• Jesus is led from Caiaphas to Pilate’s palace very early morning, but Jews could not enter in — because they would be “defiled” (Joh 18:28). Jesus was led inside to Pilate, who has now been informed by wife of her dreams, and is beginning to waver on previous agreement, ie to consent immediately to findings of Jewish court. (Note his hesitancy from now on.)

• Pilate goes out to Jews, asking, “What accusation?” (Joh 8:29). This is, of course, perfectly legal, but is nevertheless surprising to the Jews. (Probably Pilate had previously agreed to waive “Accusatio”.) The Jews resent this new inconvenience; time is important.

• “If this man were not an evildoer, we would not have brought him to you” (Joh 18:30). They are obviously reluctant to produce a charge; they had not expected this. They are angry and affronted that Pilate would actually open the case.

• Pilate: “Take him, and judge him according to your law.” Jews: “It is not lawful to put any man to death” (Joh 18:31).

• Pilate’s unexpected response: determined to have nothing to do with this man. Jews are just as determined that he will have a part — so that Jesus will be executed.

• They begin to accuse him: “Pervert nation… forbid tribute… saying he is king” (Luk 23:2). Priests’ hasty charges, designed to appeal to Romans. No proof offered.

• Pilate returns to Judgment Hall, asks Jesus, “Are you king of Jews?” Answer: Yes (Joh 18:33-37).

Time: c 1100 BC.

Summary: The book of Ruth is dated during the latter part of the period of the Judges, and shows that in a time of national decline and immorality, God preserved a remnant that could serve as the seed for a future revival. This would be accomplished through Ruth’s descendant, David, from whom the Messiah would come. Ruth is one of four women listed in the genealogy of Christ in Mat 1, and one of two women to have Bible books named after them.

Key verse: “Don’t urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will me by people and your God my God” (Rth 1:16).

Ruth’s noble choice: Rth 1:1-22 a) Naomi’s family dies: Rth 1:1-5 b) Naomi returns from Moab: Rth 1:6-22

Ruth’s faithful service: Rth 2:1-23 Ruth and Boaz meet in the harvest

Ruth’s virtuous appeal: Rth 3:1-18 Ruth goes to Boaz at the threshing floor

Ruth’s blessed reward: Rth 4:1-22 a) Boaz arranges to marry Ruth: Rth 4:1-12 b) Naomi is blessed with a new family: Rth 4:13-22

1.	Introduction: Rev 1:1-20
	a)	Prologue: Rev 1:1-3
	b)	Greeting and doxology: Rev 1:4-8
2.	Letters to the 7 churches: Rev 2:1 – 3:22
	a)	Jesus the author: Rev 1:9-20
	b)	To Ephesus: Rev 2:1-7
	c)	To Smyrna: Rev 2:8-11
	d)	To Pergamum: Rev 2:12-17
	e)	To Thyatira: Rev 2:18-27
	f)	To Sardis: Rev 3:1-6
	g)	To Philadelphia: Rev 3:7-13
	h)	To Laodicea: Rev 3:14-22
3.	The throne, the scroll and the lamb: Rev 4:1 – 5:14
	a)	The throne in heaven: Rev 4:1-11
	b)	The scroll that no-one could open: Rev 5:1-4
	c)	The lamb who would open the scroll: Rev 5:6-14
4.	Opening the seven seals: Rev 6:1 – 8:1
5.	The seven trumpets: Rev 8:2 – 11:19
6.	Various portents and beasts: Rev 12:1 – 14:20
	a)	The woman and the dragon: Rev 12:1-17
	b)	Two beasts: Rev 13:1-18
	c)	The lamb, 144,000 redeemed and harvesting the earth: Rev 14:1-20
7.	The seven bowls: Rev 15:1 – 16:21
8.	The judgment of Babylon the great prostitute: Rev 17:1 – 19:4
9.	The triumph of the lamb: Rev 19:5 – 20:15
	a)	Hallelujah: Rev 19:6-10
	b)	The rider on a white horse: Rev 19:11-21
	c)	The 1,000 years: Rev 20:1-10
	d)	Judgement of the dead: Rev 20:11-15
10.	New heavens and new earth: Rev 21:1 – 22:21

WHAT DOES THE BIBLE REALLY SAY ABOUT RUSSIA IN PROPHECY?

Our attention is centered upon Eze 38. This chapter, which is often linked with Dan 11, has been a particular focus for Bible students in all ages. And no wonder, for it is one of the most dramatic chapters in the Bible. It portrays God’s people of Israel gathered back to their own land in the latter days, and then being attacked by a large confederate army led by Gog of the land of Magog. The main invading force comes from the north. The AV says they come from “the north parts”, but more recent translations render this as “far north” or “the recesses of the north” or “uttermost parts of the north”. This undoubtedly encouraged Dr John Thomas in his conclusion, stated in Elpis Israel, that this power could be identified with the “King of the North” in Dan 11: 40-45, since both are to meet their doom in Israel in the end time, with other nations in support.

Over the last 400 years, as printed Bibles became more readily available in many languages, there has been enormous speculation as to the identity of Gog, and the nations he would lead into this conflict, and the other nations that would be aligned with him. The level of Bible interest was perhaps at its highest in the western world in the 18th and 19th centuries; this coincided with the time of the powerful czars that ruled Russia from the time of Peter the Great, who came to power in 1689. From then on Russia was a country to be reckoned with. It is natural that Bible scholars of the period should consider Russia as a prime candidate for the “King of the North.” Historical and Scriptural evidence was adduced and a lively debate followed. Bible commentaries in the 19th century reflect this debate and the differing conclusions.

