Rich man and Lazarus

It has been generally argued by Christadelphians that Jesus, in Luke 16:19-31, is deliberately using false ideas in a sort of parody. Truth be told, we are often reluctant — when preaching to others — to be drawn into a discussion of the “rich man and Lazarus.” Our reluctance testifies to the difficulties inherent in this approach, and maybe also a little discomfort at the thought of such a large portion of the words of Jesus being — fundamentally, even if ironically or sarcastically — erroneous!

In the absence of any more reasonable explanation, this approach would have to do. But perhaps there is a “better way” to read the parable.

Watch the punctuation

First of all, some background. The Greek language has a system of punctuation marks somewhat similar to ours. Originally, this was not so; there was no punctuation, and moreover, the writing was not separated into words. (“The oldest Greek manuscripts had no chapter and verse divisions, no punctuation marks and hence no separation into sentences, and not even any separation between words. All they have are line after line, column after column, page after page, through a whole book of the New Testament”: Earle, “NIV: The Making of a Contemporary Translation”). Punctuation marks were first introduced in the days of Jerome (c. 400 AD), who translated the Bible into Latin.

The best-known example of such “repunctuation,” at least to Christadelphians, is Luke 23:43, which the KJV translates: “Verily I say unto thee, Today thou shalt be with me in paradise,” but a much more appropriate translation might be “I say to you today (or even, ‘Today I say unto you’), you shall be with me in paradise.”

But other instances may be found. For example, the KJV translates Luke 16:22,23 as: “The rich man also died and was buried. And in hell he…” But William Tyndale (1525) translated this as: “The rich man died and was buried in hades.” Likewise, even the Douay (Roman Catholic) version (1582) reads: “The rich man died also, and was buried in hell.”

The Greek also has a “kai” (“and”) between “buried” and “in Hades.” So perhaps the most literal translation would be: “The rich man died and was buried, EVEN in Hades” (the “kai” used for emphasis, and here translated “even”). Or, alternatively, “The rich man died and was buried AND was in Hades” — i.e., “he died and remained in Hades” — until — when? The resurrection, of course!

The repositioning of this one period (English “full stop”) changes, at a single stroke, the whole tenor of the parable. Now it is no longer Jesus’ (ironic, but also false) description of what happens immediately after death. Rather, it is his description — in a perfectly Biblical fashion — of what will happen some considerable time after death and burial, when he returns to raise, judge, and either reward or punish all the responsible.

A couple of other points may clarify this:

V 22: “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side (or ‘Abraham’s bosom’).” “Abraham’s bosom” is supposedly a specific place in the underworld of Jewish mythology, where immediately after death the “immortal souls” (!) of the righteous are joined together with those of Abraham and all the faithful fathers. We know already that Jesus did not believe this. The question is: did he speak in a parable as though he did?

Consider an alternative: (1) First, the phrase could mean: “the beggar died, and (in the resurrection) the angels carried him to Abraham’s bosom.” (2) Second, to lie in another’s bosom is to occupy a special place of favor at a meal, something like a “guest of honor” — as John did with Jesus in the upper room (John 13:23). There are, in this same section of Luke, several references to eating meals (cp. Luke 13:28-30; 14:7-24; 15:16,17,23,28), so the idea of Lazarus reclining at a meal with Abraham is perfectly suitable to the overall context.

Lazarus enjoying a meal with Abraham provides a striking contrast: in his previous life, he was denied even the crumbs that might fall from the rich man’s table (Luke 16: 20), but now (ie, after the resurrection?!) he sits down to a sumptuous banquet (cp Luke 13:29! In fact, the whole of Luke 13:24-30 is remarkably parallel to Luke 16:19-31, seen in a “repunctuated” light: proud Jews cast out of the kingdom, with weeping and gnashing of teeth, while Gentiles and “sinners” are welcomed in.)

Likewise, being previously denied access to the “table,” Lazarus had been treated as a “Gentile,” an unclean “dog” (cp Mat 15:27). His closest companions were other “dogs,” who licked his sores (Luke 16:21). These sores were not bound up, as were the wounds of the man who fell among thieves (Luke 10:34). But later (v 22 here) they will be!

