This last Sunday, our Church began a new sermon series in the book of Revelation. I like to joke that there are two major ways to approach Revelation by the average Christian in the pew, avoidance and conspiracy theorist. That’s a bit of an unfair quip, but there is a ring of truth.
Many strong Christians who read their Bibles regularly have never deeply reflected on the book of Revelation. Revelation for them is something of a peculiar oddity in their hearts and minds, filled with supernatural imagery and impossibly complex theological puzzles, that are better left avoided. For many on the other side, Revelation has become a horoscope to reveal the future. I half-jokingly label this approach as conspiracy theorist because very often those that spend the most amount of time charting out the order of the events in Revelation are also prone to wondering how modern events fulfill Revelation prophecies.
The word “revelation” means to reveal, to uncover, to make clear. John’s aim in writing this book was not confuse or early first century Christians who were facing increasing challenges with persecution at the hands of the Romans. Rather Revelation was given to comfort persecuted saints, and to offer clarity of what God was doing in the midst of all their difficulties.
Various Approaches to Revelation
In the opening verse, John states that the events described in Revelation will “soon take place.” Meaning Revelation prophetically predicted events in John’s future. The question for modern readers of Revelation, now nearly 2,000 years after John’s writing, is what particular events John had in mind. While this might sound like a nerdy theological question, it actually has huge implications, not only on how we read and interpret the book, but on our larger vision of Christ and his Church.
Over the years, there have been five major categories of interpretation that have developed. I outline them briefly here, and then will share my particular views underneath.
The Partial-Preterist Approach: Partial-Preterists believes that the events described in Revelation all occurred shortly after John wrote the book. This assumes the earlier date of composition (in the mid 60s AD), because the huge event that John ultimately describes is the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70AD by the Romans. Partial-Preterists believe that each chapter can fairly directly be tied to verified historic events that occurred around 70AD. Christ “returned” in 70AD to destroy the temple and end finally end the temple sacrificial system, marking the final and catastrophic end to that dispensation. Partial Preterists maintain that though Christ “returned” in 70AD to destroy the temple, he will return bodily at the end of the age in accordance with the final two chapters of Revelation.
*Note: Full Preterists reject the final bodily return of Christ that is still to come at the end of the age. I find this extremely problematic, and a direct rejection of Scripture, which is why I have only described Partial Preterism above.
The Historicist Approach: Historicists believe that all of church history is unfolding according chronologically according to the chapters in Revelation. As an example, during the Reformation in the 1500s, many theologians of the time believed they were living through the days of Revelation 13. They believed the events of chapters 4-12 occurred before them, and the events of chapters 14-21 were yet to come. Under this interpretation, we are currently living in the events of one of the chapters of Revelation, which chapter exactly no one can have certainty.
The Futurist Approach: Futurists believe that everything from chapters 4-22 will happen in our future. This view is the most common view among American evangelicals as it became incredibly popular through the Christian book series known as Left Behind, which was later made into a series of movies. Under this view, the book of Revelation is primarily describing events that will happen at the close of this age, with the rise of an antiChrist and a final battle of Armageddon.
The Idealist View: The idealist view avoids the question of timing altogether. The idealist view believes that Revelation is not about specific events at all. Rather, Revelation discusses timeless truths about the Church and the battle between good and evil. Rather than attempting to pin particular events in Revelation to particular moments in human history, Idealists see the events as echoing continually throughout history. Wherever there is persecution of Christians, the story of Revelation can be applied. Wherever there is resistance to Christ’s Kingdom, the story of Revelation can be applied.
Eclectic: Fifth, and finally, is what’s called the Eclectic View. This view acknowledges that there are strengths and weaknesses to each of the four different views, and seeks to draw from those categories as the text permits. Rather than locking oneself into one and only one grid of interpretation, Eclectic interpreters recognize the complexity of Revelation, and see to honor various passages and their potential application for the Church by drawing from different approaches as needed. The Eclectic View can vary greatly from pastor to pastor or theologian to theologian, as each pastor draws from greater or lesser degrees from each category.
My Approach
Drum roll please…
In my opening sermon to this series I shared that I would attempting to carefully utilize a version of the Eclectic Approach. But that needs some nuance to understand where I’m coming from.
After holding to a Futurist Approach for many years (with plenty of notebooks with outlines and sketches of the timeline of Revelation to prove it), I have become largely convinced of the Partial-Preterist view over the last five years or so. This means that, like Jesus’ Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24, I believe the prophetic events described in Revelation, largely and primarily concerned events that took place in the years preceding and concluding the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in 70AD. While this might sound ridiculous to some, it has become fairly clear to me. In this post I obviously cannot list out all the evidence for why I feel so strongly about this view, but suffice to say, the evidence, logic, and theological unity behind this approach is overwhelming.
Many Americans steeped in the Futurist View of will be surprised to learn of the deep well of brilliant theologians and pastors who have gone before us who have held to the Partial-Preterist View. The truth is that many of our most well respected pastors and theologians throughout Church history have shared this conviction with me. Learning that RC Sproul held to this view was in fact one of the first moments I began to reconsider my previously held Futurism.
While holding to strong Partial-Preterism, I also keenly acknowledge the attraction of the Idealist approach. In fact, I would say that many prophecies throughout the Bible, not just in Revelation but throughout many prophetic books, have both an immediate fulfillment and a much broader principle fulfilment that Christians of all ages can learn from. One need only think of the many prophecies of the Old Testament that foretold the destruction of Israel at the hands of the Babylonians. Those events were fulfilled centuries ago in 596BC, and yet the principles beneath that prophetic word are just as applicable in our life today as they were to Isaiah’s listeners back then. The God who oversaw that event in history, is the same God today, and we have much to learn from what He has done in the past.
Further, while maintaining Partial-Preterism, it does seem to me that the Apostle John does not only hold out the future events of Christ’s return solely for the final chapters of Revelation. Rather, it seems that throughout the cycles of Revelation, John continually makes mention of final end times events. This means that while the majority of John’s intention was to describe events that were to immediately take place in his generation in Jerusalem, John at moments leapt forward to final eschatological events still in our future, in order to anchor his readers in their eternal hope in Christ’s bodily return.
When you put this all together, I subscribe to a version of the Eclectic View, anchored in Partial Preterism, applying the text into our own life in today’s day age through Idealist principles, and acknowledging that at times throughout Revelation, glimmers of Futurism are acknowledgeable.
Of course, my aim in preaching a sermon is always to honor the text, exposit the text, and apply the text into our lives in such a way that we experience the text. And so, our sermon series will be far more than an explanation of historic events. Each week, we will aim to have the text master us, as it brings about conviction, repentance, new hope, new life, and joy in Christ our resurrected reigning King.
In a future post I will write about more nuanced views regarding Postmillenniallism and Optimistic Amillennialism. Revelation nerds beware… 😉
For a wonderful debate on different views of Revelation, I highly suggest the video below.
