Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence
Revelation 1.5-7
October 30th 2016
Meat
(On BOARD BEFORE)
Idealist Historicist Preterist Futurist Omitist
Okay we left off with a brief introduction of verse 5 which says
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, (we covered these lines now onto the rest . . .)
and washed us from our sins in his own blood, (and six)
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Back to five – last week we covered how he is called the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth (Ready)
“And washed us from our sins in his own blood.”
I have often read over this phraseology “washed from sin in blood” or phrases like it (which are only found in here and in Revelation 7) but when we think about it the line is really very paradoxical.
On this earth, blood is one of the most difficult common stains around. I mean its paradoxical to think of blood washing anything clean, right?
Because we are using terms like washing we tend to think of our sins as being material and the blood flowing from the cross and down over the sins we have committed and washing them down a drain.
But blood and its cleansing power must be seen figuratively or better put, spiritually if we are to best understand its application because if we are talking about actual staining sin leaves none materially and materially that’s all that blood does! Right?
So in the opposite world of God we find ourselves confronted by the line that sin is washed away by blood – and accepting this we have to admit that the stain of sin is spiritual along with the washing away of it.
Not that Jesus shed blood wasn’t real. It was. It was His life pouring out for the sin of the world. But what is actually being washed away and how is (whatever is being washed away) being washed away by Jesus blood?
We might begin by asking, what stain is created by sin?
I am sitting in my house and a neighbor comes by and we engage in some gossip about another. While we understand the harm the gossip could cause for others is there any other by-product of the gossip that needs to be washed away?
I steal a pack of donuts off a delivery truck? What is the harm? Where is it located? Where is the actual stain?
I break the law – any law – where is the stain?
Is it in my soul? Is it a mark on the books? Does my driving 90 in a 70 mph zone create a stain that only Jesus blood can wash away?
In Revelation 7 (which we will get to we read the allegorical language):
Revelation 7:14 . . . “These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”
Again, how on earth could the Lamb’s blood make a robe white and it that what the blood of Jesus does? Makes things white (or cleansed)?
So we have to admit here that blood, while being represented as having a cleansing power to make things clean or white only as it makes it in an expiation for sin because literally considered its effect would be the reverse, as in, “their blood is on your hands,” or “the blood of your brother cries from the ground.”
Blood stains – unless it’s the blood of Jesus – that seems to cleanse (unless, perhaps, it stains those who reject Him).
His blood is unlike any other for what good would my or your or Ghandi or Mohammed’s shed blood do but make a mess and stain everything it touched?
But somehow we trust that in the shedding of Jesus blood the blight of sin, the residue of failure, selfishness, pain and suffering we cause – is washed away.
Clearly we can see then that atonement is a purely spiritual event. There is really no other way to see it since His blood washes away sins committed 1500 years before His crucifixion and now, almost 2000 years since.
Certainly, at the time, and in His literal body the actual blood was shed but the efficacy of that substance was so overwhelmingly powerful that in the spirit realms it has the power of a trillion brilliant suns removing all shadow and all stain from the human soul.
John the beloved put it this way in 1st John 1:7
“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.”
Its along this line that the writer of Hebrews said (in chapter 9:13-14)
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
So it seems that on some sort of reverse spectrum, where shed blood normally stains and turns things dark and soiled, the blood of Christ takes the soiled spots on the human soul and not only cleanses them removing the stain but brings them to actual life allowing us to serve the living God here and to abide in His presence there.
Verse six (which seems to follow in as if to say as a result of Jesus being . . .
“the faithful witness,” and
“the first begotten of the dead,” and
“the prince of the kings of the earth,” who
“loved us,” and
“washed us from our sins in his own blood,”
That he (verse 6)
6 . . . hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Let me knock out the first thing that pops up in some people’s minds when they read this verse (especially the LDS).
John has been writing about Jesus and all that He has done, including making those who accept Him by faith Kings and priests.
Who did this? Jesus. What did He do? Made them (us) Kings and Priests unto God, (who is His) father. So to God and his Father. Got that?
Not unto God and HIS father, but he (Jesus) has made us Kings and Priests unto God who is His father.
“And hath made us (those who believe on Him) kings and priests unto God.”
Kings and priests – I dread entering into this line for so many reasons but it’s a must.
First of all, we have to ask is this passage referring to us as Kings and priests here on earth during the coming millennium (futurism) or now spiritually here on earth (full preterism) or in the future here on earth (partial preterism) or in heaven (idealism).
Then we have to wonder if this is a reference to our being Kings AND priests or in a Kingdom of Priests.