V 23: “In hell (Hades) — (the preceding goes with v 22; a new sentence begins here) — When he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus in his bosom.” Very significantly, the “hell” here is Hades, not Gehenna. Hades (literally, “the unseen place”) is equivalent to the Hebrew sheol, the grave! Throughout the New Testament it is invariably Gehenna that is associated with the fire of eternal destruction at the last day (Mat 5:2,29,30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15,33; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 12:5; Jam 3:6). Conversely, Hades — if we set aside Luke 16:23 for the moment — is never associated with burning and destruction, but always with the grave (Mat 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; Acts 2:27,31; 1Co 15:55; Rev 1:18; 6:8; 20:13,14)! Therefore, to separate Hades/grave from torment/Gehenna, as is done by the insertion of a period (and an implied passage of time between death and resurrection), is to give both Hades and Gehenna their proper meanings as in other New Testament usage. First comes the grave, and only after a resurrection and judgment is there (the possibility of) the judgment of Gehenna!

“Torment” is the Greek “basanos”. It is a word the meaning of which seems to have developed, or evolved, over time: (a) first of all, it was the black rock an assayer would use to test whether gold or silver coins were real or forgeries (he did this by rubbing the coin against the stone, and then checking the color); (b) second, by implication, it came to mean checking any calculation in a financial transaction; and from thence to (c) any type of testing; and finally (d) testing by means of torture. With basanos and related words the general concept would seem to be that of judgment, with perhaps the accompaniment of pain. Here the “torment” of the rich man would be the self-inflicted bitterness and recrimination of knowing that it is too late to set right one’s past life, and the witnessing (for some brief time after resurrection and judgment) of the beginnings of God’s glorious kingdom, knowing that one will be excluded.

Also, the “looked up” of v 23 is, literally, to lift up one’s eyes. Especially, with reference to Abraham, it suggests one’s eyes surveying the land of promise, with a view to the kingdom (Gen 13:14; Deu 3:27).

A Suggested Summary

With all the above in mind, and with the suggested punctuation, the parable might now be summarized thusly:

“There was a rich, finely-robed, well-fed man — who ignored the needs of the poor, especially a beggar named Lazarus. But after the beggar died (and was resurrected!), the angels carried him to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried in the grave. Then, later (after his own resurrection!) he was in torment, as he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side, reclining in his bosom.

“So the rich man called to ‘Father Abraham,’ begging for mercy. But Abraham reminded him that in his previous life he received good things, while Lazarus received only bad things, and now their fortunes were reversed. And now also, their lives being ended, it was too late to make amends!

“(Returning from this vision of the future, back to the present…) Seeing now that such is the fate of all who live their lives in ease and disregard for the mercies of God, the rich man begs that his family be warned. ‘Cannot someone return from the dead to bring them to repentance?’ But Abraham replies that even the resurrection of the dead (even, we might suppose, the resurrection of the Son of God!) will not be sufficient!”

The conclusion: While Jesus may well be referring in passing to the (erroneous) doctrine of “Abraham’s Bosom,” his own direct teaching in the parable may now be seen to be perfectly in harmony with the truth of the gospel. It is as if Jesus were saying:

“Yes, there is a place known as ‘Abraham’s bosom,’ but it will be the table (the ‘Marriage supper of the Lamb’) in the resurrection and the kingdom of God, and you Pharisees and Sadducees, unless you repent, will have no part in it.”

And, “Yes, there will be fiery torment for the wicked after death, but it will not be in a shadowy underworld. Instead, it will be the weeping and gnashing of teeth involved in seeing others –especially those whom they held to be unclean and sinners — enter into the resurrectional kingdom, while they themselves are thrust out! And then, ultimately, it will be the fire of eternal destruction — the ‘second death.’ “

Rich man and Lazarus, paraphrase

There was a certain nation (Israel) which was a privileged kingdom of priests, receiving great blessings from God. And there was a certain class around them, outside the bonds of their covenant, who desired to share God’s favor, since they were suffering from sin and death. And their neighbors, the Jews, could give them no relief. And these Gentiles died, and were later raised to eternal life with Abraham in God’s kingdom. But Israel was destroyed from being a nation, and suffered persecutions and trials. Because they had refused to hear God, God refused to hear their cries or ease their sufferings. All this happened because they refused to believe the one who was raised from the dead.

“Righteousness and peace kiss each other”

“Surely his salvation is near those who fear him, that his glory may dwell in our land. Love and faithfulness meet together; righteousness and peace kiss each other. Faithfulness springs forth from the earth, and righteousness looks down from heaven” (Psa 85:9-11).

“Righteousness and peace kiss each other!” Like two old friends who finally meet, after too long a separation — embracing and kissing one another, so thankful for each other’s life and health and fellowship and company.

What does it mean that, in God’s own time, and under His supervision, and to His glory, “righteousness” and “peace” finally “kiss” each other?

It will be such a blessing, such a wonderful occurrence, because of this sad fact… that God’s “righteousness” (His holiness, his awesome and perfect character) and God’s “peace” (His union, or unity — His loving family communion with sinful man) are so far apart, and so unattainable to us.

