Revelation 1:3-4 Bible Teaching

Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence

Revelation 1.3-4
October 23rd 2016
Meat
(On BOARD BEFORE)

Idealist Historicist Preterist Futurist Omitist

Okay we left off with a brief introduction through verses 1-2 and read through verse three, which we will do again now.

Revelation 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

Let’s cover this passage in more depth before moving on to verse 4-6.

Revelation 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

We have automatic insight into the meaning of this passage as we see a singular reference “to HE that readeth” and a plural reference, “and THEY that hear.”

It seems to me that the natural interpretation of this is speaking to a preacher or reader of the Revelation reading or teaching it before an audience of hearers.

A singular reader and a plural hearer. This fits since we know that this was being written to seven churches (hearers) and each of them would in all probability have a reader in them to read aloud what John is writing.

Whether reader or hearer, both are considered blessed – fortunate, well-off, happier – to have read and heard the contents of this revelation.

So that’s an important point for us to consider today. If this Revelation is legitimate and applicable to us today then the result should be we are all blessed by reading and hearing its contents.

Let’s keep this parameter in mind as we move through the book.

I think it’s important to our parameter that we also note that John does NOT say blessed are they who understand or know the contents of the book but merely says blessed are they who read and hear its contents.

That is interesting to me. Perhaps the reading or hearing, by the Spirit, blesses us in some manner or way that we cannot comprehend in our flesh but our spirits are fortified thereby?

Something to consider.

Having said this though, the next line certainly lends to the idea that to some extent or another the person reading and the people hearing had to comprehend some of what is being communicated here because in addition to the reader and the hearer being blessed John adds:

“and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”

Right here we are reminded of an important fact about reading and hearing Holy Writ – the keeping of what is read and heard is of great importance.

It’s almost like reading a great recipe, creating the recipe described, then refusing to eat it.

The points are here to certainly be understood so that they can be applied. Not just intellectually assimilated.

I can’t help but think of some great theologians of the past who understand the finer points of scripture but who have not let the contents flow into their hearts and/or hands.

“Blessed are they who keep those things which are written therein.”

This line however, presents all Bible readers something to wonder about – are we supposed to read and hear and keep the things which are written herein.

Because the Book is in our Bibles, this passage is greatly emphasized – and has been emphasized to believers for nearly two millennia – but does the final line give us a qualification when John adds:

“For the time is at hand.”

The signification of the Greek word used here is the same as the term used in verse 1 – the time for all that is contained herein, of all that is read and heard and is to be kept . . . is about to shortly occur.

The fact that John adds this addendum to his directive to “keep all that is written here” FOR . . . “the time is at hand,” suggests to me that it was vital that all who read and heard should keep all that was written herein.

But I’m not so convinced about it having the same application to us today – unless all that is written herein still applies in some way or another.

And it may – if not literally, then spiritually or allegorically – as the Idealists maintain.

One notion we have not considered when it comes to viewing the contents of the Book is to suggest that all views (except the Omitest) are equally valid.

We might refer to this as the Collectivist View (ON BOARD) which might take the Idealist, Historicist, Preterist and Futurist views and maintain that they are all equally viable, worthwhile and applicable.

I do think, however, that it cannot be doubted that the writer meant to immediately impress upon them the importance of attending to these things of this book because either everything (or somethings) were going to happen soon.

Additionally, its worth noting that this is the only book in the Bible of which carries a “special blessing” for those who read, hear and keep its contents.

Because of this we have to confidently assume that its contents are understandable.

Alright, verses 4-6 – which to me sounds like another sort-of introduction:

4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

The word Asia is used in quite different senses, by different writers, so we have to consider how to try and see what John means here. First, it is used

To refer to the whole eastern continent now known by that name;

(or) to part of Asia which Attlus III., king of Pergamos, gave to the Romans. This Asia would include the lands of Mysia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Lydia, Carla, Pisidia, and the southern coast—in other words, all in the western, south-western, and southern parts of Asia Minor; and

Then in the New Testament, the south-western part of Asia Minor is usually referred (of which Ephesus was the capital.)

Asia is not found in the Old Testament but is used in the books of Maccabees.

We do know, however that in the New Testament Asia is not used in the large sense that we use it today (meaning the whole continent) but in its largest application is only referred to what is called, Asia Minor.

