New Testament as a tradition.
So, to make a doctrine out of it to apply to all Christians as the
Old Testament teaches about Sabbath is beyond the scope of New Testament
thinking, or so I believe. All
of the above being said, there is another point that could be made about
the Lord's Day and that is that it might actually refer to what the Bible
calls the Day of the Lord. The
Day of the Lord are those days that exist just prior to the return of
Christ to earth, that is, the last days.
Throughout the Old Testament the Day of the Lord is understood to
be the days when God pours out His wrath in judgment on the world.
Those who believe this say that John was transported in the Spirit
to a future time that the Bible calls the Day of the Lord.
This might well be what is meant here when the text uses the words
"on the Lord's Day." This
is my present leaning, with the understanding that I could be wrong.
The
Greek word "en" can be translated into English as
"in," "on," "by," "at," or
"with." In
Revelation 1:9 and 10 "en" appears six times.
How it is translated depends on context and more often than not,
one's view of prophecy. If
you read different translations of Revelation you will note that they
differ in how they translate this little Greek word in these two verses.
According to the NIV John was a brother in (en Greek) suffering; in
(en) Jesus, on (en) the island, on (en) the Lord's Day, and, in (en) the
Spirit. Concerning
the Lord's Day, the NIV says that John was on the island "on the
Lord's Day." Some version
say "in the Lord's day." The
NLT avoids translating "en" directly by saying: "it was the
Lord's Day …" This is
my point, depending on your view of prophecy, you will believe that John
was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, which could mean Sunday, the Sabbath.
or, in the Lord's Day of wrath and judgment yet to come that is spoken of
in the Old Testament. It
is also interesting to note the NIV states that John was "on the
island" while the NLT states that he was "exiled to the
island." Again, the
NLT avoids translating "en" directly, and, it is obvious that
there is a presupposition in the translation, which is, John was exiled.
This is the most common reason why John was on the island, but,
it's not the only reason people suggest.
Some believe John was on the island to give testimony to the Word
of God. That is to say, he was
there sharing the gospel to prisoners.
They say this because of the construction of the phrase,
"because of the Word of God."
At the moment, I tend to believe John was a prisoner on the island, but I could be wrong. I'm not as sure as I once was. I also tend, almost convinced, that John was transported into the future, into the Day of the Lord, the day of wrath and judgment. I'm not seeing the Day of the Lord here as being our Sunday. In
verse 10 John says that he heard "a loud voice like a trumpet."
If you pay attention as you read through Revelation you will note
that every time you hear someone speak in heaven, or, every time you hear
anything in heaven, what you hear is very loud.
This is the first time in the book we see this take place.
The voice John heard was loud.
I suggest that everything is heaven is loud to our frail earthly
ears. Once we get there,
things won't be so loud. It's
just that our earthly ears can't adapt to heaven.
That would be the case with all of our senses.
In
verse 11 the loud voice told John to write down on a scroll what he was
about to see and send it to the seven churches that are named.
Again, I would suggest the word "churches" be replaced by
the phrase "the communities, or, the assemblies of God's, or Jesus'
people." Then, it would
be up to you to determine what assembly of God's people are being talked
about here. It is either the The
word "write" in verse 11 is a Greek Aorist Active Imperative
verb. This means that John
must, as in a command, write down what he saw.
In
verse 12 and following we note that the voice came from behind John.
He turned to see seven golden lampstands and someone like the
"Son of Man" standing among the lampstands.
Verse 20 clearly states that the seven lampstands are the seven
churches, or, assemblies of God's people, to which the book is directed.
The one like the Son of Man is in fact Jesus as seen in verse 18.
The term "Son of Man" is an Old Testament term.
You can see it in the Book of Daniel. We
need to note the word "lampstand."
This is a clear reference to Old Testament The
description of Jesus is exceedingly majestic to say the least.
He was dressed "in a robe down to His feet and a golden sash
around His chest." Are we
to make anything out of the way Jesus was dressed?