The aim of this article is to revisit this debate. We are particularly interested in the evidence on which the conclusions were based. It may also be that there is clearer evidence today, at least historically, than early brethren had available to them. They were understandably very keen to arrive at a conclusion about such a key chapter on prophecy, especially since they thought it was likely to be fulfilled in their lifetimes. It is natural that, in efforts to reach their conclusions, they would have assessed and taken into account the most current political situations and policies of the nations, giving very considerable weight to those immediate circumstances. We might not like to admit that this was (and is) done, but rather that the Bible only is the basis for prophetic interpretations; however, the evidence is compelling. In the case of the return of Israel to their homeland, by contrast, the scripture testimony was plenteous and unambiguous, and so, despite the lack of outward signs of such a return, our brethren of 150 years ago were confident in their expectations. But the identification of the King of the North was and is a different matter!

Gog of the land of Magog

Eze 38 reveals the final time when the prophet is to set his face against a power and to utter words which signal Yahweh’s pending judgement. Gog is the object of that judgement, he is “of the land of Magog”, and he is a prince. This is the first reference to Gog and Magog in the Bible. There is only one other reference, Rev 20:8, describing the nations that rebel against Christ at the end of the Millennium. In Eze 38 and 39 there are 8 refs to Gog, making it clear he is an individual, the leader of the Host. Magog probably should be seen as a collective term to describe the enemy lands from which the host comes, which is its probable meaning in Revelation although it also carries the implication of being a person. The fact that Magog is one of the sons of Japheth (Gen 10:2) adds an odd note and causes speculation. It may be there was a land named after him as with others from the beginning of history, but the Bible makes no reference to it, so it is wisest to discount it as a factor in our research. However, we should note that Josephus (Ant 1, 123, vi. 1) refers to the land of Magog as the land of the Scythians. But where is that? Scythian appears to be a term covering a multitude of different nomadic peoples of no fixed abode. I have not seen a Bible Atlas that attempts to place Magog on a map, although I found it in the back of one 19th century Bible!

The key factor is that Gog is a prince, captain or ruler! But the Bible versions differ. Some say he is a “chief prince of Meshech and Tubal”, others that he is “prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal.” This difference in translation arises from the fact that the LXX (Septuagint translation, from Hebrew into Greek in the 1st/2nd century BC) translated the word “rosh” as a proper name — as though there were a country by that name. In every other place (nearly 600) in the Old Testament it is indisputably a common noun meaning “chief, head, etc.” The Hebrew text (called the Masoretic) has vowel accents which indicate it is a common noun. Some argue that the sentence structure in the Hebrew is different, and that that justifies making rosh a proper noun. However, rosh occurs within similar sentence structures elsewhere in the Bible, eg, Isa 7:8-9, where it is obviously just a common noun. Today we have some English versions which render it as chief (ie, New Jerusalem) and some as Rosh (i.e. NIV, mg only). Jerome lived in Bethlehem, in the third century, in order to make a new translation of the Bible into Latin from the oldest manuscripts available; he refused to follow the LXX translation of Rosh as a proper noun because there was no existing nation by that name. Jerome’s translation, which became known as the Latin Vulgate, influenced the early English translations, including the AV, to all render rosh as “chief.”

Can Rosh be identified?

There have been many efforts to identify this country in ancient history. None are particularly convincing. The tendency is to quote authorities, selecting the ones who support our line of thinking. A favourite is the historian Bochart; Dr Thomas referred to him as “celebrated” but the Encyclopaedia Brittanica devotes just a few lines to Bochart. He wrote about 350 years ago and viewed Rosh as being Russia. Cook’s voluminous Commentary notes, “Traces of the name (rosh) have been found by Bochart and Frahn in ‘Ar-ras,’ the Arabian name for the river Araxes, and the people who inhabit its shores … from which the Russians are thought to have derived their name.” Is this really appropriate and sufficient evidence to prove such a major point? Even if there might be some connection between Ar-ras and rosh, this river, later called Araxes and now Arak or Aras, flows into the Caspian Sea and forms the northern border of Iran. It rises in the mountains of eastern Turkey after forming the southern boundary of Azerbaijan and Armenia. How would the name of such a river contribute to the name of a people that would be centred on Moscow 2,000 km north and emerge from the 10th century AD onwards?

So much has happened since Dr Thomas wrote his original work over 150 years ago. Archeology was in its infancy then; all the major finds of Layard and others were still in the future. Dr Thomas had to base his investigations on the comments of historians who were forming opinions on very sketchy evidence. With a better knowledge of the times, the evidence is still far from concrete when we go back into prehistory, for there was no real history of the land, the land which is now occupied by Russia, in the era before Christ. We need to realise that this type of historical research leads to very tentative evidence. But some people just have to be dogmatic! The classic case in recent history is Germany. A Cambridge University Professor of History observed that the Germans “harnessed prehistory to their racial mad chariot and did so because they felt somehow that history must be, or must be made to be, on their side…. ‘The one and only thing that matters to us,’ Himmler is supposed to have said, ‘and the thing these people (the State-employed historians) are paid for by the state, is to have ideas of history that strengthen our people in their national pride.’ ” The writer concludes by observing, “And here of course, pre-history, where we really know so little and guess so much, came into its Germanic own.” (Prof Glyn Daniels: The idea of pre-history, p 115)

If Rosh is the name of a country, it is more likely to be the people known as Rash or Rasu. “The land of Rash, on the western border of Elam, is mentioned in the cuneiform inscription (see Delitzsch, Paradies 322),” says Hastings Bible Dictionary (vol 4, page 314), commenting that this is an area further east than the prophecy seems to require. It adds, “Gesenius actually thought of the Russians, but this is impossible.” The recent IVP Illustrated Bible Dictionary (vol 3) refers to the same thing in its entry on Rosh, saying, “Most follow Delitzsch in identifying Rosh with Assyria. Rasu on the NW border of Elam (ie, Media).” Is it too far east? We will look at that later when we consider what is “north”!