Luke uses Asia to describe a country called, Ionia, but it seems that John meant to describe a region where Ephesus was the principal city, and it was in this region that the “seven churches” were situated.

Therefore we read, “John to the Seven Churches in Asia.”

Were there more that seven churches? Could have been. It could have been that the Seven were the primary churches of that day.

We know from the New Testament that two other churches are mentioned (Colosse and Hierapolis) but they were probably destroyed by an earthquake prior to John receiving and recording this revelation. The Roman historian Tacitus, (Annal. xiv. 27; compare also Pliny, N.H. v. 29,) reports that in the time of Nero (A. D, 61) that the city of Laodicea was destroyed by an earthquake, in which earthquake, according to Eusebius, the adjacent cities of Colosse and Hierapolis were involved.

Laodicea was immediately rebuilt, but there is no evidence of the re-establishment of the church there before the time when John wrote this book.

This makes the Preterist argument weaker as the earliest mention we have of a church in Laodicea after the earthquake in 61 was in the time of Trajan, when Papias was bishop there and which was sometime between A.D. 98 and 117.

However, it is possible that when Laodicea was immediately rebuilt after the 61 AD destruction that they gave special attention to making it materially superior to its former self, that this contributed to the rich and self-satisfied description Jesus gives to it in the chapters to come, and that a pre-70 AD dating of the Revelation is still entirely possible.

John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come;

Grace be unto you and peace was a common form of greeting a church as we can see from the writings of Paul.

“From him which is, and which was, and which is to come.”

Bottom line – from Him who is eternal.
From one embracing all duration, past, present, and what is to come.

We recall that God (Elohyim) said to Moses in Exodus 3:14 when asked His name:

“I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”

This is the self existent one. I see no need to “divide in order to describe” or identify this as the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit. It is God – all are God.

The phraseology “From him which is, and which was, and which is to come,” is purely Jewish, and probably taken from the Tetragrammaton, (HWHY) pronounced by us as YEHOVAH, a name that apparently includes in itself “all time” – past, present, and future, or, as John reports, this is a Revelation from him:

“which is, and which was, and which is to come.”

In response to the question to one Rabbi Samuel ben David of:

“Why are you commanded to use three hours of prayer? His answer was:

“These hours point out the holy blessed God who WAS, who IS, and who SHALL BE. The MORNING prayer points out him who WAS before the foundation of the world; the NOONDAY prayer points out him who IS; and the EVENING prayer points out him who IS TO COME.”

So here John is pointing out that this revelation is coming from a being who is from all eternity.

So we have “that which WAS (being the eternity before time) “that which IS,” (which is within time itself); and “that which IS TO COME,” (which is the eternity which shall be when time is no more.)

Could it be that a message or revelation who cannot be pinpointed to any time or place as beginning but merely always just being providing us a Revelation that must be read in a similar fashion?

That perhaps all of our limited human attempts to capture the real meaning of the book are failures because we keep trying to box a God and His revelation into our extremely limited views?

(beat)

Just as an FYI, there have been some remarkable discoveries where human beings and peoples of ancient societies have also assigned eternality to themselves or their gods.

For instance Greek biographer Plutarch, (De Is. et Osir. p. 354,) speaking of a temple of Isis, in Egypt, says,

“It bore this inscription: ‘I am all that was, and is, and shall be, and my vail no mortal can remove’

Orpheus, the Greek legend, is said to hav said: “Jupiter is the head, Jupiter is the middle, and all things are made by Jupiter.”

So in Pausanias, 2nd Century Greek geographer wrote:

“Jupiter was; Jupiter is; Jupiter shall be.”

“John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;”

Every month for probably eight years my little older brother in the faith, One Jeddie, asks me something (or says something) about the Seven Spirits.

What makes this line wild is that John tells us that the Revelation is from the eternal one (God) AND . . . AND . . .

“And from the seven spirits which are before his throne.”

The phrase “seven Spirits” is only used in Revelation:

Here we read:

John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

In chapter three verse one we will read:

1 “And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.”

In chapter four verse five we will read

5 “And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.”

And in Revelation 5:6 we read

“And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.”