And why is that? Because, usually, and in practical outworking, and due to our sins, we have been shut out from both the “righteousness” and the “peace”.

But even more so, the Almighty — who is perfectly righteous — cannot even “look upon” sin and sinners… much less have true and lasting “fellowship” or “peace” with them! Even for the Father, “righteousness” and “peace” had to be kept at arm’s length — for He could not treat as “righteous” those who are unrighteous!

Something, or someone, was needed to bridge the gap between the “righteousness” of God and the “peace” of God.

And what, or who, might that be?!

So this was the age-old question: how could a pure God, who could not even look upon sin, save a world of sinners?

But in God’s work of salvation through His Son, two disparate (one might almost say, two mutually exclusive elements) are at work together. God’s “righteousness” is declared and vindicated in the sacrifice of His Son (Rom 3:21-31), and on that basis — the recognition of His righteousness, or holiness — God is pleased also to show His “peace”, or mercy, in the forgiveness of sins.

Thus it is a wonderful miracle that, in and through Jesus, the truth of God and the mercy and grace of God are met together in one. This mercy (grace) and truth have been manifested in the Word made flesh (Joh 1:14-18). These divine attributes parted company at the fall of the first Adam, when God’s holiness decreed an exile from the “garden” of His presence. But now they have been joined together again with the coming of the last Adam! The irreproachable righteousness of God may save sinners, and bring them “peace” (joy, fellowship, and reconciliation with Himself), without any diminishing of His absolutely righteous character, because of the mediatorship of His Son: “Father, forgive them… for MY sake!”

RIGHTEOUSNESS is perfection of character, or sinlessness.

And PEACE is “shalom” — joy, fellowship, and reconciliation with God: ie “good will toward men” (Luk 2:14)! Cp Rom 5:1; Act 10:36; Mat 5:9; Eph 2:14.

“Faithfulness springs forth from the earth, and righteousness looks down from heaven” (v 11). The figurative and poetic meeting of heaven and earth (in vv 10,11) is an anticipation of the advent of Jesus. In him heaven and earth are met together: Son of God and seed of the woman! Like the hymn: “Thy grace and truth became… Flesh for a saving name.” The righteousness of God looked down from heaven, planted the “seed” that germinated in the “earth”, ie, the soil of human nature, and from that “earth”, that soil, there sprang up a Righteous Branch, the Word made flesh, the “faithful and true witness”, the Amen of God, the priest and mediator of the Heavenly Father’s everlasting covenant with man!

Only through that man, says Paul to the Romans, can God offer “peace” (reconciliation, justification) to sinful man, whilst not letting go (as He surely cannot!) of His own righteousness and holiness.

One of the subtle beauties of these verses is that word “kiss”. God’s offer of salvation to man may be expressed in terms of a legal contract. It may even be worked out and explained in a fairly logical manner, and we are grateful that it can be so explained. Many people need such explanations in order to accept the gospel.

But, really, the gospel of salvation as presented in the Bible bears much more resemblance to a glance of love, a tender kiss, a gentle caress… the love of a Father for a small and helpless child, the love of a husband for a devoted wife… and the love of a man laying down his life for his friends.

So… is God’s plan of salvation a legal contract, or an ongoing act of love? I think it must be both — but surely much more of the latter.

But especially, in these verses, it is a way by which heaven and earth may be brought together. And a way by which the vilest of sinners (you and I) may have the veil lifted from our eyes, put out our hands, and touch the glorious face of the pure and righteous and eternal One… who has become — wonder of wonders! — our “Father”.

Roberts on fellowship

“If men were more busy judging THEMSELVES, which they are COMMANDED to do, they would not have so much propensity for judging others, which they are forbidden to do.”

“There are divisions that are uncalled for, and therefore sinful. Paul refers to such when he says, ‘Mark them that cause divisions among you contrary to the doctrine (the teaching on unity) that ye have learnt.’ He was referring, no doubt, to the factions arising out of personal preferences, but the warning applies to all divisions that ought not to be made. There is division enough, in all conscience — division that is inevitable, division that must be, unless we are to ignore divine obligations altogether; but there are divisions that ought not to be. It is possible to go too far in our demands of fellow-believers. How far we ought to go and where to stop, is at one time or other a perplexing problem to most earnest minds.”

“If good men would adopt the rule of refusing to listen to an evil report privately conveyed, until it had been dealt with to the last stage according to the rule prescribed by Christ, much evil would be prevented.”

