It is accepted that the “eclectic” or “modified idealist” view (Beale)1 allows
some departure from the idealist, though as to where the line is drawn there is no clear consensus. Beale himself says,
“...certainly there are prophecies of the future in Revelation. The crucial yet problematic task of the interpreter is to identify through careful exegesis and against the historical background those texts which pertain respectively to past present and future.” 2 [emphasis added]
[1 G.K. Beale,
New International Greek Testament Commentary: Revelation (Eerdmans 1999), pp 48, 49.
2 Ibid., p 49.]
It has been clearly stated in earlier posts the difference between "pure" idealism (no historical referents at all) and the modified or eclectic (I especially liked Matthew Ball's link above to Sam Waldron:
https://cbtseminary.org/modified-idealist-revelation-1/ ). Waldron is good on eschatology, sound and balanced.
I strongly contest the view there are no referents to historic events in Revelation. Even Beale and Dennis E. Johnson, while conceding there may be such, do not give any examples, except that Johnson, speaking of the impact of the influx of demons into the human sphere shown in the fifth trumpet, says, “this outbreak of demonic activity among the unbelieving carries the expression of God’s wrath
in the course of history to a new level, a first woe.” (Dennis E. Johnson,
Triumph of the Lamb, p 149) [emphasis added]. Yet Johnson does not identify
where in the course of history this occurs, save to mention it cannot be the historicist’s “Muslim invasions of Europe (e.g., the Moors in Spain)” (ibid., p 353). Nonetheless, he says that this
particular outbreak is expressed
in the course of history, as a specific event, as distinguished from a repeated dynamic of symbolic ongoing events.
There
are Amil commentators who do understand historic events may be expected:
Geerhardus Vos, although speaking of discerning the Antichrist, enunciated
a principle applicable here,
“[It] belongs among the many prophecies, whose best and final exegete will be the eschatological fulfillment, and in regard to which it behooves the saints to exercise a peculiar kind of eschatological patience.” (The Pauline Eschatology, p. 133)
O.T. Allis in his book,
Prophecy and the Church, expressed the same sentiment:
“The usual view on this subject [‘the intelligibility of prophecy’] has been that prophecy is not intended to be fully understood before its fulfilment, that it is only when God ‘establishes the word of his servants and fulfills the counsel of his messengers,’ that the meaning and import of their words become fully manifest.” (p 25)
Stuart Olyott in his,
Dare to Stand Alone: Daniel Simply Explained, thinks likewise:
“We must realize that some of the Bible’s teachings relating to the very last days will not be understood until we are in those days. That is why it is both unwise and dangerous to draw up detailed timetables of future events. Some parts of the Word of God will not become obvious in their meaning until the days of which they speak have dawned.” (p 166)
@Steve Ski , your seeking to connect the civil magistrate and eclectic idealism to the confessions will not bear fruit, I believe, as the confessions by and large do not go into particular eschatological details and views, granting some leeway there, though they do extensively treat views on civil magistracy itself.
