I used to wonder why the Lord's coming for us is in Acts (Acts 1:10–11) and the epistles (1 Corinthians 15:51–57; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18), but not in Revelation. I think there are a few reasons for it, which we might want to discuss.
J. N. Darby differentiates prophecy (which relates to God's purpose and government on earth) from revelation to the church. From that point of view, we could say the Lord's coming for us is a matter of church truth, as opposed to prophecy (and I think Robert has made this point here before, but I can't find it now). So the Lord's coming for His saints is distinct from the Lord coming with His saints: the former is detailed in the epistles (1 Corinthians 15:51–57; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18), the latter is in prophecy (Jude 1:14–15; Revelation 19:11ff). I think there's a good deal of merit in this view.
There's another perspective on this that I think is worth contemplating. Several years ago I was part of an assembly that went through the book of Revelation over the course of several months' reading meetings. I read through that book many, many times over the course of those meetings, and was struck that it's not truly chronological. It struck me that Revelation is laid out similarly to Hebrews, where the Lord Jesus is shown to be superior in various comparisons. So the first three chapters show the Lord as Head (and Judge) over the church, then we see Him as superior over Heaven in the next couple chapters; then as superior over the fallen world and its kingdoms; over Satan, and Babylon and the antichrist; then as Judge over the living and the dead; and finally over the new creation. I realize that's very vague.
No doubt there are a lot of consecutive events in Revelation that are specifically mentioned, and there are clues right there in the text. For example, "then I saw" is a common phrase that indicates relation in time. But my point is that there are several sections that might well run concurrently.
It's also worth mentioning that Revelation is certainly a very symbolic book. There are several things in there that are not to be taken literally: the sword coming from the Lord's mouth, for example (Revelation 1:16). I really don't think we'll see a sword in the Lord's mouth when He comes to get us, I'm sure this is a symbolic figure.
So here's one bit of wisdom we can see in the scripture: moving the Lord's coming for us into the epistles, where the language is much less symbolic makes it much easier for us to grasp. We can firmly anchor the apostolic teaching of the Lord's coming literally, physically for us in time and space because of the context of 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians.
But we might also remember that not all prophecy is actually fulfilled. And before you jump down to the comments section, consider the prophet Jonah. He predicted the overthrow of Nineveh in forty days, and it didn't happen (Jonah 3:4). I don't think we fully appreciate this point: the Lord sent Jonah to Nineveh, and His word to Nineveh accomplished exactly what the Lord wanted it to accomplish. But that prophetic warning went unfulfilled, precisely because they believed it.
I have heard that exact argument used for Revelation, and it's difficult to argue against. We know that God will send prophets with the purpose that their warning will be heeded; as a result, what they warn about won't come to pass.
Now, I don't actually think that's going to happen. I do believe Revelation will play out as written. But I don't know what that will look like when it comes to pass. There is symbolic language in that book, and it can be difficult to know which features are symbolic, and which ones are literal. For example: I can believe the demonic locusts (Revelation 9:1–12) will look just like demonic locusts, I can also believe they won't really be visible at all. Remember that Elisha's servant couldn't see the angelic host around him without divine intervention (2 Kings 6:17), maybe the people afflicted by those demonic locusts won't have any sense they're there, except for the pain they inflict. I just don't know.
But the point is that the Lord's coming for us is not described in terms that invite speculation. Will the Lord come down on an actual horse (Revelation 19:11), or is that a symbolic description? I don't really know. But notice that when the apostle describes His coming to get us (as opposed to His coming with us), he uses much more concrete language.
The Lord Himself will descend with a shout (1 Thessalonians 4:16), the dead in Christ will rise (1 Thessalonians 4:16), those who are His and are still living at that time will meet them in the air (1 Thessalonians 4:17). This isn't symbolic language, and it's not in a context laden with symbolism.
So here's a thought, and I think it gets back to the point that J. N. Darby and Robert were making: we can anchor our hope on the Lord's coming for us much more dogmatically (and certainly) than we can discuss things like what Babylon, or what those demonic locusts are. We can, in a sense, disagree on how to interpret big chunks of Revelation, while agreeing on 1 Corinthians 15:51–57 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18.
Personally, I find Darby's view of the Revelation convincing, and there are significant differences between that and the Scofield notes view. I think I've commented on those differences before. But there are very good reasons that honest believers sincerely disagree with me on that. And I'm not going to make it a bigger deal than it is.