Roberts, Robert

As a very young man, Robert Roberts (1839-1898) formulated the “Bible Companion”, a plan by which the Old Testament was read once and the New Testament twice in the course of a year. Later he became the first editor of The Christadelphian magazine, a position which he held for 34 years until his death in September 1898. During this period he upheld and guided the brotherhood by his writings and by his indefatigable ministrations in speaking and lecturing throughout Britain and abroad — especially in America and Australia. He frequently engaged in public debates with leading figures on religious topics, and staunchly upheld the absolute inspiration of the Bible. He was instrumental in formulating and writing the original Christadelphian Statement of Faith, which survives today (with slight additions) as the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith.

His published works include:

The Blood of Christ, Christendom Astray, Seasons of Comfort, Further Seasons of Comfort, Nazareth Revisited, The Ways of Providence, The Visible Hand of God, and The Law of Moses.

Rom, outline by chapter

1. Men may have a knowledge of God from general revelation, and thus all men are in some sense guilty, since they have rejected this revelation.

2. The Jews are guilty of rejecting God’s law as well, and thus are doubly guilty.

3. Since no man can be saved by his own righteousness, justification can only be by faith in the work of Jesus Christ.

4. The chief Old Testament example is Abraham, who was saved by faith.

5. The fruit of this justification is peace with God.

6. Free grace gives no license for sin, but rather provides resurrection power for a new life of righteousness.

7. Nevertheless, our regeneration introduces a struggle, within our own natures, against indwelling sin.

8. Christ works with us in the war against sin, and guarantees us our final victory in the resurrection.

9. Our security in Christ is grounded in God’s choice of us, not our choice of Him.

10. God brings His elect people to Himself by means of the preaching of the gospel.

11. God has taken the gospel to the Gentiles now, but there will come a time when Israel will also be gathered back to Him.

12. Paul shifts from theological exposition to practical application. The appropriate response to such a great salvation is to present ourselves as living sacrifices and transformed people in the ecclesia.

13. Believers should live in submission to the civil authorities.

14. Weak and strong believers need to live in harmony, understanding each other.

15. The apostle to the Gentiles hopes to visit Rome soon.

16. Paul sends greetings to the saints, and gives warnings against “wolves”.

Rom, overview

Author: Paul.

Time: AD 57.

Summary: Paul first demonstrates that Jews and Gentiles alike are sinners in the eyes of God and therefore worthy of death. That is the “bad news” that gives power to the “good news” (Rom 1:16,17), in which Paul explains that Jesus Christ is able to provide a covering for our sins. Further, he shows that Israel too, though presently in a state of unbelief, has a place in God’s plan of redemption. The letter concludes with an appeal to the readers to work out their Christian faith in practical ways.

Key verses: “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus” (Rom 3:23-24).

“An epistle which, for sublimity and truth of sentiment, for brevity and strength of expression, for regularity in its structure, and, above all for the unspeakable importance of the discoveries it contains, stands unrivalled by any mere human composition, and as far exceeds the most celebrated productions of the learned Greeks and Romans, as the shining of the sun exceeds the twinkling of the stars.”

Outline

1.	Introduction: Rom 1:1-17

2.	The unrighteousness of all mankind: Rom 1:16–3:20
	a)	Gentiles: Rom 1:18-32
	b)	Jews: Rom 2:1-3:8
	c)	Summary: all people: Rom 3:9-20

3.	Righteousness imputed: justification: Rom 3:21–5:21
	a)	Through Christ: Rom 3:21-26
	b)	Received by faith: Rom 3:27–4:25
	c)	The fruits of righteousness: Rom 5:1-11
	d)	Summary: man’s righteousness contrasted with God’s gift: Rom 5:12-21

4.	Righteousness imparted: sanctification: Rom 6-8
	a)	Freedom from sin’s tyranny: Rom 6
	b)	Freedom from the law’s condemnation: Rom 7
	c)	Life in the power of the Holy Spirit: Rom 8

5.	The problem of the rejection of Israel: Rom 9-11
	a)	The justice and cause of the rejection: Rom 9:1-10:21
	b)	The restoration of Israel: Rom 11

6.	The gospel in practice: Rom 12:1–15:13
	a)	in the body — the church: Rom 12
	b)	in the world: Rom 13
	c)	among weak and strong Christians: Rom 14:1–15:13

7.	Conclusion and greetings: Rom 15:14–16:27

Rahab (Egypt)

“Rahab” was the name of a mythological sea serpent or dragon, lit the “boisterous one,” referred to a number of times in the OT (Psa 87:4; 89:10; Job 9:13; 26:12; Isa 30:7; 51:9). The name of this monster has not hitherto been discovered in any extrabiblical text. In the OT, Rahab functions similarly to Leviathan, an originally Canaanite chaos monster, but whether these are to be identified or are separate monsters in origin is not entirely clear.

