Resources for interpreting Revelation?

[clawrence9008]

I (very loosely) hold to an amillennial view of eschatology right now, and in the very little that I have studied in Revelation, I have found the idealist view (a la Beale) the most convincing (though I definitely see merits of some historicist positions, like the Pope being the man of sin/Antichrist). Are there any online resources or sermons that help introduce how to interpret Revelation from this idealist point of view? (Preferably not books, as I don’t currently have time to read something lengthy)

 

[Polanus1561]

The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation

by Vern Sheridan Poythress This book is published by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, P.O. Box 817, Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865-0817. It is posted on the internet by permission of t…

frame-poythress.org

Not lengthy.

 

[Ed Walsh]

Greetings,

I contend that we tend to get the interpretation of the Revelation ass-backward (if I may put it this way). The rule is that more clear passages on the same subject interpret the less clear. But often, I have seen the exact opposite rule followed into nonsense.

Regarding helpful reference works, I suggest Isaiah, Danial, Ezekiel, Numbers, the Pentateuch, plus the rest of the 65 Books that came before.

IX. The infallible rule of interpretation of scripture is the scripture itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture, (which is not manifold, but one,) it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly.y​

​

y 2 Pet. 1:20. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. Ver. 21. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Acts 15:15. And to this agree the words of the prophets, as it is written, Ver. 16. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David which is fallen down, and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up.​

​

Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith: Edinburgh Edition (Philadelphia: William S. Young, 1851), 20.​

 

[TheInquirer]

Reading Beale‘s commentary will help you a great deal with interpretive method and issues.

”Not having enough time” and ”learning to interpret Revelation” don‘t go together.

 

[clawrence9008]

Reading Beale‘s commentary will help you a great deal with interpretive method and issues.

”Not having enough time” and ”learning to interpret Revelation” don‘t go together.

That’s a fair enough point, haha. I will certainly have to read Beale’s commentary at some point, as I have profited from his lectures and from his commentary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians. I guess by “not a lot of time”I meant I was looking for something to listen to or read that would just serve as introductory material to the whole matter.

 

[Polanus1561]

Re: Beale. His interpretations are not the end all be all of Amillennialists (e.g him thinking the white horse rider of Rev 6 is a satanic imposter). He needs another commentary to complement him (I recommend Schreiner / Johnson /Poythress)

 

[TheInquirer]

No Beale isn’t (neither is Poythress or anyone else) and I also disagree with him on the white rider and several other points, but his commentary walks you through detailed arguments and his thinking regarding idealist interpretation like no one else I have read, making an excellent resource for what the OP was asking for.

 

[JvMill]

Johnson’s Triumph of the Lamb is great. Perhaps the ‘compliment’ to Beale you want. It’s also very accessible.

 

[itsreed]

Beale condensed coupled with Johnson, then Beale full on reference,
Beale full useful for subjects not yet solidified, in that it will give you enough data to work it out, even if yo end up disagreeing with Beale.

 

[Zach]

I second The Returning King by Dr. Poythress. I was taught Revelation by Dr. Poythress and found him so helpful and clear and the book is not overly difficult to grasp, such that you're equipped to wade in to the more difficult parts with the tools you need. He's also very charitable toward other views (at least in class, I can't remember off the top of my head how much he engages other views in the book). He went through a very fair and thorough strengths and weaknesses for each view, including his own.

 

[DanSSwing]

Does anyone present an idealist position that is compatible with partial preterism, e.g. acknowledging that most of the events of Revelation happened around 66-73 AD but then arguing that they will be recapitulated in some way? I just can't look past the insistence of John (and others) that the events prophecied were mello i.e. about to happen.

 

[RamistThomist]

Condensed Beale.

Although he is a premillennialist, Grant Osborne's commentary is excellent.

 

[RamistThomist]

Does anyone present an idealist position that is compatible with partial preterism, e.g. acknowledging that most of the events of Revelation happened around 66-73 AD but then arguing that they will be recapitulated in some way? I just can't look past the insistence of John (and others) that the events prophecied were mello i.e. about to happen.

I think a partial preterist needs an idealist application. If all the events are past, then there is little relevance for today in terms of history. Even though Rushdoony wasn't a preterist, he used idealism in eschatology.

 

[clawrence9008]

I appreciate all of the suggestions. I'm not sure if this is available, but are there any sermons or audio lectures out there that give an introduction to how to interpret Revelation as a whole from an idealist perspective? If I do a full study of Revelation in the future, I intend on acquiring the commentaries listed above (Beale, Poythress, Johnson, etc.), but I am more interested at this time in finding materials that serve as an introduction to interpreting the book. I don't know if I made that clear in my OP. Perhaps that isn't possible and I would have to purchase a commentary in order to do so, but I'm just curious.

 

[Zach]

I appreciate all of the suggestions. I'm not sure if this is available, but are there any sermons or audio lectures out there that give an introduction to how to interpret Revelation as a whole from an idealist perspective? If I do a full study of Revelation in the future, I intend on acquiring the commentaries listed above (Beale, Poythress, Johnson, etc.), but I am more interested at this time in finding materials that serve as an introduction to interpreting the book. I don't know if I made that clear in my OP. Perhaps that isn't possible and I would have to purchase a commentary in order to do so, but I'm just curious.

See if you can find the audio files of Dr. Poythress teaching through Westminster online. They, more than the book, were most helpful to me.

 

[TheInquirer]

Beale has many lectures on YouTube. This might be a good one to start with -

I remember liking Poythress’ lectures when I listened to them. Lectures here - https://faculty.wts.edu/lectures/revelation-introduction/

Michael Krueger at RTS will give you an explanation of Hendriksen’s approach and the 7 cycles (not entirely convinced by those but its one of the major views). Lectures here - https://subsplash.com/+3c13/learn-about-rts/li/+vhzj6jc

Reason there is so much confusion about Revelation is that there isn’t a consensus on how to interpret it. Beale has about 170 pages in the intro to his NIGTC commentary going over approaches and methods - it is a goldmine of hermeneutical info if you like to geek out on that stuff as I do.

I like Beale because he doesn’t give his readers the sense Revelation is easy to interpret as some others do. Maybe other authors genuinely think that but I don‘t find their arguments convincing. It is not hard to notice major themes running throughout the book but that is not the same as developing a biblically sound exegetical method for interpreting every passage.Beale and Poythress have done the most work I am aware of on developing hermeneutics of symbol interpretation.

 

[clawrence9008]

Exactly what I was looking for @Zach @TheInquirer , thanks so much!

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Connor, if you are going to get Beale I would suggest his larger Revelation commentary, as the abridged is – in my view – greatly inferior (it is good, but does not compare with the other).

I used to agree with Hendriksen that the rider on the white horse was the Lord – or the Gospel (Kistemaker) – but over the years came to agree with Beale and Dennis Johnson that it was the spirit of conquest.

 

[GulfCoast Presbyterian]

In general, I have found this book to be most helpful in the area of eschatology. It is however, massive in size and scope.

https://www.amazon.com/Biblical-Eschatology-Second-Jonathan-Menn/dp/1532643179