Huh? What?
Here’s the deal. My King James reads the passage this way:
“And hath made us (those who believe on Him) kings and priests unto God.”
Other translations agree with this one from the Textus Receptus.
However, Bible versions which come from other mss lines like the Nestle or the Westcott and Hort all say this:
Revelation 1:6 (RSV) and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
I’m sorry folks but these are VERY different things, folks.
The Greek is no help here because – get this – both the King James and the other versions ARE true to what their specific Greek mss say!
In other words the Greek in the Revised mss is a word for Kingdom and the Greek for the Authorized is King.
The responses have been really remarkable by commentators as all that I consulted either stand firm on the idea that nowhere in scripture is man promised to become a King (only Jesus after the order of Melchizedek) but other commentators suggest that the presence of Revelation 5:10, which says:
“And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”
Tends to refute that claim straightforwardly.
When we get to chapter five we’ll discuss the implications of that verse but for now, are believers made Kings and priests or as the MNT translation puts it:
“and has made us to be a kingdom of priests unto his God and Father; to him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever, Amen.”
It is believed that this latter interpretation is based on a passage in Exodus 19:6 where God says to the Nation of Israel:
“And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.”
Now, in the New Testament we find two important words that have, over the course of time, evolved into conceptual ideas that are often far afield from their Biblical and historic meaning.
These two words are Church and Kingdom.
Often, in the modern evangelical mind, both of these words create notions much different than their original Greek meanings.
The Greek word for “church” is ekklesia, whereas, the Greek word translated as “kingdom” is basileia.
Ekklesia and basileia.
Both of these words were in common usage, long before the time of Christ and the writing of the New Testament and both of them have their roots in a non- religious context.
Instead they were political terms in the ancient Greek world.
It is important that we understand how these words fit into Greek political theory.
Of course the New Testament was not written in a vacuum. Jesus came in “the fullness of time” (Galatians 4:4), when a Greek-based political culture had spread across the Mediterranean world and the Near East.
The language of this culture serves a “back drop” to understanding the New Testament.
The word ekklesia was used by Jesus to ascribe the status of His followers and it meant those who were called out of the common citizenry or polis.
These were an elected assembly and their purpose was to rule.
It was the “ekklesia” who made fundamental political and judicial decisions in that Greek influenced world.
When the disciples heard Jesus use this word for what He was building, they undoubtedly were aware of its implications relating to public authority.
Jesus could have used the word “synagogue” (Greek sunagogee) instead of Ekklasea which was a nondescript term for “gathering” that says nothing about the significance of the gathering at all.
Actually, the term best means herd.
But Jesus instead chose a word rich in political connotations.
Then “basileia” was a word that meant “a supreme sovereign’s (a monarchical) reign.” From it we get kingdom.
The significance of basileia and Jesus’ choice of the word ekklesia is really interesting in light of Greek political theory.
Quite frankly Aristotle’s use of the words were mutually exclusive. In other words Basileia meant exclusion from political decision-making (remember, it was a Kingdom of monarchal rule) so therefore it would have been viewed as an undesirable reign for free people who made their own decisions. But it was considered a desirable form of government for slaves, who were unable to make responsible decisions themselves and had to be ruled.
The form of government for a free people, Aristotle termed a politeia and central to a politeia was an ekklesia.
The ekklesia was thus symbolic of the status of a free people, a people set free from the yoke of the basileia.
What was the form of government for the Nation of Israel under the Old Covenant?
With only a few exceptions (Abraham, Moses, David, the Prophets), the Old Testament saints were of the status of slaves.
They were left out of the counsel of God and were fearful of Him. Take note the status Paul attributes to Old Testament Israel in Galatians 4:22-5:1.
The book of Hebrews makes the same point (12:18-24), saying:
18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
19 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more:
20 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:
21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:)
22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church (ekklasia) of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Mount Sinai evoked fear in the hearts of the Israelites; but the New Testament believer, by contrast, is brought to Mount Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem, the ekklesia of the firstborn.
All of this is political language, describing the New Testament saint’s relationship to the King.
The King’s relationship with the ekklesia is one of trust based upon true reconciliation, an intimate relationship, one in which the subject is not a slave but a citizen, a fellow decision–maker.
This is made evident by the words of Jesus at the Last Supper (John 15:13-16).
There He calls His disciples friends, not slaves, remember.
“No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what the master does.”
A slave is the object of decisions by the master, over which the slave has no control.