Rahab appears in two different contexts in the OT. On the one hand, it appears as a sea monster defeated at the time of creation (Psa 89:10; Job 9:13; 26:12), and on the other as a metaphorical name for Egypt (Psa 87:4; Isa 30:7). In Isa 51:9 the two usages may be combined.

Rev, date of

Eur 1:36: Iraneus (c 169 AD) is said to have introduced the opinion that Apocalypse was written in reign of Domitian (80-96). Isaac Newton does not adopt Iraneus’s opinion: he suggests Iraneus might have heard from Polycarp that he had received the Apocalypse from John about time of Domitian’s death or that John might at that time have made a new publication of it. Eusebius (3rd/4th cent) adopts Iraneus’s opinion (but is thought by some to invalidate it by conjoining the banishing of John to Patmos with the deaths of Peter and Paul).

Eur 1:37: “There is no evidence to show how long he was an exile, or in what year of his sojourn in Patmos the Apocalypse was given.”

P 38: Tertullian says John was banished to Patmos by Nero (65 AD). Arethas quotes Iraneus from Eusebius, but does not follow it: he affirms Apocalypse was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. Syriac Version in title of Apocalypse states: “into which (Patmos) he was banished by Nero.

P 39: Isaac Newton: “It seems probable to me that the Apocalypse was there composed (ie in Patmos) and that soon after, the epistle to Hebrews and those of Peter were written, with ref to this prophecy as what they were particularly concerned in.”

P 40: In conclusion, JT: “It cannot be said with certainty in what year the Apocalypse was written.” (He means, from context, a date of 65 or 67 is quite possible.) JT: “The knowledge of these particular times does not at all affect the interpretation.”

WRev 53: “The date of the writing of Rev is of fundamental importance, vitally affecting the interpretation of the book.”

P 54: 2 objections to Iraneus’s testimony: (1) his doubtful value as a witness: (a) he insists Christ died at age 50; (b) he gives credence to the fantastic story of the miraculous translation of the LXX; and (2) possible mistranslation: Instead of “it was not long since it — Apocalypse — was seen, but almost within our own generation, about the end of Domitian’s reign”…the passage could read: “It was not long since HE — John — was seen…

The book was received during a time of intense persecution (ie 1:9), and the Neronian persecutions were the only such in the 1st century.

Ellicott, vol 8, p 526: Theophylact: John was in Patmos 32 years after ascension. Also, argument by comparing Rev 2; 3 to Eph and Col (also in Asia Minor): Since very little change in conditions, the general weight is in favor of earlier date.

Clarke (6:960,961): “So many conflicting opinions.”

IBD: “External evidence — Iraneus’s being the earliest — support later date.”

ISBE: Iraneus is confirmed by Clement, Origen, etc.

Hastings (IV, 259): “The efforts to force Emperor worship upon Jews goes back to Caligula (39,40 AD).” (But ct Peake, p 928.)

1. Fulfillment Would Be “Soon”: Many verses throughout the Book stress the immediacy, and the extreme urgency, of its message: Rev 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11; 6:10,11; 22:10,12,20. How was the prophecy fulfilled “soon”? How was it “near” in the days when John received it? The obvious answer is that the Apocalypse was fulfilled (partially, at least) within a very short time after it was given. If it were written in AD 66, the events of AD 70 would certainly be considered as happening soon!

2. Authenticity of a Prophet: A very common pattern with all Bible prophecy is this: one more-or-less immediate fulfillment, usually only partial, in the days of the prophet himself, and another fulfillment much later, often related to the Second Coming of Christ. The Olivet prophecy is notable in this regard. An immediate fulfillment (ie, within at most one generation of its proclamation) was absolutely essential for every prophecy, no matter what it might mean to much later generations — for how else could a would-be prophet prove his credentials to his original listeners? See Deu 18:19-22. So a prophecy, even one written by the Apostle John, would have needed some significant fulfillment within a few years — or the churches would have been well within their rights to reject it as a false prophecy! If the Apocalypse were given, and received, shortly before AD 67, then soon-to-come events would have validated it almost immediately. But if the Apocalypse were given about AD 95 or 96, and especially if it were designed for a single, long, almost imperceptibly slow working-out spanning 1,900 years, where would be any real test of authenticity to the generation first receiving it?

