Home | About | Subscriptions | Contact us | Search
New this month | Back issues | Other publications | Other sites
Back to Special Issue contents

“BLESSED IS HE THAT KEEPETH THESE SAYINGS”

THE APOCALYPSE AS A CONTINUOUS-HISTORICAL PROPHECY

TONY BENSON

THERE ARE three basic views of the book of Revelation:

1. That it applied to the events of the writer’s own time. This is called the preterist view.

2. That it is a prophecy of events which will take place just before and at the time of the return of Christ. This is called the futurist view.

3. That it is a prophecy fulfilled over the centuries from the time it was given to the return of Christ and beyond. This is called the continuous-historical view.

The first view is generally held by those who do not believe in the inspiration of the Bible and therefore cannot accept that future events can be predicted, although some see it, in part at least, as being a short-term prophecy of events which occurred just after the prophecy was given. The second view is generally held by those amongst the churches and sects of Christendom who believe that the Bible does foretell future things. The third view was once universally held by Protestant Christendom, but very few still hold it. It was once accepted by the entire Christadelphian body as being the correct view, but in recent years other interpretations have been put forward, mainly encompassing the second view, and the Brotherhood is now divided over the issue.

The purpose of this article is to advance reasons why the continuous-historical view is the correct one. There will be no space to identify and argue against the various futurist interpretations which have been put forward within the Brotherhood. Since it is the futurist view and not the preterist view which is the alternative view now held in the Brotherhood it will not be necessary to say much about the preterist view.

The introduction to the Apocalypse

It is always a sound principle, before coming to any conclusions, to pay careful attention to what a book of Scripture actually says about itself. John was told: “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter” (1:19). “The things which thou hast seen” were the details of the vision in chapter 1; “the things which are” concern the current state of affairs in the seven ecclesias as detailed in chapters 2 and 3; “the things which shall be hereafter” are detailed in the rest of the book, as is shown by the repetition of the phrase in 4:1.

The major part of the book therefore concerns “things which must be hereafter”. In fact, however, chapters 4 and 5 are an introduction to the “things which must be hereafter”. Future events are depicted as being written in “a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals” (5:1), and only the crucified, resurrected and ascended Christ is worthy to open the book. When he begins to open the book angels make things happen on earth in series after series of events.

In actual fact there appear to be two main series of events. The first series runs from 5:1 to 11:18 and culminates in the establishing of the Kingdom of God in 11:15-18. Following this heaven is once more opened (cp. 4:1 with 11:19) and a series of events begins which is not linked to the preceding series, for the opening events clearly have nothing to do with the Kingdom. As the events unfold we do get to the Kingdom again, for in 16:15-16 the nations are gathered to Armageddon and the Lord Jesus returns as a thief, and there are then several chapters which concern the establishing of the Kingdom, culminating in a detailed depiction of the Millennium and beyond. The existence of two sequences of events, each culminating in the Kingdom, is in harmony with the fact that these events are depicted as being recorded in “a book written within and on the backside” (5:1).

Which method of interpreting Revelation does the above support? Clearly not the idea that the book concerns events in John’s own time, otherwise the Kingdom references would have no place. Nor does it support the futurist view, for it is surely unreasonable to suppose that there should be a gap of two thousand years between the ascended and glorified Lord Jesus being accounted worthy to open the book, and the events recorded in advance in the book actually occurring. The introduction to the main visions of this book is surely telling us that the continuous-historical interpretation is the correct one.

When Peter wrote his first epistle he could say of Jesus Christ: “... who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him” (3:22). He did not write of a state of affairs which would exist two thousand years later; he wrote of something then existing, and it is this control of affairs by Jesus through the angels that is depicted in the Apocalypse.

The opening words of the Apocalypse state that it is “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass”. These words rule out the futurist view of the book, for it would not then be “things which must shortly come to pass”. At first sight these words seem to support the idea that it was all fulfilled in John’s day, but we have already seen that this cannot be so because the visions lead up to the establishing of the Kingdom. The terms of 1:3 indicate that the Apocalypse is intended for the instruction of all Christ’s servants down the ages, and this best fits the idea that it is a continuous-historic prophecy. At any time between when the prophecy was first recorded and the establishing of the Kingdom the servants of Christ would be able to see prophecies being fulfilled in their time or in recent times, and would be able earnestly to look for the fulfilment of new events in the sequence. To every generation it reveals “things which must shortly come to pass”.

God reveals His purpose

Another article in this issue deals with the principle that God “revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets” (Amos 3:7), but it is appropriate in building upon what we have already said to relate this principle to the subject of the Apocalypse.