Without overly symbolizing His apparel, such clothing was worn by
dignitaries, and those of importance in John's day. Of
course Jesus is very important. There
are also some similarities between what Jesus wore here and what the high
priest would wear in Old Testament days.
The fact of the matter is that in both Jewish and Roman culture of
the day, the clothes we see Jesus wearing here suggests authority. In
verse 14 we see that Jesus’ head and hair were white as snow.
Scripture does suggest that our sins will be as white as snow.
White as snow suggests complete purity and so Jesus in His
appearance is seen as completely pure.
Another thought that might be considered here concerning white hair
is that white hair is something that men have as they grow older and more
mature. White hair can be
understood as it is applied to Jesus in the sense that He is the eternal
wise one. His
eyes were like "blazing fire," as if He could see right through
you, and of course He can. It’s
like if Jesus stood in front of you, not as He was on earth, but as He is
now, His eyes would pierce and burn their way into your very heart and
soul. That being said, the
Greek text suggests that Jesus' eyes were shooting out fire.
Fire is in relation to judgment in the Bible.
It is thus clear that Jesus is very upset about what He is seeing
on earth.
Also
in verse 15 we see that Jesus’ voice is like the "sound of rushing
water." In
verse 16 we see that a double edged sword came out of his mouth.
It is like His tongue was this sword.
And so we see in the Book of Hebrews that the Word of God is a
double edged sword. See
Hebrews 4:12. God’s word
cuts into our souls even to the dividing of soul and spirit, so says the
same passage. Again, the sword
coming out of Jesus' mouth speaks of judgment. Isaiah
11:4 is written about the Jewish Messiah.
It speaks of Jesus, and in particular, it speaks of the sword of
his mouth and the breath of His lips bringing judgment onto the world.
This is just one of many of these characteristics of Jesus that we
see the prophets of old prophesy to the Jews.
Paul repeats this in 2 Thessalonians 2:8.
One
of the greatest sins we commit as Christians is not taking the Word of God
seriously. Some day when we
all stand before Jesus, His words will penetrate our very souls and we
will experience the reality of this two-edged sword that cuts on both
sides. His words are from His
tongue and are words of judgment. John
then says that His face was like the sun.
A brilliant light came from Jesus’ face.
His purity is so pure that it is most likely hard to look at Jesus.
We
need to realize that John said that Jesus’ head, hair eyes, feet, and
voice "were like…" It
doesn’t mean that Jesus had bronze feet, but his feet were like bronze
in a representational way. That
being said, when it comes to the glorified body of Jesus, we're not really
sure what it looks like in all of its fine details.
The same would hold true when we have our glorified bodies.
We just don't have enough information on this matter to make a firm
determination that what we see here of Jesus is merely symbolic.
Think
about this. It just might be
that in our glorified bodies our thoughts are expressed in real visible
terms. Therefore, if Jesus is
angry, that anger is visibly seen by a sword coming out of his mouth.
Now I know that sounds too far fetched for many people's liking,
but the simple fact is that we do not know or understand the world in
which our glorified bodies will exist in.
If you think this is far fetched, then, you must believe the flood
in Norah's day is far fetched as well.
That would also apply to Balaam's donkey talking to Balaam, the
burning bush before Moses, Jesus walking on the water, the resurrection of
Jesus, and numerous other things we see in the Bible. Really,
how we interpret the Bible as a whole should be carried over to how we
interpret the book of Revelation. I
attempt to understand the Bible literally as possible, although in light
of good hermeneutics, including relevant linguistic and cultural
influences. What
we see here in this first vision is the revelation, or, the unveiling or
uncovering, of who Jesus presently is.
He is no longer the suffering servant that we see in the gospel
accounts. When thinking of who
Jesus is, we must think of him in these terms, not in the terms we read
about in the gospel accounts.
In
verse 16 we see that in Jesus’ right hand were seven stars.
Verse 20 tells us what these seven stars are.
They are seven angels or messengers of the seven communities of
God's people. Remember, I'm
not using the word "churches."