3. Jesus Did “Come” in AD 70: Upon his resurrection, Jesus was given “all authority in heaven and earth” by God (Mat 28:18). Earlier, he had twice declared that the Father had placed all judgment into his hands, in order that “the Son may be honored” (Joh 5:22,23,27). In his parable about the rebellious city, Jesus predicted the destruction of Jerusalem (Mat 22:1-7). As the Son of God, Jesus sent his destroying army (the Romans) against Jerusalem. As a prophet, Jesus had to be proven right — and he was! So in the sense of bringing God’s judgment (in order to induce repentance among the people), Jesus did “come” in AD 70.

4. The Theme Verse of the Apocalypse: “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 a composite of two Old Testament prophecies, and is demonstrably a theme verse for the whole Book. The first half of the verse quotes from Dan 7:1. The rest of Revelation is based on Christ’s glory with God in heaven and his imminent return to earth in that same glory.

The second half of Rev 1:7 is derived from Zec 12:10-14. The recognition that Jesus is the Messiah brings the Jews to repentance. “Those who pierced him” means the Jews (Mat 26:14, 15,47; 27:2-12,62-66; Joh 18:39,40; 19:6; Act 2:22, 23,36; 3:13-15; 1Th 2:14,15). “The peoples of the earth” (in Rev) and “the clans of the land” (in Zec) are the same! They are the Jewish tribes (cp Rev 5:5; 7:4-8; 21:12), in contrast to “every tribe, tongue, nation, etc.” (Rev 5:9; 7:9; 13:7; 14:6). So a key opening verse in the Rev declares a “coming” of the Lord Jesus to the people of Israel, in Israel. The connection of Revelation 1:7 with the words of Jesus in his Olivet prophecy is unmistakable: Mat 24:30. Since Jesus was predicting the impending overthrow of Jerusalem (in AD 70), then this theme verse must also be part of a message predicting the imminent judgment of God upon Israel. Thus, Rev 1:7, properly seen with its OT links, may have much to say about the scope and the setting of the Book — and thus also about the date of its writing. Since the Book seems to be dealing with God’s judgments upon His people Israel, in their own land, because they have rejected His Son, then the only logical time for its writing in the first century would be before the great outpouring of those judgments, in AD 70. [See Rev, theme verse.]

5. A Judaizing Element in Revelation: Rev 2:9 and Rev 3:9 presume that there was a strong Judaizing element in the Church when John was writing. These were prob Christian brethren whose influence depended in large part on the existence of a Temple and a priesthood in Jerusalem, and whose influence would have been considerably reduced later, after Jerusalem fell in AD 70.

6. A Temple in Jerusalem: Rev 11:1-3 likewise presumes the existence, at the time of writing, of the great Temple in Jerusalem (cp Luk 21:20,21,24). This Temple was of course destroyed by the Romans in AD 70.

7. Other Pre-AD 70 Letters Quote Revelation: Several letters which were undoubtedly written before AD 70 appear to quote extensively from Revelation:

Hebrews… quotes from…	Revelation
The Word of God (Heb 4:12) (= Jesus: Heb 4:13)	The Word of God (= Jesus: Rev 19:13)
…is sharper than a two-edged sword (Heb 4:12)	…with a sharp two-edged sword (Rev 1:16; 19:15)
The city which hath (the: RV) foundations, whose builder and maker is God (Heb 11:10)	The wall of the city (of God) had 12 foundations (Rev 21:14)

And this whole sequence from Heb 12:

Mount Zion	The Lamb on Mount Zion (Rev 14:1)
Heavenly Jerusalem	New Jerusalem out of heaven (Rev 21:2)
The city of the living God	The God of the living creatures (Rev 4:6)
An innumerable company of angels	The voice of many angels (Rev 5:11)
The general assembly	The 144,000 sealed out of Israel (Rev 7; 14)
Written in heaven	Written in the Lamb’s book of life (Rev 13:8; 21:27)
God the Judge of all	The dead standing before God, to be judged (Rev 20:12)
Jesus the mediator of a new covenant	A Lamb as it had been slain (Rev 5:5,6)
The blood of sprinkling	Thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood (Rev 5:9)
Him that spoke from heaven	Revelation is the only message of Jesus spoken from heaven!´
Let us serve God	They serve Him day and night in His temple (Rev 7:15)

1 Peter quotes from…	Revelation
Things angels desire to look into (1Pe 1:12)	Angel: “Who is worthy to open the book?” (Rev 5:2)
Faith… gold tried in the fire (1Pe 1:7)	Buy gold tried in the fire (Rev 3:18)
Living stones (1Pe 2:5)	City with 12 foundations, and in them the names of the apostles (Rev 21:14)
A royal priesthood (1Pe 2:9)	Kings and priests (Rev 5:10; 1:6)
Redeemed with the precious blood of Christ as of a Lamb (1Pe 1:19)	A Lamb as it had been slain… Thou hast redeemed us (Rev 5:6,9)
The foundation of the world (1Pe 1:20)	The foundation of the world (Rev 13:8)
To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever (1Pe 5:11)	To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever (Rev 1:6)
Babylon (1Pe 5:13)	Babylon the Great (Rev 17:5)