Some confidently assert that Rosh is identifiable with Russia; others, like the dictionaries just referred to, equally confidently deny this, saying it is “impossible” or “unlikely,” and the New Bible Commentary Revised (p 682) declares it is “unsupportable.” What is the background to this drastic difference of judgement? We have come to the conclusion that expositors are looking for evidence to support an emotional conviction that Russia must be Rosh, and the result is not dissimilar to the search for scriptural evidence by some who are convinced they have an immortal soul. There is little doubt that the people of Russia in the Moscow region were first called Rus, and this led to the land being called Russia and the people Russians. But where did the term Rus come from? A chronicle of the history of Russia, written in the 12th century AD, says that “Varangians were known as Rus… on account of these Varangians, the Russian land received its name.” The Varangians were Scandinavian migrants from the north. The word, it is suggested, is derived from Rousti, the Finnish name for Sweden, in particular the people of today’s Roslagen area, roosmen, rowers who travelled south down the large Russian rivers. It is said that “north central Russia is full of place names derived from Finno-Ugrian.” (Cultural Atlas of Russia and Soviet Union, p 37) This development occurred in the 8th to 10th centuries AD. There is one source that suggests the name could have been in use as early as the 6th century. But some suggest that earlier the Greeks called the people “Rhos”. It is true Greek colonists before the time of Ezekiel established trading posts on the shores of the Black Sea. We know this because the historian Herodotus has left a record of a visit to the area. But the origins of the evidence that shows the name Rhos or Ros was in use then are never quoted. And even if Ros were so used, it would need to be demonstrated how that led to the name of Russia 1,400 years later. In books like the Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Russia and the Cultural Atlas of Russia, both of which have lengthy sections on the earliest history of the area, there is not the slightest hint of how this might have come about. A number of ancient history sites on the internet offer no answer either.

In the days of Ezekiel, and for more than 1,000 years afterwards, nearly all the land known today as Russia was open steppe country and, further north, forests, roamed by nomadic tribes generally referred to as Scythians. The Scythians themselves left no written records, they were not settled people, their language was not committed to writing, and the historians’ attempts to understand something about them is based almost entirely on the contents of tombs that date from the period. One interesting insight is their apparent appearance in Assyrian records and inscriptions. Kings Sargon and Esarhaddon had battles with these northern neighbours in the times of Judah and Israel. But the area in question in Bible times was that of northern Iran and Azerbaijan, not Russia. Later the Medes and Persians had to contend with the Scythians. (Ency Brit; the World Atlas of Archaeology, p 216) The Assyrians called them the Saka and, because the cuneiform inscriptions refer to “Sariti and Pariza, sons of Gaagi, chief of the Saka,” (History of Assurbanipal from cuneiform inscriptions, p 94, Cook’s Comm); some speculate whether Gaagi was a prototype of Gog! Indeed there are a number of speculations about this name, but they all seem so vague that we have not considered them.

The Nations of Ezekiel 38

If we accept, for the sake of argument, that Rosh might be a proper noun, then there is something particularly odd about the nations listed in Ezekiel 38. The names given, not only Meshech and Tubal, but also Gomer, Togarmah, Cush (Ethiopia) and Phut (Libya), are all grandsons or great grandsons of Noah. They existed from ancient times as peoples mentioned in the early chapters of Genesis — and peoples live in lands and give their names to their lands. But Rosh is the odd one out. There is no other mention of this Rosh in Scripture and no mention in secular history. Seeing that Ezekiel spent much of his life in Babylon where examples of ancient writing have survived in great abundance, the absence of any inscriptions referring to Rosh raises extreme doubt. The one possible piece of evidence is Rash or Rasu, a people lost in ancient history, who may have lived near the border of Elam.

If we accept the argument, against all the evidence, that Rosh refers to Russia, then we have another hurdle to get over. Although the other names are ancient peoples widely known as much as 1,500 years prior to Ezekiel, Russia was not to come into existence for another 1,400 years beyond Ezekiel’s day. There is no other example of God’s prophets anticipating a modern name long before it came into being. Such an approach is without parallel elsewhere in Scripture.

Those who link Rosh with Meshech and Tubal cannot explain why these two countries already warrant a mention twice in Ezekiel (Eze 27:13; 32:26) as nations that traded with Tyre and are later destroyed for their sins. Some see Meshech as being the same as Moscow. As proof they offer the word “Moschi,” but where did this word originate? Nobody has advanced any evidence. How the descendants of a grandson of Noah developed into a people about 4,500 years ago is not difficult to believe, but how they then eventually became the people of a far-distant city four millennia later, defies all but the most elastic imagination. Meshech, Tubal and Togarmah exist in Bible Atlases. But I suspect there is a lot of guesswork involved, as there is so much variation in their placement by different publishers. It may also be noted that none of the major publishers of non-Biblical history atlases place these names in their maps, although they have maps covering the same period of history, ie, the Assyrian/ Babylonian and Greek Empires.

The Russian name for Moscow is Moskva, which is one of the words of Finnish-Ugrian origin referred to earlier. Similarly, Tubal, a people which Nebuchadnezzar destroyed along with Meshech (Eze 32:11,26), surely cannot now mean the inhabitants of Tobolsk! We need more evidence than widely-separated names with similar sounds, which is the most common of occurrences across languages and time. The atlases just referred to always place these names in some part of Turkey. We also have to be consistent in our interpretations. With the ancient people of Moab, Edom, Elam etc, about which there are latter-day prophecies, we look at the areas in which they existed and understand the prophecies concerning these peoples as referring to the same areas today and the nations occupying them. We do not speculate as to where the peoples may have possibly migrated over the many centuries since the prophecies were given.

How far north?