From the Fall to the call of Abraham little is recorded about God’s dealings with man; but from the time of Abraham, when God began the process of selecting Israel as the people of His purpose, there is a detailed record of the history of God’s people. However, between the end of Genesis and the beginning of Exodus there is a gap; but prophecy filled that gap, for in Genesis 15:13-16 a brief outline of the events which span that period is given.

There is a much larger gap in Divine revelation between the Old and New Testaments. Again, however, prophecy fills the gap. The faithful, though deprived as far as we know of the guidance of inspired prophets in their midst, had the prophecies of Daniel to guide them. Chapters 2,7,8,9 and 11 would all have made their contribution to their understanding of the times in which they lived and what was to happen.

It is now 1,900 years since the New Testament was completed, and we believe we are living just before the time when the Lord Jesus Christ will be revealed in the earth and our need for the Bible will cease. On the basis of God’s past dealings with man, is it not reasonable to suppose that He has given information and guidance to His servants regarding that long gap? If God gave His people living in the time between the Testaments prophetic guidance within the book of Daniel, is it not reasonable to suppose that He would have provided a new revelation to give similar guidance in the time between the withdrawal of the Spirit-gifts in the first century and the return of His Son in (we hope and expect) the twentieth century? And what other book is there except the Apocalypse that could provide such a revelation? Yet the Apocalypse is only such a revelation if it is continuous-historic in its fulfilment; a prophecy fulfilled in a short period nearly two thousand years after it was given would not serve that purpose.

Daniel and the Apocalypse

The comparison we have made above between Daniel and the Apocalypse is enhanced if we look carefully at them both, and such a look can only serve to confirm that the Apocalypse is a continuous-historical book.

Any examination of Daniel must result in the conclusion that its prophecies are continuous-historical in character. The image prophecy in Daniel 2 clearly begins in Daniel’s own time and ends with the establishing of the Kingdom. The same four kingdoms are depicted as beasts in Daniel 7, and we have clear statements about the establishing of the Kingdom which end the sequence of events. Daniel 8 commences with the Persian Empire, then existing and about to overthrow the Babylonian Empire, and runs forward to the Roman conquest of the land and beyond. Daniel 11-12 is in fact one prophecy, again beginning with the Persian Empire and culminating with the Kingdom. If the Apocalypse serves the same purpose for believers in the period between Christ’s first coming and his second coming as Daniel did for believers in the period between the Testaments then it must be continuous-historical in character too.

Any reader coming fresh to Daniel and to the Apocalypse would be struck by how similar in character both are. The prophetic portions of Daniel mostly consist of highly symbolic visions, and so does the Apocalypse. These visions in Daniel are fulfilled progressively, over long periods of time, and it is reasonable to suppose that the visions of the Apocalypse are similarly fulfilled.

The similarity is closer than that, however. The second series of visions in the Apocalypse has in its opening chapter a dragon (12:3), which is clearly based on the fourth beast of Daniel 7, for both have ten horns. This makes sense in relation to what we have already said. The beast of Daniel 7 is the Roman Empire, which was of course the dominating power when the Apocalypse was written. If Revelation 12 is at the beginning of a sequence of prophecies running from the time the Apocalypse was given to the time of the Kingdom then it is appropriate that the Roman Empire should appear in symbol here.

In Revelation 13 the dragon is succeeded by a beast. This beast is clearly connected with Daniel 7 because it incorporates within itself characteristics of the first three beasts of Daniel 7 and has ten horns like the beast of Daniel 7 (Rev. 13:1,2). It is a development from the dragon because “the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority” (13:2). This beast has significant similarities to the little horn which develops out of the beast of Daniel 7. The little horn has “a mouth speaking great things” (Dan. 7:8,20), and the beast has “a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies” (Rev. 13:5). The little horn “made war with the saints, and prevailed against them” (Dan. 7:21), and of the beast it is said: “it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them” (Rev. 13:7). The persecuting career of the little horn lasts for “a time and times and half a time” (Dan. 7:25, RV), whilst of the beast it is said that he continues “forty and two months” (Rev. 13:5)— both expressions being alternative ways of stating that familiar prophetic time period of 1,260 days.

Daniel and the Apocalypse are alike in character, and partly similar in content. The visions of Daniel are clearly continuous-historical in fulfilment; the Apocalypse must likewise be so. In fact the Apocalypse is largely a development in more detail of the visions of Daniel, and more connections could be brought out.