On the other hand, a friend participates in the counsels of the master. Jesus said, “But I have called you friends, for all things I have heard from My Father I have made known to you.”
Jesus’ “friends” (His faithful disciples) are granted the privilege of participation in the heavenly counsels of the Father and the Son, through the Holy Spirit.
(We note that the distinction between friend vs. slave is found in the writings of Aristotle.)
In Ephesians 2:6 we are told that as believers, “we are seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.”
We are invited to sit down in the place where heavenly decisions are made.
Through Christ, the Gentile saints are now “fellow polites” (Ephesians 2:19), participants in the life of the politeia of God, along with the Jewish saints.
They are citizens of the New Jerusalem, the heavenly city which reigns spiritually over the kings of the earth, the seat of royal messianic dominion.
Jesus Christ is now King of kings and Lord of lords, the ruler of the kings of the earth (Rev.1:5).
His ekklesia reigns with Him:
“To Him who loves us, and released us from our sins by His blood, and He has made us to be a kings and priests to His God and Father (Rev.1:6).
It only stands to reason that in light of this, and in light of the fact that we are to be joint heirs with Him, that being Kings and Priests is the best way to read this disputable passage in verse 6.
In terms of priests the proof is easy. Where Kings reign and rule (and I would suggest that the freedom to rule oneself under the tutelage of Christ may be one of the rewards of life eternal) priests are those who offer up sacrifice – in our case on earth living sacrifices.
The Apostle Peter validates the fact that believers are priest saying in 1 Peter 2:9
“But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.”
And Titus 2:14 which adds, speaking of Jesus . . .
“Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.”
Which is, and will apparently continue to be, the sacrifices of those who are His – good works.
Finally, in this little introduction John adds:
“To him be glory.” I read this, based off verse 5, to refer to Jesus and the word means “praise or honor.” , implying a wish that all honor should be shown him.
And then he adds, “And dominion,” which in the Greek really means strength – “kraton” – so it probably refers to Jesus having the strength to exercise all authority over all.
At this point we enter into more of the Revelation. But once again, this appears to be another brief introduction.
Looking back, verses 1-2 appear to me to be the first introduction.
Verse 3 seems to be one.
Verses 4-6 seem to be a third.
Now we receive what I see as a fourth mini-introduction where John writes (either because it was shown to him or he was inspired to write it I don’t know):
Revelation 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
This first line, when we consider context, is yet another warning of the eminent nature of this prophecy.
God, according to Jesus when He was on earth, was the only one who knew the day or the hour.
God has now given Jesus a Revelation and Jesus has given it to John and John is giving it to the seven churches.
He has said that he comes quickly.
He has said he comes in the clouds.
God, to Jesus, to John to the seven churches now says:
“Behold, he cometh with clouds.”
So we can see that this Revelation is all about, at least at the beginning – and maybe all throughout – His return which would be the culmination of everything, the complete wrap up, the end.
The question is which view are we to read and to continue to read, this revelation through.
I have to say that if we are going to rank the content thus far the idealist, the historist, and the Preterist views are winning.
I would have to say that the futurist view is already called into question because I see no reason for this Revelation, if it had ANY bearing on real people in the real seven churches, to reiterate that the “time is short,” and “at hand,” and now “behold” (meaning Look, pay attention to this) “He cometh in the clouds.”
The interesting thing about this is the futurists claim that “they read the text as it is without imputing any mystical meaning to the revelation itself” and if this is truly the case how do they explain away the first seven verses of the first chapter.
I realize that as we dig into the body of the book that all manner of debatable issues are going to pop up that require interpretation and it is here where the futurists regain ground – if we allow it – but so far for me – and I am really trying to set my prejudices aside (which might be impossible) but so far it seems like in the introduction of this book, where things are most clear as to audience, intent, and purpose of the book, there is a preponderance of evidence that clearly says that all of the Revelation about to come forth is to describe something that is about to shortly happen – or in the least about to begin to shortly happen – and this seems (SEEMS) to include Him coming in the clouds, the focal point of everything because Him coming in the clouds is the summation of all things!
The word behold here is also important. Last week John told those who read and heard and kept the revelation would be blessed.
Now he begins this passage with behold he cometh . . .
The Greek behold – idoo – is in the imperative – it means “SEE, LOOK!” you of the Seven Churches . . . He cometh in the clouds.
His coming in the clouds is in accordance with the uniform representation respecting His return.
Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Matthew 26:64 Jesus reiterates this message and says:
“I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”
Mark repeats the message of Matthew and of course in the first chapter of Acts we read of Jesus coming together with His apostles and at verse 6 it says:
6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, “Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?”