The one remaining point to be considered is the question of “north.” On the surface the geographical evidence looks powerful. Gog will come from the “far north” (Eze 38:15), says the NKJ version. Certainly, as we look at a map, Moscow is just about due north of Jerusalem. But is this proof conclusive? Does it stand close investigation? The Hebrew for “north” has the sense of northward, as when God told Abraham to look northward, southward, eastward and westward, signifying a directional arc; northward (same word) doesn’t just mean due north. In Eze 26:7 we read, “For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus, Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings from the north.” But Babylon is almost due east of Tyre! We find several passages that speak of Babylon as being north of Israel, when strictly speaking it is east! (At any rate, the issue might well be as much the direction from which Gog and its allies attack, as their physical location in relation to the land of Israel. It is well known that those who traveled from even the far northeast on their way westward and southward — such as from Persia or Babylon to Egypt — would have entered the land of Israel from the north, due to the prevailing trade routes and best available roads of the times.)

How far north is “far north”? What does the Hebrew mean by the words which the AV renders as “north parts” and “north quarters” in Eze 38:6,15? The Hebrew word basically means border or coast and is usually rendered “side” in the AV. It first occurs in Gen 49:13 concerning “Zebulun… his border shall be unto Zidon.” So the word has the sense of outer boundary. What is the boundary of the north? The ultimate boundary is the North Pole! But surely the prophet means the boundaries of the known north. Zidon and Damascus were cities north of God’s land, but the nations over which Gog was prince were beyond these, and the indications of ancient history concerning the location of Meshech, Tubal and Togarmah fit the picture. It may be that the reason we cannot identify the areas of these nations today with absolute confidence is the outworking of the purpose of God. In the days of the prophet the vast areas of Russia were peopled by wandering nomads who rode horses and herded cattle, who left no written records, and only touched upon known history when they briefly came in contact with ancient civilisations. On the other hand, Ezekiel was writing of known peoples, some of whom were nations that traded with Tyre, even though they were nations remote from Israel.

Gog’s hidden identity in the other prophets

In conclusion, there are no genuine grounds for believing that Russia is mentioned in Bible prophecy. Yet undoubtedly there will be an end time attack on God’s people, and it will come principally from the north. It may well be that Russia will support and aid the attackers, but we cannot believe on Scriptural grounds, that Russia is the leader Gog. There is additional proof of this point in Eze 38 itself. After stating that Yahweh “will be sanctified in thee O Gog, before their eyes.” The prophet continues, “Thus saith the Lord GOD: Art thou he of whom I have spoken in old time by my servants the prophets of Israel, which prophesied in those days many years that I would bring thee against them?” (vv16,17 — a rhetorical question with an affirmative answer). So we can surely find in former prophets more passages that speak of Gog’s attack upon Israel. And we find many of them, and while the name “Gog” is not used, the message of warning is the same. We have Dan 11 of course, but may also consider Jeremiah, Joel, Obadiah, Zephaniah and Zechariah. Ezekiel is blessed with being able to give more detail of the course of events.

Finally there is Isa 14 which, when seen in its proper light, has a compelling impact. Many know this chapter because of its reference to Lucifer. V 4 tells us it is a proverb against the King of Babylon, and we might presume it refers to Nebuchadnezzar or his predecessor — or perhaps to the king of Assyria, which bore rule over Babylon in Isaiah’s day. But while this chapter certainly had an initial application close to Isaiah’s time (whatever that was, exactly), the first 4 vv make it plain that the most important application of this prophecy is to the time when Israel finally rules over its oppressors. This strongly suggests that, in a last days context, Lucifer is Gog!

The apparently never-ending feud between Jews and the Moslem Arabs, could easily see the Moslem nations of the former USSR join the fray in the near future. Turkey is the odd one out, but how quickly things can change — let us remember Iran when the Shah was in power!

We strongly suspect that if Dr Thomas were alive today, he would revise his prophetic anticipations considerably. In his preface to the 4th edition of Elpis Israel, written 17 years after the first, he acknowledges that in the third part, which deals with prophecy, he found it necessary to make the most alterations. And now, 134 years later, the scene is so totally different. His vision was wonderful for the age, but as the age changes, there is a sense in which each generation needs fresh pioneers, and a fresh look at the old interpretations. In saying this, we also most readily acknowledge the fundamental fact that Truth never changes, that there is “one hope, one Lord, one faith…” But in revisiting the question of Russia we have not been talking of fundamental truth. For 30 years the writer lectured following the traditional understanding, but then became uneasy as he saw more and more weaknesses in the evidence — compelling a complete reappraisal. This article shares the substance of that reappraisal.

Let me finish with a very telling example. The brotherhood was faced with a particular crisis of understanding the signs of the times in 1940. England stood alone against the might of Germany, which had made a pact with Russia. The U.S.A. refused to officially enter the war. France fell. (In Elpis Israel, Dr. Thomas had written about Ezekiel’s prophecy and its application of Gog and Magog to Russia and Germany.) But then Germany turned on Russia. There was confusion in the minds of many, a confusion that demonstrates the unwisdom of being dogmatic about the details of prophecy when those details are based on interpretations and not clear-cut statements. The Editor of ‘The Christadelphian’ Magazine made some very pertinent comments; after surveying the course of war as against prophetic expectations, he said, “What conclusion can we reach from these seeming contradictions? Only at present there is no conclusion: we must let events interpret prophecy. The words of the prophets are given not to make us clever but to make us humble: to reveal God’s working, not our superiority.” (May 1941)

It seems to the writer that we need to reflect on these wise thoughts again. It has been said that those who will not learn from history are destined to repeat it. Let that not be said of Christadelphians.

David Caudery

A great theme of Rev is that “the time is near” — these things were about to happen (Rev 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:10,11; 22:6,7,10,12,20). The relationship between the letters and the rest of Rev cannot be overlooked; what was to happen to them in judgment was bound up with what was to come upon the land of Palestine in AD 70. Mat 21:40 parallels the coming of the Lord with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. This is exactly the sequence of events we expect in the last days, according to Zec 14. There are many links between the trumpets, seals and the Olivet prophecy; and also many links with Josephus’ descriptions of what came upon Palestine in AD 66-70.