That being said, I'm certain the Lord's imminent return is not in the same category as the demonic locusts. The apostolic attitude toward the Lord's return was that it could happen at any moment, and they lived expecting it. Again, I'm not going to accuse people who disagree with me of heresy, but living out the faith once delivered to the saints involves living in expectation that the Lord is coming for us and could be here at any moment.
9 comments:
“ I read through that book many, many times over the course of those meetings, and was struck that it's not truly chronological.”
I think that is a very helpful statement Mark and one that took me years to understand. I want to suggest an alternative view to studying Revelation which I learned from F.A. Tatford of Eastbourne. We should view ch.1 to ch.11 as the prophetic panorama, or tapestry, in which John outlines events from the end of the apostolic age through to the millennial kingdom and the edge of the eternal state. Then from ch.12 to ch.22 John invites us to draw near and view the panels that make up the tapestry. As we look at them, we see the people and places that will feature in the prophetic end times.
Someone also taught me a long time ago, can’t remember who, that John wrote in Greek but thought in Hebrew. His imagery is invariably based on OT truth. For example, 1 John 1:7 - where do we find a place where there is light and blood? The answer is the sanctuary of the tabernacle on the Day of Atonement.
Thanks for passing on the helpful point from FA Tatford. I took down my copy of his book on Revelation and found the same:
“Chapters 1 to 11 describe the prophetic programme from the apostolic period of the Church down to the close of the millennium and deal with the general principles involved. The remainder of the Book introduces the persons on the scenes.”
“Chapter 12 marks the commencement of a new section of the Revelation and makes plain not the external facts and events which are to occur, but rather the unseen conflict between invisible and supernatural forces. “Hitherto,” says Bishop Boyd Carpenter, “we have seen the more outward aspects of the great war. Now we are to see its secret, hidden and spiritual aspects, that we may understand what immeasurably divergent and antagonistic principles are in conflict under various and specious aspects in the history of the world.””
Good post, Mark. Getting into the weeds over interpretation is the surest way to forget all about having the blessed hope, and lose the dynamic it is to have in our lives.
(Sorry for not attaching name. Was me again.)
Last year I had some meetings on future events and I said at the beginning that my studies as a younger believer would have been greatly helped if older men had used the phrase, ‘I don’t really know’ more often. So thanks for using it, Mark. I have sat in homes where men have categorically stated that the first beast of Rev 13 is the Antichrist, yet John who is the only writer to mention him does not tell us which of the two beasts he is. I know a brother who insists the white horse is real but won’t accept the city of 21&22 is literal.I have my views like everyone else but using the phrase, I don’t really know, greatly assists conversation and the spirit of enquiry amongst us.
I think the main reason the Lords coming for us is not explicitly stated is because Revelation has to do with events on earth. The heavenly scenes only inform us about why those events will take place. Another thing I learned from older men is that the key difference between the writings of Paul and John is that Paul brings men to where God is but John brings God to where men are. Paul’s ultimate is raised and seated with Christ in heavenly places. Johns ultimate is, the tabernacle of God is with men. So in John’s writings we look for God coming to be with us rather than us going to be with Him.
When I mentioned Mr Tatford, I heard him when I was about 16 speak in a town hall which was filled with around 500 people. Contrast that to a reading I attended a few weeks ago where 35 believers met on a Saturday to study the church at Philadelphia. And I learned that the brethren who had come before me had told them there is no prophetic aspect to the 7 letters!
On a related note, what do you think the great falling away in 2 Thess 2 refers to? Does it have any connection with the LGBT/woke issue which so many churches are stumbling over?
Apostasy is mystery babylon absorbing the laodicean church the catholic church is reconsolidating and that will eventually include the protestant church look up synodality mystery babylon is the first religious force driving the beast empire until mid tribulation when the little horn reveals himself as god
https://cruxnow.com/news-analysis/2023/02/as-synodality-summit-looms-navigating-a-papacys-imperial-phase
Trans has to do with the merging of the sexes which has already occured look at the movie stars and celebrities at mid tribulation when the little horn rises the occult will come to light we've been slowly prepped over the years so at the point of revealing what's hidden we'll be ready to be initiated into the last form of mystery religion with the antichrist as god
https://watch-unto-prayer.org/new-man.html#16.C
Post a Comment