AUTHOR

The traditional author of Revelation is the apostle John, who contributed the Gospel of John and the three letters of John in the New Testament. There are good reasons to hold this view. (1) The writer refers to himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8). (2) The author had personal relationships with the seven churches of Asia Minor (1:4,11; chaps. 2–3), as did the apostle. (3) His circumstances at the time of writing (1:9) match those of John the apostle. (4) The saturation of the book with Old Testament imagery implies a Jewish writer, such as the apostle John. (5) Though the author does not claim to be the apostle John, it seems unlikely that any other first-century Christian leader would have had the authority or was associated closely enough with the churches of Asia Minor to have referred to himself simply as John.

However, because the writing style, vocabulary, and thought patterns of Revelation are quite different from those of the Gospel of John and 1, 2, and 3 John, some interpreters have reasoned the book was written by a different John, someone known in that day as “the elder.” While these observations are correct, traditional authorship is supported by the following considerations. (1) Revelation has many themes and theological ideas in common with John’s Gospel and letters. For example, only the Gospel and Revelation refer to Jesus as the Word of God (Jn 1:1; Rv 19:13) and the Lamb. The theme of “witness” is also particularly prominent in all five books. (2) Different wording is to be expected in a book that is largely of a different kind of literature from John’s other writings (see below). (3) The early church almost unanimously attributed Revelation to John the apostle.

DATE

Though some have dated the book later and a few earlier, the two most commonly held dates of Revelation are the mid 90s and the late 60s of the first century AD. Both views are held by evangelicals, but the mid-90s view is perhaps the stronger of the two as well as the majority opinion.

The primary issues involved concern the date of the persecution portrayed in the letters to the churches (2:9-10,13) and whether or not the portrayal of the beast in chapter 13 reflects a myth of the Emperor Nero returning from the dead. Some have suggested that the allusions in the text to Nero imply he was still alive at the time of writing. Furthermore, they claim, there is a reference to the temple in 11:1-2 that suggests that it had not yet been destroyed. Since the temple was destroyed in AD 70 and Nero died in about AD 68, a case can therefore be made for a late 60s date. That said, all other factors, notably the tradition that John the apostle was exiled to Patmos during a period of intensifying local persecution of Christians by the emperor Domitian, favor a date of about AD 95.

THEMATIC CONSIDERATIONS

One of the primary challenges of interpreting Revelation is determining what kind of literature it is. At first glance it appears to be apocalyptic (exotic visions and symbolism; see the Greek apokalypsis in 1:1) or prophecy (1:3). However, the reference to the human author and audience, the standard greeting (1:4) and ending (22:21), and the mini-letters in chapters 2 and 3 indicate that we must also view Revelation as a letter. While this may seem more confusing, it actually simplifies things, for we can now view the book as a much longer literary cousin of the letter of Jude, which also contains extensive apocalyptic and prophetic material within an epistolary framework. So we can interpret Revelation in much the same way as we do Jude.

A further question relates to how to decide among the interpretive approaches to the book. Is Revelation depicting: (1) the time of the writing of the book, in the first century AD (the preterist view); (2) the sweep of church history (the historicist view); (3) principles or ideas that apply equally in any time (the idealist view); or (4) the end of the age (the futurist view)? Of these approaches, the historicist approach has been discredited by the diverse, and highly subjective, understandings of the scholars who have championed the view. The other three views are helpful to one degree or another, especially when used together. It is most effective to interpret Revelation as apocalyptic prophecy primarily referring to the end times, spoken to the problems and needs of first-century churches and yet communicating principles applicable to hearers at any point in history until the end of the age.

Other interpretive challenges are posed by extensive use of the Old Testament (OT) and other writings in Revelation and its use of symbolism and numbers. When we realize that echoes of the Hebrew Bible either speak of the ultimate fulfillment of OT prophecies or point back to a key for interpreting the passage found in the OT text, much of the mystery disappears. Similarly, most symbols and numbers are biblical commonplaces, meaning what they mean elsewhere in the Bible, and are not unique to Revelation. The text interprets other images itself (e.g., 1:20).

The immediate context for both the author and the initial hearers of the book of Revelation was a group of churches (1:11; chaps. 2–3) experiencing selective persecution (2:9-10,13) in the midst of doctrinal and practical problems (2:6,13-15,20-23), set against the backdrop of unseen but powerful spiritual warfare (2:10; 9:1,11; 12:3-4,9-10; 20:2).

The teaching that appears focused on events at the end of the age (eschatology) parallels practical (Christian life) choices believers must make in the time ahead. And indeed Revelation provides a virtually complete tour of systematic theology categories. There is much about Christ, mankind and sin, the people of God (both the church and Israel), holy angels, and Satan and the demons. There is important material on God’s power, aspects of the work of the Holy Spirit, the nature of Scripture, and the wonder of salvation. The book clearly and eloquently offers the gospel, inviting its readers to enter into grand narrative—(14:6-7; 22:14,17)

The believer can learn much theology from Revelation. However, as John warned the church at Ephesus—to understand, believe, and even persevere and defend the doctrinal purity of the faith is not enough (2:2-6). Whatever temptations and alternatives may emerge (2:4-6,14-15,20-24), it is crucial to passionately love the Lord with all our hearts, placing him first in our lives. Only in this way can we become conquerors (2:4-5,7).

In the body of the book, the ultimate choice for time and eternity is whether one will worship the beast (the Antichrist figure energized by Satan; see chap. 13) or Christ the Lamb (chap. 14). The strikingly placed command in 18:4 for God’s people to “come out” of Babylon implies that both unbelievers and compromised professing Christians are, even if subconsciously, in league with the diabolical spiritual force that has martyred many of God’s saints throughout the ages (17:6; 18:20,24). For either group—unbelievers or sinning church members—the answer is to repent to gain the victory (2:5,7; 9:20-21). The warning from Revelation is thus clear: those who refuse the Lord’s offer of salvation will face a climactic judgment and eternal consequences of their choice (20:11-15; 21:7-8).