Rev 6:1,2	Mat 24:14
Rev 6:3,4	Mat 24:6,7
Rev 6:5,6	Mat 24:7
Rev 6:7,8	Mat 24:7
Rev 6:9	Mat 24:12
Rev 6:11	Mat 24:14
Rev 6:12	Mat 24:7
Rev 6:13	Mat 24:32
Rev 6:14	Mat 24:35
Rev 6:16	Luk 23:30
Rev 6:17	Luk 21:36
Rev 7:1	Mat 24:31
Rev 7:3	Luk 21:18,28
Rev 7:14	Mat 24:19,21
Rev 8:3	Luk 21:36
Rev 8:5	Mat 24:27

  It is clear enough that the Olivet Prophecy has application both to the “last days” of AD 70 and also to our last days. Rev is the Lord’s expansion upon His words on Olivet — and therefore we should use this as a framework for interpreting the book. See notes in the following verses, which trace some leading features of the AD 70 interpretation. The most powerful proof is in private reading of Josephus’ Wars Of The Jews — it reads like a running commentary on the seal and trumpet judgments upon Israel:

Rev 5:1; 6:2,3,9-11,14,15,16; 9:5; 11:2,8; 13:5-7; 14:20; 16:19; 17:7.

In the same way as the 1st century believers could not have accurately predicted how all this would come about, but would have been wonderfully encouraged as they saw it all happening, and perceived then the interpretation — so we will see the Rev come true, rather that be able to predict its precise fulfillment, in our final “last days”.

The briefest glance over the Apocalypse indicates that seven is a very prominent number: seven lampstands, seven letters to seven churches, seven angels, seven spirits, seven seals, seven trumpets, seven thunders, seven bowls, etc., etc. Further investigation [see page 6 in the following article] reveals that some of these “sevens” may be further organized into groups of “seven sevens”!

This is not a matter of ingenuity, chance, or coincidence. This design is from God. From the very beginning, God has worked on a “plan of sevens”:

“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it” (Exo 20:11).

God commanded Israel to memorialize this simple yet awesome truth in a calendar in which every seventh day was a special day of rest and worship. To this day, the major religions of the world — Judaism, Christianity, and Islam — all commemorate a seventh day, although for various reasons the particular day is different in each religion.

But, in God’s timetable, it is not just the seventh day that is special and sacred. It is also the forty-ninth day — the end of seven cycles of seven days each:

“And you shall count from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven full weeks shall they be, counting fifty days to the morrow after the seventh sabbath; then you shall present a cereal offering of new grain to the LORD” (Lev 23:15,16).

The “sabbath” in v 15 was the great day of the Passover. A count of 49 days — or seven sevens of days — ended with the Feast of Harvest (Exo 23:16), or the Feast of Weeks (Exo 34:22), when the firstfruits of the field were to be offered to God. This feast is also called “Pentecost” in the New Testament, from the Greek for “fifty”, because it began on the fiftieth day, ie, 49 days after Passover.

The “plan of sevens” applied to both days and years in the Jewish calendar. The seventh year was a very special “sabbath” for the people of God, just as the seventh day was a regular “sabbath” of rest:

“At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release… every creditor shall release what he has lent to his neighbor; he shall not exact it of his neighbor, his brother, because the Lord’s release has been proclaimed” (Deu 15:1,2).

Not only were debts to be forgiven after seven years, but those who were sold or had sold themselves into contractual service to satisfy debts were also to be released:

“If your brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you, he shall serve you six years, and in the seventh year you shall let him go free from you” (v 12).

The seventh year was also significant even for the soil of Israel (Deu 11:12). The Land of Israel was Covenant land, beloved and watched over by Israel’s God himself, granted especially to the people of Israel, and apportioned to each tribe. They were to hold their particular inheritance in trust only so long as God willed. As man was to rest one day in seven, the soil was to rest, or lie, fallow, one year in seven:

“When you come into the land which I give you, the land shall keep a sabbath to the LORD. Six years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your vineyard, and gather in its fruits; but in the seventh year there shall be a sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a sabbath to the LORD; you shall not sow your field or prune your vineyard. What grows of itself in your harvest you shall not reap, and the grapes of your undressed vine you shall not gather; it shall be a year of solemn rest for the land” (Lev 25:2-5).

And, with the years as with the days, the cycle of seven was itself to be repeated seven times:

“And you shall count seven weeks of years, seven times seven years, so that the time of the seven weeks of years shall be to you forty-nine years. Then you shall send abroad the loud trumpet on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the day of atonement you shall send abroad the trumpet throughout all your land. And you shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants; it shall be a jubilee [literally, a trumpet blast: cp the seven trumpets of Revelation!] for you, when each of you shall return to his property and each of you shall return to his family” (vv 8-10).

The trumpet blast that resounded and echoed throughout the Land would signal the return of all properties, sold or leased during the interim 49 years, to their original owners or — if they were deceased — to their heirs. Thus the integrity of God’s original deeding of the Land to the particular tribes would be preserved.

Several themes are evident in these divine cycles of seven and seven times seven:

• The ends of the cycles marked times when the people of God rested from their ordinary business, and especially remembered and worshiped their Creator.

• The ends of the cycles meant that God would free His people from their debts and their bondage.

• The ends of the cycles brought the return of God’s Land to its rightful owners.

• In Revelation, the recurrence of numbers and combinations of numbers which are strikingly significant in the Jewish calendar reinforces the idea that the Apocalypse is a Jewish book — about the Jewish people and the Jewish Land.