2 Peter quotes…	Revelation
The more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well to take heed… (2Pe 1:19)	The Apocalypse itself? (What other “sure word of prophecy” could it be?)
The day star (2Pe 1:19)	The bright and morning star (Rev 2:28; 22:16)
False prophets (2Pe 2:1)	The false prophet (Rev 16:13; 19:20)
Angels… cast down to hell (2Pe 2:4)	The devil and Satan… cast into a bottomless pit (Rev 20:1-3)
Brute beasts made to be destroyed (2Pe 2:12)	The beast and false prophet and dragon… destroyed (Rev 13:11; 19:20; 20:10)
The way of Balaam (2Pe 2:15)	The doctrine of Balaam (Rev 2:14)
A thousand years (2Pe 3:8)	A thousand years (Rev 20:3,5,6)
A thief in the night (2Pe 3:10)	I will come as a thief (Rev 3:3; 16:15)
The heavens shall pass away with a great noise (2Pe 3:10)	The heaven fled away (Rev 20:11; 21:1)
We, according to his promise (where?), look for a new heavens and a new earth (2Pe 3:13)	A new heaven and a new earth (Rev 21:1)

Quite a number of the correspondences suggested above are the only occurrences of those phrases in all of the NT, and indeed, in some cases, in all of the Bible. While one or two such allusions could be attributed to mere coincidence, the (1) virtual uniqueness and (2) cumulative effect of many such allusions strengthen dramatically the case for the other writers quoting Revelation. This line of reasoning was first hinted at by Sir Isaac Newton in his writings on prophecy, and later expanded in WRev:

“It is possible to identify many allusions to the Book of Revelation in Hebrews and in the two epistles of Peter. If this assertion can be established as true, then Revelation must predate the three epistles mentioned. Since Peter definitely died in Nero’s persecution of AD 64-66 approx (much of his First Epistle was to strengthen the brethren in that fiery trial) and since Hebrews is generally admitted to have been written before the Jewish War of AD 67-70, the dating of Revelation is narrowed down to a very fine margin.

“…It may be as well to dispose of the only way of upsetting this argument. It could perhaps be suggested that whilst the links between Revelation and the three epistles may be undoubted, the facts are capable of the reverse interpretation, namely, that Revelation is borrowing from Hebrews and 1st and 2nd Peter… The answer to this comes from careful consideration of the character of the phrases under review. Practically all of them will be seen at once to be ‘Apocalyptic’ in style — they belong naturally to Revelation, they are in keeping with its idiom and symbolism: e.g. ‘the morning star’. Further, when they occur in the three epistles they often introduce matters which have received no mention whatever in their context but which are fully explained in Revelation, eg ‘the city which hath the foundations, whose builder and maker is God’ ” (WRev 55).

Questions About an Early Date

But the idea that the Revelation had a first-century fulfillment — in the Neronian persecution of the Church and the Jewish Wars of AD 67 to 70 — leads to a quite logical question: ‘Why didn’t the Kingdom of God — clearly so much a part of the Apocalypse — come in the first century?’

The answer is: it might have, if the conditions had been right. As JT wrote in Elp: “Had the nation [of Israel] continued to obey the Lord’s voice and to keep the covenant, and when Christ came, received him as king on the proclamation of the gospel, they would doubtless have been in Canaan until now [written in 1848]; and he might have come ere this, and be now reigning in Jerusalem, King of the Jews and Lord of the nations” (Elp 301, 11th ed).

So, ‘does the fact that the Kingdom of God didn’t come in the first century mean that the Apocalypse was in reality a false prophecy, ie, a prophecy not to be fulfilled?’

The answer, again, is: NO!: Sometimes, even though a particular prophecy is plainly from God and therefore inspired, it will not be completely fulfilled (at least, not at the time first anticipated) because those to whom the fulfillment of blessing should come have not properly prepared themselves to receive that blessing — or, conversely, because those upon whom the fulfillment of punishment should come have repented, and sought to be released from the judgment of God: Jer 18:7-10. A well-known case in point is the prophecy of Jonah, directed against the wicked city of Nineveh (the capital of Assyria): Jon 3:1-4. But the time for the destruction of Nineveh came and went, and the mighty city still stood, much to Jonah’s chagrin. Why? Was God’s word void? Of course not! Instead, the city, from king to slave, had repented in sackcloth and begged the mercy of God (3:5-9). And He had listened (3:10). [For more on this approach to Bible prophecy, see WRev 259-273.]