7 And he said unto them, “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Biblically clouds are symbols of heavenly majesty and God is often represented as appearing in that manner.
Psalsm 18:11 He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion round about him were dark waters and thick clouds of the skies.See Ex
Isaiah says in chapter 19:1 that the Lord “rideth in on swift clouds.”
So, that is how the Lord is coming back – with the clouds.
“And every eye shall see him.”
And so we come to our first truly debatable phrase – and every eye shall see Him.
I remember as a kids when the subject of the second coming would pop up we would wonder how every eye would see Him – especially if He returned to the Mount of Olives.
As a Latter-day Saint at the time we came to the conclusion that Jesus was going to return to an LDS General Conference (since the Mormon church was His church) and because it was televised EVERY eye would witness Him take the stand – to give one heck of a General Conference talk!
The futurist maintains that this description has not happened (or course) because we have no record of every eye at any time in history seeing Jesus return – therefore this was written to a future date.
Here is where we have to take the content of the whole of scripture to help us understand and interpret lines like this in Revelation.
In Hebrews we have another way of understanding what eyes will see Him when He returns as it says:
Hebrews 9:28 “So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.”
Speaking to this same time, when all things will be completed and there will be new things like heaven and earth Peter said to his audience:
2nd Peter 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
This is the same Peter who wrote to his audience in the same letter:
1st Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
The futurist reads verse seven of Revelation one and says,
Every eye will see Him coming in the clouds but the Preterist says, “every eye that is looking for Him when He comes will see Him.”
But John the Revelator says there is another group who will see Him:
“And they also which pierced him.”
This seems to be in accordance or a fulfillment of Zecharia 12:10 which says:
“They shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn.”
First of all this could not be referring to when He was crucified and those who looked upon His person with sorrow as the event is tied to His coming in the clouds.
Based on the four general views this can be taken literally, meaning those who actually crucified him (the Romans) and/or those who were responsible for Him being pierced literally (the Jews I that day) or those for whom He was crucified (every human being on earth – which is more the futurist view of the line).
The Idealist would say that this applies to all of us at the time we come to Jesus at our seeing Him in the clouds.
John adds that not only will those who crucified Him would see Him but adds . . .
“And all kindreds of the earth.”
This line seems to really add fuel to the fires of those who see what John describes as not happening because certainly:
Not every eye has seen him, neither has
“Every one who caused Him to be pierced,”
Neither, “all the kindreds of the earth!”
Young’s Literal Translation of the passage present us with another view as it says:
“Lo, he doth come with the clouds, and see him shall every eye, even those who did pierce him, and wail because of him shall all the tribes of the land. Yes! Amen!”
Automatically by appealing to the Greek we (shall we say) shrink the vastness of the passage and bring it in to more geographical confines.
In other words “shall all the tribes of the land” is a very different picture than, “shall all the kindreds of the earth.”
This translational misdirection is the product of the King James team and has done great damage to the actual meaning of the Greek.
It’s not to say that this was purposeful but more due to the time and language.
For instance the term translated “all the kindreds” in the King James is from the word, Foo-lai – which means tribes and in all probability speaks to the 12 Tribes of Israel (or whatever tribes that were around Judea) rather than all the families of the earth.
Similarly the line of the earth comes from the Greek Ghay and better means all that were of the tribes IN THE LAND – not of the whole earth or Kosmos.
When the apostles ask Jesus to describe His return and the end of the age in Matthew 24 he uses these same terms – tribes, land, rather than kindreds or world (as the King James has used).
Even futurist bible commentators admit that the word tribes is what is commonly applied to the twelve tribes of Israel, and thus used, it would describe the inhabitants of the holy land.
John adds that in witnessing His return in the clouds all (who see Him)
“Shall wail because of him.”
The word means to beat, to cut – to beat or cut one’s self in the breast as an expression of sorrow, to lament, to cry aloud in intense grief.
And it is interesting that John add to this:
“Even so, Amen”
According to scholars this is “A double expression of so be it, assuredly, certainly, one in Greek and the other in Hebrew.”
It is a strong affirmation that what he has just written will be, and the fact that there is an affirmation in both Hebrew and Greek tells me that all who were part of His church, who were His bride, at the time – whether Jew or Greek – could expect what John has written to come to pass – quickly.
It is not by mistake, in my opinion that in the last verse of the Revelation John writes (chapter 22:20)
Revelation 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Another affirmation of certainty rather than a hope or wish.
Let’s stop here.
Q and A