In Scripture, the special numbers seven and 49 stand for the completion of cycles and the returning of affairs to their rightful, original state. And this is what the Apocalypse is all about: a time when the kingdom of men becomes the kingdom of God and His Christ (Rev 11:15). A time when the people of God, delivered out of tribulation and bondage, will find rest and comfort with Him (Rev 7:14-17). A time when the faithful will be released from the greatest debt — sin — and the greatest bondage — death (Rev 20:4-6,11-14)!

And a time when God’s own blessed Land, long in alien hands, will itself be freed and returned to its rightful owners:

“And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself will be with them; he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.’ And he who sat upon the throne said, ‘Behold, I make all things new.’ Also he said, ‘Write this, for these words are trustworthy and true… He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son’ ” (Rev 21:3-7).

“Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen” (Rev 1:7).

This verse is set apart from all other true prophetic portions of the Apocalypse, and highlighted by the affirmative “Amen”. In fact, it might be said that the prophetic portion proper does not begin until Rev 6. So why is Rev 1:7 where it is? Perhaps because this one verse is a theme verse, or key v, for the whole of the Book. (Think of it as something of a subtitle.) If so, then what can it tell us about the terms under which the Book may be interpreted?

The first half of the verse quotes Dan 7:13:

“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven.”

So Revelation is surely about the return of Christ from the Father’s throne back to the earth. No surprise there!

What about the second half of Rev 1:7? It quotes Zec 12:10-14:

“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. On that day the weeping in Jerusalem will be great, like the weeping of Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. The land will mourn, each clan by itself, with their wives by themselves: the clan of the house of David and their wives, the clan of the house of Nathan and their wives, the clan of the house of Levi and their wives, the clan of Shimei and their wives, and all the rest of the clans and their wives.”

Are we being told, then, in this “theme verse” of the whole of Rev, that the events foretold therein are designed by God to lead to the repentance of Israel. Zec 13:1, which follows immediately after 12:14, reads:

“On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and impurity.”

So… going no further into the “murky depths” of the Apocalypse, with all its symbolic and figurative language… what does a close look at the “theme verse” alone suggest?

• The “arena” of the Apocalypse is the “land” of Zec 12: the land of promise, the (greater) land of Israel. (Why “earth” in Rev 1:7 and not “land”? Perhaps because the Greek “ge” best translates the Heb “eretz”, a word of ambiguous meaning, a word which — very often in the OT — means the “land” of Israel, and not necessarily the whole globe.)

• The “main characters” of the Apocalypse are those who inhabit this “land”, and they are further defined in Zec 12:10-13:1 as the “house of David” and the “inhabitants of Jerusalem” (and its environs?).

• In this land of Israel, a great mourning will be followed by a great cleansing for Israel… culminating in (or coinciding with) the return of their Messiah whom they crucified (Zec 12:6,7), who will deliver them from their conquering enemies (Zec 14). Then God’s Kingdom will be established…

• And, of course, the “theme verse” is also telling us that, whatever earlier (preliminary?) fulfillments there might be to the Apocalypse, the Book is preeminently about the Last Days… when…

1. the people of Israel have come back to their land (only true in the last 50 years)…

2. in ignorance of their true Messiah…
3. to suffer great threats/setbacks from their avowed enemies…

4. the trials of which will lead them to turn back to their God and His Son…

5. which will lead them next to the waters of cleansing…

6. And so their Messiah will appear to them…

7. and will vanquish their enemies…
8. and will set up the Kingdom of God.

The above is a small example of letting OT prophecies (directly quoted in the Apocalypse) aid us in setting up signposts and guidelines to understand what at first glance might seem an extraordinarily complex book.

Is it really that complex?

General Study Guidelines

• Pray to God for wisdom (Jam 1:5; Mat 7:7), believing 2Ti 3:16.
• Read every chapter in the book for yourself, thoroughly; it is essential that you familiarize yourself with the contents.

• Allow the book to explain itself; several definitions are given, and similar descriptions recur, implying the same or similar happenings.

• Use clear, simple passages to aid in unraveling the meaning of less clear, more complex passages.

• Be consistent in your interpretation; don’t force two different meanings upon a symbol or time period, in the same context.

• Remember that any conclusions must be in harmony with known basic principles of God’s truth as revealed in the rest of the Bible.

• Follow up the Old Testament and New Testament cross references, which can be especially enlightening, with due regard for context.

• Consult other books and commentaries for their suggestions and conclusions, but make sure that your own research is objective and critical.

• Discuss your own conclusions with others, but remember that your ideas and arguments must find solid support in Scripture.

• Attend Bible classes or seminars on the subject of the Revelation; be willing to change your thinking if something better is demonstrated — after all, you are looking for the right understanding.

Some Principles of Interpretation

1. The Book of Revelation is understandable, because God gave it as revealed Scripture, not concealed.

2. There is nothing in Revelation for which God did not set up the groundwork and background in the rest of the Bible.

3. The meaning of any symbolism can be (indeed, must be) found in OT and NT source passages.

4. The text should be allowed to interpret itself, and this should take precedence over other contending interpretations.

5. Any interpretations should be consistent with what has already been understood or determined to be correct.

6. Any interpretation must be in harmony with well-established principles of God’s Truth.

7. There can be more than one “application” of a passage, as long as it has valid Biblical support.

8. Reference to history as confirmation to an interpretation is allowable, and ultimately necessary to prove the accuracy of any interpretation involving the future.

9. However, unless there is a plain directive from Scripture to look at any particular date or event, historical evidence must be regarded as assumptive and speculative.

10. Any interpretation that involves future events cannot necessarily be confirmed until such events take place; but that does not mean that one has a totally uncertain interpretation, since the Return of Christ, a future event, is very certain!

11. God has placed more importance, and consequently has given more details, on the coming of Christ (both first and second) than any other Biblical event. Therefore we can expect the Revelation to have a great amount of detail about events in and around the Second Coming of Christ.