I will comment on this in verse 20. We
need to know that angels are compared to stars in the Old Testament.
This is language that the Jews to whom this is written to at the
end of this age will understand, assuming this letter was in the long run
written to and for them. In
verse 17 we see John “fall at His feet as if he were dead”.
John experienced the awesome power of Jesus. He could not stand in
His presence, and I believe this will be the same for us when we meet
Jesus face to face at the end of this age.
Everyone will fall to their knees as Paul puts it in Philippians
2:10 and 11. When John says he
fell as if he were dead, this is not a simple falling by choice.
The very presence of Jesus knocked him over.
And it wasn’t like he fainted.
His breath was taken away as if he were dead. It’s like John got
hit by a freight train. As
powerful as Jesus was, and still is, He is gentle enough to understand
what was happening to John. Jesus
touched John with His right hand and told him not to be afraid.
We see the nature of Jesus here.
He is almighty in powerful, yet is sensitive to the human condition
and reaches out in love and tenderness. Then
Jesus told John this: "I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One.
I was dead and behold I am alive for ever and ever."
These words are very similar to the words that God spoke about
Himself in verse 8. As God is
eternal in greatest and power, so is Jesus. When
Jesus uses the word "firs," that doesn’t mean first as first
one to be created. Jesus was
not created. He has always
existed. He is eternal. The
word "first" means "source" in this instance.
Jesus is the source of all things, both in the past and throughout
eternity. That being said, He
is the first one to rise from the dead and exist in a new glorified bodily
form. Jesus
then said that He "holds the keys to death and Hades."
At this point we need to distinguish between death and Hades. Death
is easy. We know about death. Death
is the door into Hades, the place of the dead.
The English word Hades comes from the Greek word “Haydees”,
meaning place of the dead. Hades
in Greek mythology is actually the god of the underworld and thus the
whole underworld was seen as Hades. This
is how the first century person understood Hades.
Hades
in the Old Testament was the place of both the righteous dead and the
wicked dead. Hades in the New
Testament is the place of the wicked dead only.
When Jesus died on the cross He descended into Hades, preached the
gospel to the righteous dead and freed them into paradise.
The wicked dead remain in Hades until they are thrown into the There
is another Greek word that relates to this subject and it is "gehenna"
and is translated as hell in the KJV.
Gehenna was an actual place south of There
is still another word translated into English as hell too and it is "tartaroo."
This word is used in 2 Peter 2:4. It is a classical Greek word that
refers to a place under the ground where the wicked are punished. To
sum this up, we should know that hell is the Lake
of In
verse 19 Jesus tells John to write three things, one" "what you
have seen," two: "what is now," and three: "what will
take place later". Here
is my thinking about this verse at the moment.
How you understand this verse will determine how you understand the
rest of the book of Revelation. There
are a number of views on this verse. Here
is a bit of an exegesis of verse 19 from the NIV.
The word "write" in Greek is an aorist active imperative
verb. Simply put, John was
mandated to sit down and write. An
aorist verb is a one time action. This
writing was not to be a continuous project for John.
He had to get right to the task at hand and get it done, which is
the meaning of imperative. The
word "what," in "what you have seen" is translated
from the Greek word "hos" can mean, "about,"
"according as," "even," among other things.
The words "you have seen" is an aorist active indicative
verb. An aorist verb when used
with the indicative mood is always a one time event with no relation to
time, as in, past, present, or future.
The
words "is now" in the phrase "what is now" in the NIV
are translated from the Greek word "eimi," which is a present
active indicative verb; thus the present tense word "now" in the
NIV, although some believe "eimi" should be translated as
"signify," as is the case in many other New Testament passages.
This does change the meaning significantly of this phrase. The
words "what will take place later" in the NIV are translated
from "gimomai meta houtos."
"Gimomai" is an aorist middle infinitive verb.
An infinitive in Greek is a verb that can be used in a noun in a
sentence, but the word that places this phrase into our English future
tense is the word "meta" that can be translated into English as
"after."