Taking these verses we can say from scripture (not from any ideas or opinions from Man, but from scripture) that:

The Revelation is from God AND the Seven Spirits.
That the person speaking to the church at Sardis has the Seven Spirits.
That the seven lamps burning before the throne of God “are the seven Spirits of God,” and
That the Lambs seven eyes and horns “are the Seven Spirits God sent forth into all the earth.”

Before we discuss some of Man’s ideas of who or what the Seven Spirits are I do find it intriguing that Jesus mentions seven Spirits in His teachings which are reported in Matthew and in Luke

In Matthew 12:43-45 Jesus teaches an important spiritual principle, saying:

43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.
44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.
45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.

Is the number seven representative here or are we to take this literally? Do the seven wicked spirits have any relation to the fact that seven spirits are mentioned as being before the throne of God in Revelation?

Can’t say – yet.

But Luke uses seven spirits one more time in his Gospel narrative, which is the only other place seven spirits are spoken of in scripture.

It’s in Luke 8:2 where we are introduced to Mary Magdalene and read:

“And certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils,”

So twice in the New Testament (sans the Book of Revelation) the term seven spirits is used and in both they speak of evil spirits.

Of course the seven in Revelation are closely linked to God and His throne – but I think we need to keep it in the back of our mind that every other time (only two) that where seven spirits are alluded to they are evil.

A lot – I mean a lot – has been written of the Seven Spirits. And after all that has been written it is still impossible to determine with certainty who or what they are or mean.

But let me hit on the main theories.

First, they refer to God. Johan Godfried Eichorn taught this as did George Ewald, the German exegete.

But if the Seven Spirits refers to God it seems it would have to be seen as pure tautology, which means saying the same thing in a different way in succession, like “she had acne all over her pimply face” – saying the same thing in a different way in succession – a tautology.

In other words some believe that Seven Spirits is just another way to say God.

How the Seven Spirits could be describes as “before the throne of God” is a ontological mystery but no more mysterious than the Holy Spirit being God and standing apart from God on his throne.

Bible scholar Grotius believes that it refers to “the multiform providence of God,” or to God considered as operating in seven or many different ways. But few salute this flag when raised.

A third opinion, perhaps the most popular, is that the reference is to seven attending and ministering angels; angels represented as standing before the throne of God, or in his presence.

This opinion was adopted among many of the ancients through the views of Clemens of Alexandria and includes some more modern thinkers (though not modern to us) such as Beza, Drusius, Hammond, Wetstein, Rosenmuller, Clarke, and Stuart (among others).

But among them this opinion is understood in different ways.

Some maintaining that the seven angels are referred to because of the Hebrew tradition that there were seven angels standing in the presence of God (just as seven princes stood in the Persian court before the king).

Others believe that the angels of the seven churches are particularly referred to here, represented at this point in the Revelation as “standing in the presence of God.”

Some suggest that that seven angels, represent seven principal angels that are employed in the governance of the world.

Others think they are seven archangels.

Those who think the seven spirits are angels of some type (without the specifics) sustain their views in the following ways:

Beings that stand before the throne of God are angels – typically. So that makes sense.
There are other passages in the Book of Revelation that describe seven angels. Hence,

Revelation 8:2: “And I saw the seven angels which stood before God.”

(3.) As mentioned, the Hebrews held this view and in the Book of Tobit, an apocraphal book, Raphael introduces himself saying,

“I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy One.”

Also, in the apocryphal book of Enoch (chapter 20) gives the names of the seven angels “who watch” – meaning they are watchers (like it says in Daniel) who stand in the presence of God waiting for the Divine commands and/or who watch over the affairs of men.

Even in the “Zendavesta of Zoroaster,” seven archangels, are also mentioned.

However, there are great rejections toward this view.

The first is it sounds like equal rank is given to these angels as to God himself. This would be a no-no.

Also, if these seven spirits refer to angels there is the thought that it will lead to angel worship but we know from scripture that God alone is to be worshipped.

Finally, there is a theory that states that these seven spirits refer to the Holy Spirit.

This is supported by the idea that Jesus has been mentioned thus far in the the first three verses, so has Him “who was, and is, and is to come,” so it only makes sense that the third person of the Trinity also gets a nod.

The example of 2nd Corinthians 13:14 is used as an example of this, where Paul says:

“The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.”

It is also pointed out that the word used here is not angels, but spirits – very different terms, and though angels are spirits (and that the word spirit is applied to them in Hebrews 1:7) it seems that angels would have been used if that is what they were.