12. Without ignoring prophetic patterns and applications to past ages, the Revelation is particularly relevant to the faithful living in “the last days” and contains information that can/will have a direct impact on the 20th century.

13. No one can work out an exact timetable of what God has said He would do, even though “God reveals His secret to His servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7). However, a general framework is both reasonable and possible.

14. The book is not necessarily in chronological order; it will be apparent that some events are concurrent, and may even include “gaps” of time, ie, whole periods are skipped.

15. Correct interpretation is not an end in itself, but the means to an end, namely, the personal preparation of the Bible student for the coming King! (NF)

Consider this imaginary conversation between a teenage Sunday School student and her teacher:

Student: How do you go about understanding the Book of Revelation — it’s got all those symbols and stuff?

Teacher: Well… how have we gone about understanding any of the other Bible books?

Student: By reading them, I guess.

Teacher: Good start.

Student: But what if you don’t understand what you’re reading? Or what’s going on? For example, what are the weird-looking “living creatures”? And what do the colored horses mean? Who are the “souls under the altar” and the dragon and the beast and the woman, etc.? It’s all very confusing…

Teacher: You’re right — it can be confusing. But you have a couple of things going for you. First of all, since you have a Bible with cross references, you can look up the Old Testament and New Testament source passages and determine what the symbol or event or phrase meant originally.

S: But that would take forever! Besides, I don’t know what the Old Testament passages are about either!

T: Well, there’s no real shortcut to understanding Scripture. It takes a lot of hard mental work, and it may take many years to appreciate the richness of God’s Book. As you know, the Revelation alludes to most if not all of the previous 65 books and letters. If you don’t have a working knowledge of the earlier information, comprehending the last book of the Bible is virtually impossible.

S: That’s what I thought — it’s impossible to make sense of Revelation!

T: No, that’s not what I meant! Revelation is not incomprehensible — it’s just very difficult to come to a correct understanding unless you have a solid background in the rest of Scripture. In any case, would God go to the trouble of having Revelation written only to leave it impossible to comprehend? Of course not! The book is a disclosure, an unveiling, a revealing of God’s mind and purpose — that’s what the Greek title “Apocalypse” means! God meant it to be understood!

S: Then why did He make it so difficult?

T: Perhaps because the very best way to reveal His message is to require effort on our part. We’re told that “It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out” (Prov 25:2). So the difficulty is deliberate, to challenge us, to draw out and demand our best effort.

On the other hand, some of the difficulty is our own making. Three things get in the way: ignorance, laziness, and a false notion. Ignorance of Scripture is a fundamental problem, but can be overcome by daily reading and patient study. Mental laziness is another real problem. You not only have to read the text but also think about what it means. Finally, there’s the false notion that only Bible scholars and prophetic students will be able to figure out what the Apocalypse, or Revelation, means. That’s nonsense! God never intended any Scripture to be the exclusive privilege of intellectuals. God has given you a mind and a spirit equal to the task. Understanding the Apocalypse at some level is well within the capability of every person who prayerfully seeks to comprehend its meaning and to obey its teaching.

S: You said earlier that I had a couple of things going for me. The first was a Bible with cross references. What’s the second?

T: Thanks for reminding me. We older folks sometimes lose our train of thought. Actually, I’ve just told you. Your God-given mind is a wonderful gift. Use it. Combined with the right attitude, it’s just a matter of time before you discover the meanings and applications of the Revelation message.

S: I know you said there were no shortcuts… but is there any way to make the study easier? After all, you’re the teacher. Aren’t you supposed to at least give me some guidelines, tips, outlines, etc.?

T: You’re right. It’s part of my job to pass on what I know, just like my teachers shared what they knew. Over the years, I’ve been exposed to a wide variety of interpretations of Revelation. Some of the viewpoints are radically different and some flatly contradict others. How can you determine which is correct? Here are three guidelines that have worked for me:

Guideline #1: The interpretation must be Bible-based. That is, it must derive its fundamental teaching and source material from Scripture. To rely on uninspired writings such as those by a notable church leader, respected theologian or authoritative historian is to rely on the wrong source. By all means consult other writings and books, but don’t depend on them. Make up your own mind about what makes the most sense, remembering that any interpretation must be in harmony with the “first principles” of Bible teaching.

Guideline #2: Look for an explanation in the text itself. In many cases, the meaning of a symbol or term is provided in the next few verses. For example, the significance of the dragon (Rev 12:3,4,9) goes right back to “that ancient serpent” (Gen 3:1). Sometimes the meaning will not become clear until the events and details of another chapter are described. For example, the beast that makes war on and kills the witnesses (11:7) is not fully introduced until chapter 13.

Clues are also found in the repetition of numbers and settings. For example, the number 7 is obviously important. The time periods of 42 months, 3 1/2 years and 1,260 days are arithmetically equivalent and might point to the same time period. The areas hurt during the blowing of the first four trumpets are similar to the areas hurt when the first four bowls are poured out. These patterns and parallels should be taken into consideration.

Guideline #3: Visualize the contents and happenings of the book. It was very helpful for me to have an artist friend sketch her impressions of what the Apocalyptic people and things looked like, and what they were doing in the given setting. For example, when you see the pictures, the relationship of the dragon, beast and false prophet become clearer: The dragon empowers the beast, who in turn empowers the false prophet (Rev 13:1,2,11,12). Their eventual destruction follows the same hierarchy (Rev 19:20; 20:2,10). Another example: Revelation 12 opens by describing a “pure” woman who ends up fleeing into the wilderness, while Revelation 17 opens by describing a “bad” woman who just happens to be in the (same?) wilderness. This suggests a connection or comparison between the two women.

S: Okay, I get the picture(!). But what else can you tell me or show me — something to get a good head start on the reading and study?