Here's my take on this
verse to date. Jesus told John
to write what he has seen. Our
English word "has' suggests that John has already seen the whole
vision, but once again, the Greek verb tense may not suggest this.
If the word "has" in appropriate here, then, what John
has seen is the vision that comprises the Book of Revelation, where, John
was transported into the future. There,
he saw these visions of what was in the present and what would be in the
future.
To
help explain my last paragraph I refer you back to verse 2 where the text
reads; "John, who testifies to everything he saw."
The point here is that John had already seen all of the visions
when he penned verse 2. According
to verse 2, he was now going to testify to what he saw.
He would do this in writing since Jesus told him to do so in verses
11 and 19. Therefore, it
appears to me at present that this introductory chapter of the Book of
Revelation "might" have been written after John saw all of the visions he writes about.
Therefore, when the text reads "what you saw" in verse
19, that is in reference to the whole book of Revelation.
One
other point that may be debatable that I mentioned earlier in my exegesis
of verse 19 is this. The words
"now is" are translated as "to mean" or "to
signify." If you choose
this as your translation then that changes the meaning to this verse.
John is simply told to write the visions that he saw, what they
mean, and the future aspect to the visions.
When
it comes to the words "which will take place later," there is
not much controversy over those words.
These words clearly refer to the future. The most well known view of verse 19 among Prophetic Futurists is that the things which are now, are the things which we see in chapters 1, 2 and 3, which then would refer to the first century churches in their designated cities. The things that will take place later are obviously in the future. Thus, those holding to this view divide the book of Revelation into past, present, and future. All
of the above being said, there are a few other verses that we need to
consider as well when thinking of when John actually wrote his account.
In Revelation 2:1, as is also the case with each of the seven
letters, John was told to write what he heard.
Did John write these letters immediately, or, did he write them
later? The same would apply to
Revelation 10:4, 14:13, 19:9, and 21:5.
It's not an easy problem to solve, but in some circles, how you
solve this problem determines how you understand the chronology of the
book. In
verse 20 Jesus reveals the mystery of the seven starts and the seven
lampstands. Therefore, the
stars and the lampstands are symbols, but these symbols are explained in
the text. He says that the
stars are the angels or messengers of the seven communities of God's
people, and the seven lampstands are the seven communities. Remember, I'm
replacing the word "churches" with the words "community of
God's people". We should
note that a lampstand is not the light but holds the light.
There can be a lampstand with light or without light.
Jesus provides the light of the Spirit to the lampstands, unless He
takes the light away. The
Greek word "angelos" is translated as "angel. here and
elsewhere in the New Testament. In
its simplest form it means a messenger. In
many places in the New Testament it is translated as angel, but it can
also be translated as a messenger. The
NIV writers translate “angelos’ as angel.
Some believe the messenger is an angel that has some kind of
authority over the church and have some responsibility.
I believe this thinking is problematic in the sense that we don’t
see anywhere else in Scripture that each city church has an angel.
Then in today’s fragmented church, does every little group have
their own angel? I don't think
this text is saying that each city church has an angel, although that
might well be the case. It's
just not the topic at hand here. If
you think of these seven communities of people as being Jews who are alive
during the period Revelation speaks of, you will then note that each
Jewish priest in the Old Testament had a spokesman who would speak on his
behalf. This might well be
considered to be the messenger or angel we see here.
The
individual communities of God's people are seen as “lampstands”. Once
again note that they aren’t the light. They hold the light, and so it is
with any community of God's people, including the church.
We are to be the stand that holds the light of Jesus.
We have no light in ourselves, and if we neglect the true light
then our reason to exist is no more.
We
should understand that it is Jesus who gives the light, gives the Holy
Spirit to the people of God, whether that be Jews or the church.
It is also Jesus that withdraws the light, the Holy Spirit, from
God's people. Just because a
group of people carry the name of God doesn't mean they have the light of
the Spirit in their midst. It
doesn't mean they are a true people of God.
|