This, of course, leads to one last question: ‘If a first-century (and partial) fulfillment is a proper interpretation of the Book, then can there be any other interpretation which in any sense is also “soon” and “near”?’

YES! And the explanation is ready-at-hand, and easily grasped: see Luke 21:29-32. The Olivet prophecy is generally recognized to have two fulfillments (one in the first century and another in the near future). Likewise, the Apocalypse (which, not coincidentally, shares many points in common with the Olivet prophecy) may also have two fulfillments. The second, or Last Days, fulfillment may rightly be spoken of as “soon” or “near” if considered in relation to the proper starting point. So, to paraphrase the quotation above: ‘When you see the rebirth of the nation of Israel in the Last Days, and especially when you see Jerusalem in Jewish hands again, and again encircled by threatening enemies [cp Luk 21:20-24]… — that is, when conditions in the Middle East mirror the state of affairs in Jesus’ day — … then know that the fulfillment of all things is, from that time, very near — even upon that very generation!’

The Importance?

Why is the dating of Revelation important? Because, given the early date for its writing (AD 65/66), the Book may be seen to have had an immediate fulfillment, which then greatly influences what we may expect as its final fulfillment. In other words, the Last Days fulfillment should follow the pattern of the first century fulfillment. We can expect then:

An attack by Gentile enemies upon Jerusalem.
A downtreading period corresponding to 3 1/2 literal years (also designated as 42 months and 1,260 days).
Severe trials upon Jews living in the Land of Israel, and tribulations which may spread to the rest of the world.
Witnessing (preaching) which converts those who will listen (both Jew and Gentile) to believe in God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Judgments upon the enemies of God’s people in and around the Land of Israel.

The difference will be that, whereas the first century fulfillment stopped short of the actual Return of Christ, the final fulfillment will go on to the completion of the purpose of God. Jesus will return in glory, the dead will be raised for reward or punishment, the nations will be judged, and God’s Kingdom will be established!

Thus the Apocalypse is seen to gather together the threads of many Old Testament prophecies, and to weave them into a sequence of events that fit both the first century and the Last Days. Rather than clashing with, or standing as a contrast to, the OT prophetic picture, the Apocalypse is seen to extend and enhance it. Rather than being a mystical book, with relevance only to a few Bible scholars, the Apocalypse is seen to be quite understandable and applicable to “every tribe, tongue, people, and nation”!

Evidence for a later date:

The AD 95 date rests almost entirely on the testimony of the early Church “father” Iraneus (c AD 180) — generally considered by today’s scholars to be a rather unreliable witness. Iraneus wrote concerning John: “We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For it was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign.”

This is often assumed to fix the date when the Revelation itself was “seen” as “towards the end of Domitian’s reign”, that is, in AD 95 or 96. But the Greek text itself is ambiguous as to the key pronoun and its antecedent; it could as easily read: “…For he [ie, the apostle John himself] was seen not very long ago…” — thus saying nothing about when the Book of Revelation was written, but only about how long its author lived! (Several later “fathers” simply quote Iraneus, perpetuating the same ambiguity; their witnesses are therefore not really independent.)

Rainbow, the lesson of the

The Hebrew “qesheth” signifies “bending”. God’s rainbow was natural, conspicuous, universal, unique, and beautiful. It spoke of a permanent union between heaven and earth (Eze 1:28; Rev 4:3; 10:1).

The rainbow was composed of seven colors, symbolizing a complete revelation of God’s glory (Num 14:21). It referred to the covenants of promise, and of adoption into commonwealth of Israel (Eph 2:12) — through baptism into Christ: Gal 3:27,29, as obedience of faith: Rom 16:26.

In this scene of Rev 10:1 it was related to the promises of the Kingdom, the avenging of the Holy (Dan 8:14), the righteous wars of the saints (Psa 149), and the land of Israel (Lev 26:42).

The order of its colors also possesses a spiritual significance: (1) Red, always on outside = flesh; (2) Orange = fire of trials; (3) Yellow = refined faith (1Pe 1:7); (4) Green = renewal, resurrection; (5) Blue = godliness, heavenliness; (6) Indigo = royalty in Kingdom; (7) Violet, more perfect = royalty after Kingdom.

Thus by stages God’s plan to fill the earth with His glory is fulfilled, and the red of man and the blue of heaven become perfectly united — “God all in all.”