T: If you have trouble following the 1611 English of the King James (Authorized) Version, get a more modern translation of the Bible for your study. Make sure it’s a widely-accepted translation, and not a paraphrase. I have found the Revised Standard Version (1946-1952) to be much more readable, and therefore much more comprehensible. The New International Version (1973) is said to be a good choice as well.

If you want to read what someone else has written on Revelation — just to give you some ideas — and if you want to consider a reasonable spectrum of Bible-based thinking, here are three books to try:

* Eureka (1861) by John Thomas, * Revelation — A Biblical Approach (1973) by Harry Whittaker, and * Apocalypse for Everyman (1982) by Alfred Norris.

That last title is especially interesting, for it implies — rightly — that the book of Revelation is meant to be read and understood and personally applied by every disciple of Jesus Christ.

But don’t postpone your own reading and study. Don’t wait until you digest someone else’s writing. Go right to the source and do your best. There are two good reasons for doing so: the blessing, and the urgency. For here’s what Rev 1:3 says:

“Blessed is he who reads the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written therein; for the time is near.”

I’ll never forget Easter 1946. I was 14, my little sister Ocy 12, and my older sister Darlene 16. We lived at home with our mother, and the four of us knew what it was like to do without many things. My dad had died five years before, leaving Mom with seven school kids to raise and no money. By 1946, my older sisters were married, and my brothers had left home.

A month before Easter, the pastor of our church announced that a special Easter offering would be taken to help a poor family. He asked everyone to save and give sacrificially. When we got home, we talked about what we could do. We decided to buy 50 pounds of potatoes and live on them for a month. This would allow us to save $20 of our grocery money for the offering. Then we thought that if we kept our electric lights turned out as much as possible and didn’t listen to the radio, we’d save money on that month’s electric bill. Darlene got as many house and yard cleaning jobs as possible, and both of us baby sat for everyone we could. For 15 cents, we could buy enough cotton loops to make three potholders to sell for $1. We made $20 on potholders.

That month was one of the best of our lives. Every day we counted the money to see how much we had saved. At night we’d sit in the dark and talk about how the poor family was going to enjoy having the money the church would give them. We had about 80 people in our church, so we figured that whatever amount of money we had to give, the offering would surely be 20 times that much. After all, every Sunday the pastor had reminded everyone to save for the sacrificial offering.

The day before Easter, Ocy and I walked to the grocery store and got the manager to give us three crisp $20 bills and one $10 bill for all our change. We ran all the way home to show Mom and Darlene. We had never had so much money before. That night we were so excited we could hardly sleep. We didn’t care that we wouldn’t have new clothes for Easter; we had $70 for the sacrificial offering. We could hardly wait to get to church! On Sunday morning, rain was pouring. We didn’t own an umbrella, and the church was over a mile from our home, but it didn’t seem to matter how wet we got. Darlene had cardboard in her shoes to fill the holes. The cardboard came apart, and her feet got wet, but we sat in church proudly, despite how we looked. I heard some teenagers talking about the Smith girls having on their old dresses. I looked at them in their new clothes, and I felt so rich.

When the sacrificial offering was taken, we were sitting on the second row from the front. Mom put in the $10 bill, and each of us girls put in a $20. As we walked home after church, we sang all the way. At lunch, Mom had a surprise for us. She had bought a dozen eggs, and we had boiled Easter eggs with our fried potatoes!

Late that afternoon the minister drove up in his car. Mom went to the door, talked with him for a moment, and then came back with an envelope in her hand. We asked what it was, but she didn’t say a word. She opened the envelope and out fell a bunch of money. There were three crisp $20 bills, one $10 bill, and seventeen $1 bills. Mom put the money back in the envelope. We didn’t talk, but instead, just sat and stared at the floor. We had gone from feeling like millionaires to feeling like poor white trash.

We kids had had such a happy life that we felt sorry for anyone who didn’t have our mom and dad for parents and a house full of brothers and sisters and other kids visiting constantly. We thought it was fun to share silverware and see whether we got the fork or the spoon that night. We had two knives which we passed around to whoever needed them. I knew we didn’t have a lot of things that other people had, but I’d never thought we were poor. That Easter Day I found out we were poor. The minister had brought us the money for the poor family, so we must be poor.

I didn’t like being poor. I looked at my dress and worn-out shoes and felt so ashamed that I didn’t want to go back to church. Everyone there probably already knew we were poor! I thought about school. I was in the ninth grade and at the top of my class of over 100 students. I wondered if the kids at school knew we were poor. I decided I could quit school since I had finished the eighth grade. That was all the law required at that time.

We sat in silence for a long time. Then it got dark, and we went to bed. All that week, we girls went to school and came home, and no one talked much. Finally on Saturday, Mom asked us what we wanted to do with the money. What did poor people do with money? We didn’t know. We’d never known we were poor.

We didn’t want to go to church on Sunday, but Mom said we had to. Although it was a sunny day, we didn’t talk on the way. Mom started to sing, but no one joined in and she only sang one verse. At church we had a missionary speaker. He talked about how churches in Africa made buildings out of sun-dried bricks, but they need money to buy roofs. He said $100 would put a roof on a church. The minister said, “Can’t we all sacrifice to help these poor people?”

We looked at each other and smiled for the first time in a week. Mom reached into her purse and pulled out the envelope. She passed it to Darlene. Darlene gave it to me, and I handed it to Ocy. Ocy put it in the offering plate. When the offering was counted, the minister announced that it was a little over $100. The missionary was excited. He hadn’t expected such a large offering from our small church. He said, “You must have some rich people in this church.”

Suddenly it struck us! We had given $87 of that “little over $100.” We were the rich family in the church! Hadn’t the missionary said so? Deep down, I knew that we were actually a rich family.

Author unknown