Taking this into account it is thought that since these Spirits are called the Spirits of God, and God is deity, then these spirits are expressions of deity, seven in form, possibly seven characteristics of God, which He sends into the world by and through His Holy Spirit or breath.

Because the number seven is often representative of a full or complete number it is thought that this refers to the complete spirit of God represented by seven, which would mean the Holy Spirit.

Also, as we will soon realize, the number seven is evidently a favorite number in the book of Revelation, and it might be used by the author in places, and in a sense, such as it would not be likely to be used by another writer.

Therefore there are seven epistles to the seven churches; there are seven seals, seven trumpets, seven vials of the wrath of God, seven last plagues; there are seven lamps, and seven Spirits of God; the Lamb has seven horns and seven eyes.

We also see (in Revelation 1:16) “seven stars” are mentioned; in Revelation 5:12, seven attributes of God; in Revelation 12:3, the dragon has seven heads; and in Revelation 13:1, the beast has seven heads.

Therefore, and again, the number seven may have been given to the Holy Spirit with reference to the diversity or the fulness of his operations on the souls of men and to its full agency on the affairs of the world.

Finally, and this is a stretch, but because this is a book that describes judgment, and because the book of Job has God calling the Sons of God with Satan being among them, and the references to seven evil spirits in some of the Gospel accounts, maybe we ought to also wonder if the seven spirits are in fact wicked and wild and are bringing forth the message of judgement to the world.

Have to consider it before we can discount it, right?

So in verse four we read:

4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come (God); and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne (not Sure) and then verse five;

5 And . . . from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

This inclusion of Jesus makes one wonder that if the Seven Spirits are NOT speaking of the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Holy Trinity, that maybe we have yet another reason to wonder about the supposed third person.

Anyway,

“And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness.”

I think Jesus is called the faithful witness in a number of senses.

First, as the Word made flesh, He was faithful in His witness of the Father.

Secondly, on passing this specific revelation on He is again a faithful witness.

“And the first-begotten of the dead.”

The is the exact same expression in the Greek that occurs in Colossians 1:18.

I think it is very significant that Paul explains that it was at His resurrection that God says, “Today I have begotten thee.”

To me this says that as a man who died, Jesus was shown to be the true Son of God after He rose from the grave and that this would be the case of all who were about to shortly be raised from the same, showing that God had also begat them by and through the Spirit.

And then Jesus is described as, “And the prince of the kings of the earth.”

King of Kings, Lord of Lords. He has rule over all the kings of the earth the pre-eminence which kings have over their subjects.

The word translated Prince here is taken from Ar-kone, from the root, achae meaning the primary , the first, the principle King or Ruler over all kings of the earth.

It is His. It is Him. He reigns – not Hilary not Trump and not McMullin.

Him.

All through scripture we are given passages that point to Him as the exalted Redeemer. Paul writes in Ephesians 1:20-22

20 Which he (God) wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
The exaltation of the Redeemer is elsewhere expressed in different language, but the idea is one that everywhere prevails in regard to him in the Scriptures.

OR

Philippians 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

OR

Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

All these things we just read are also found in scripture as pertaining to the rights and authority of God (mostly in the Old Testament) so we can see that He, the Man who overcame all is now the prince and King of Kings raised to right hand of His side – all to the glory and honor of the Father.

“Unto him that loved us.”

This line troubles me greatly. Maybe I’m just dense. But this is why.

In verses 4-6 we have read (emphasis mine)

John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto (or to) him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

How is the Revelation from Jesus Christ who is the faithful witness (verse 5) but is also To Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood?

The standard answer is that this is a brand new beginning or passage and therefore it should not hearken back to verses 4 and the first half of verse 5.

I suppose that’s possible. But it still doesn’t answer how it could both be from Jesus Christ and then to Jesus Christ.

Another answer is that it was grace and peace that was from God, the Seven Spirits and Jesus but John himself dedicates the Revelation to Jesus Christ

who “loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

In other words John admits here that Jesus is King and Lord, that He loved those who are His in that last hour, that he washed them from their sins in his own blood, and made them kings and priests unto God and His Father” and then John adds:

To Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen

We will begin our study next week with a review of the lines before moving into verses 6 and beyond.

Comments, Questions, Answers

Prayer