It's one thing to try and explain a Scripture text to someone who sincerely doesn't know how to go about trying to understand it.

It's quite another to try and engage with someone who embraces wilful ignorance -- who sticks her fingers in her ears and hums "Lalalalalala, not listening" when people who have some insight into the text attempt to explain to her what it's about. It's like trying to teach a literature class to students who have refused to learn how to read, on principle.

I'm done trying to explain anything to VC. (BTW, nice touch, starting with an OP that appears to be asking an objective question, but is actually fishing for a pre-approved answer from a like-minded person.)

What I understand of the text in question: The author of Revelation is addressing churches in Asia Minor that are feeling a lot of pressure from the dominant Roman culture to conform to its mores and its mandated worship of the Emperor as a god. At this point in history there have not yet been widespread persecutions of Christians, but they have taken place on a local level. That's the intended audience of the author -- someone who has gravitas in the wider Christian community; who's in exile somewhere away from these particular Christians. The author is someone with an obvious familiarity with the Hebrew Scriptures, who is using the Book of Daniel -- also written to a beleagured faith community oppressed by a rich, powerful dominant culture, wondering about the viability of its own future -- as a kind of template for his own letter to these churches.

First the author does some pastoral housekeeping with the churches to whom the letter is addressed -- lets them know where they're getting it right and where they aren't. Then, using Daniel as a guide, he launches into this series of images and symbolic numerology that speaks to their situation under the Empire, that they would understand from their familiarity with the Book of Daniel. He talks about the temptation to idolatry under a government that's deified its leader, whose very currency promotes idolatry. He talks about the decadence of the Empire, and its use of force to get its way.

But then he presents a new image: Jesus as the Lamb -- a victim of this cruel, corrupt, idolatrous Empire, but one who has triumphed over it through his resurrection. He paints an image of the fullness of the Reign of God, with Christ as its head, finally defeating the imposter Caesar's supposed divine rule of the world, calling nations and peoples to account, and finally calling his own into the real Reign of the real God.

The last part of Revelation offers images and symbols of completeness in accord with this, harkening back to the story of the original paradise in the Garden of Eden. Instead of the Tree of Life and Death there's an amazing Tree of Life that bears fruit not only during one season but during all the seasons, all the months -- completely fruitful. (The number 12, in Jewish numerology, connotes completeness, especially in the area of government and the structure of life. 12 was the age when boys came of age in the faith community and when girls were considered marriageable.) Marriage imagery is used -- again a sense of completeness and fulfillment. The corrupt city of Rome is implicitly compared with the beautiful city of God's reign, whose perfection is described in symbolism that, again, would make sense to people familiar with Old Testament symbolism and Hebrew numerology.

And, in the end...as in the beginning...is Christ. Christ, the "Lamb who was slain," the victim of the supposedly indestructable Roman Empire (and by extension all the iterations of "the way the world works") , is declared victor in this struggle between the Reign of God and the Reign of darkness.

That's a very truncated, Cliff Notes version of Revelation as many of us have learned about it. And I fail to understand how that in any way disrespects God or the text or the author. It's a powerful message of hope and liberation to Christians being beaten down by the world, that's as timely now as it was when it was written without trying to turn it into a Ouija board.

Mar 5, 2010 -- 8:36PM, Xristocharis wrote:

Mar 5, 2010 -- 8:02PM, tawonda wrote:

It's a powerful message of hope and liberation to Christians being beaten down by the world, that's as timely now as it was when it was written without trying to turn it into a Ouija board.

Not to mention that it beats the hell out of the wild fringe theories proposed by the self-proclaimed prophecy experts who are less interested in understanding Scripture and more interested in using fear to sell books and stroke their own egos.

The Revelation is an amazing and wonderful book when it's allowed to be what it is.

-Jon

One of my favorite authors, in his very scholarly commentary on Revelation, says it like this:

“It is difficult to worship God instead of his messengers. And so people get interested in everything in this book except God, losing themselves in symbolhunting, intrigue with numbers, speculating with frenzied imaginations on times and seasons, despite Jesus' severe stricture against it (Acts 1:7)… nothing is more explicit in this book than that it is about God. It is the revelation of Jesus Christ, not the end of the world, not the identity of the antichrist, not the timetable of history... Nothing has meaning apart from his lordship.” from Reversed Thunder, Eugene Peterson

he goes on to say, aptly:  "People who are preoccupied with the future never seem to be interested in preparing for the future, which is something that people do by feeding the poor, working for justice, loving their neighbors, developing a virtuous and compassionate life in he name of Jesus.” 

Apocolyptic literature as a genre:  There are other examples of it.  Revelation is by far the best I've read.  The Dead Sea Scrolls have some really bad examples. In fact, one I read was so bad that I just had to stop reading it--pure nonsense!  In general, I find the apocolyptic literature to be warlike, aggressive, and lacking the humility that is typical of our God in action.

Here is a video made by a priest from my Church.  He explains our view of Revelation in brief, but I think he does a very good job of it.  Like us, however, he does not share your vision, he gives the history of your view of it:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFmfDRKcWx8

Annie

Mar 5, 2010 -- 11:17PM, Xristocharis wrote:

Fr. Matthew is a bit of a dork (which I can relate to), but I've seen a number of his videos and I've always found them to be pretty good.

-Jon

Psssssst . . . I think he tries to make it light, humorous and brief.  I doubt he's a dork.  lol  I enjoy his videos.  ;)

Mar 5, 2010 -- 4:47PM, voice-crying wrote:

Mar 5, 2010 -- 3:53PM, Verdugo wrote:

Mar 5, 2010 -- 3:28PM, voice-crying wrote:

Mar 5, 2010 -- 10:39AM, Campbellite wrote:

So now, instead of taking the Bible literally, I take it seriously.

Why would you take it "seriously" IF the prophecies in it are not going to happen?

If you're right, there is no need to spread the Word because after death there wouldn't be anything to worry about and the unsaved won't be judged.  If you're right christians can just go to church and have a good time.  And above all, Jesus would not have needed to die. 

What makes you think he DOESN'T believe the prophecies are going to happen???  He may or may not believe they are going to happen in the exact way YOU think they are going to happen, or he may differ with you on which parts he believes are prophetic and which are speaking contemporaneously.  But, again, that part has to do with US, our interpretation, not with the Bible per se.   Just because he-- or I or anyone else-- does not interpret the Bible in exactly the same (literal) way you do does NOT mean he or she doesn't "believe it" or, again, take it seriously.

Thanks for your opinion...I'd like to (also) hear his answer since he made the comment.

In truth, Verdugo has stated almost verbatim what I was going to reply. Your own comments are noting but red herrings, and "talking points" which have nothing to do with what I said.

Part of taking the Bible seriously includes understanding the prophecies. Prophecy is not the same as Prediction. It is a form of preaching. The prophecies, for the most part (not exclusively, mind you) are warnings to Israel (or whomever is being addressed) to straighten up and fly right, or you will find yourself in deep trouble, not because God will "smite" you for it, but because your current course will end up in the ditch.

Those which are predictions are actually few and far between, and most of them are already fulfilled in Jesus Christ. How many times does Matthew report, "This happened in accordance with the words of the prophet..."

As for this:

Mar 5, 2010 -- 4:47PM, voice-crying wrote:

If you're right, there is no need to spread the Word because after  death there wouldn't be anything to worry about and the unsaved  won't be judged.  If you're right christians can just go to church and  have a good time.  And above all, Jesus would not have needed to die. 

Where on earth are you getting that? That doesn't follow at all.