Symbology appropriate to lengthy fulfilment

At this point we ask the question, Why is symbolic language used in Daniel and the Apocalypse? The answer is surely that it enables much to be revealed in few words. In Daniel 11 there is a continuous-historical prophecy expressed in literal language. It is much lengthier than the other continuous-historical prophecies in Daniel. The section from 11:5 to 11:29 is longer than any of the preceding prophecies, yet it only covers a relatively short period of history, not much over one hundred years in fact. The symbolic prophecies in Daniel cover a lot in a few words by use of symbols.

Consider in the light of this the use of symbolic language in Revelation, which is considerably longer than the prophecies of Daniel. Does it make sense that all this symbology should be prophetic of events to take place in a short time at the return of Christ or just before? It has been estimated that over two hundred events are required to take place to fulfil all the complex symbology. It is not reasonable to pack all these into a short time before the return of Christ. Only the continuous-historical method enables these symbols to be explained in a rational and orderly fashion.

Warnings of apostasy

It is a principle of God’s dealings with His people that He issues warnings against going astray after false worship. In the Old Testament Israel were repeatedly warned not to get involved with the idol worship of the nations around. In the New Testament God’s people are warned repeatedly that the Truth would be corrupted by false teachers, and what this would lead to is described in the symbology of Revelation as a politico-religious system that would dominate the earth.

In 2 Thessalonians 2 the Apostle Paul described the development of false doctrine. He was referring to something which had already commenced, for he said: “the mystery of iniquity doth already work” (v. 7). At that time it was being restrained (see RV), but later it became a fully developed system of false religion, which will exist until the Lord Jesus Christ comes and destroys it. We clearly have something here which is continuous-historic in character: it was beginning to come into existence at the time Paul wrote, would develop into something much bigger, and it will be destroyed at the return of Christ. As we know from the epistles, the Truth was already being corrupted in the first century by false ideas, and these and other false ideas gradually took over until, three hundred years later, they became institutionalised into the Roman Catholic Church, which became a politico-religious system which is still powerful in the earth today.

There are two significant links between 2 Thessalonians 2 and the little-horn prophecy of Daniel 7. The “man of sin” in 2 Thessalonians 2 is described as “the lawless one” (v. 8, RV), and the little horn is said in Daniel 7:25 to “think to change times and laws”. Of this “lawless one” it is said: “... whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming” (2:8); and of the little horn it is said: “they (Christ and the saints) shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end” (7:26).

Likewise there are links between 2 Thessalonians 2 and Revelation. 2 Thessalonians 2 is about the “man of sin” (v. 3), and in Revelation 13:18 the number of the beast is “the number of a man”. “The lawless one” (RV) of 2 Thessalonians 2:8 is the one “whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs (Gk. sēmeion) and lying wonders” (2:9). The second beast of Revelation 13 “doeth great wonders (sēmeion)” and “deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles (sēmeion) which he had power to do” (vv. 13,14). “With all deceivableness of unrighteousness” is how 2 Thessalonians continues (v. 10), and of those that follow the man of sin it is said: “God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie” (v. 11); whilst in Revelation 13 the second beast “deceiveth them that dwell on the earth” (v. 14).

Three-way links have been established between Daniel 7, 2 Thessalonians 2 and Revelation 13 (for Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 see earlier in the article). All use language appropriate to the great politico-religious system that has had such a dominating role in affairs in the period between Christ’s two appearances on earth. Revelation 13 is therefore part of a continuous-historical prophecy, just as Daniel 7 and 2 Thessalonians 2 are continuous-historical prophecies. One of the prime functions of the Apocalypse is to add to the warnings of apostasy contained in the earlier Scriptures by describing its development into a powerful politico-religious system which persecutes those who strive to hold fast to the Truth.

If we do not accept the continuous-historic interpretation of the Apocalypse then we are missing out on warnings of apostasy. It is surely no coincidence that the advocacy of other views of the Apocalypse in the Brotherhood has occurred at the same time as the introduction of false doctrine and a weakening of our separation from the churches of Christendom.

The antichrist delusion

The importance of remaining faithful to the continuous-historical view of Revelation, and separate from the errors of Christendom on the matter, has become even more clear with the widespread adoption of what can be termed the antichrist theory. This is almost universally held in the evangelical wing of Christendom, and it is this part of Christendom which has shown itself over the past few years as presenting the greatest threat to the Truth. Some brethren and sisters have left the Truth to join evangelical churches; the false teachings of these churches have infected some areas of the Brotherhood; and there is a tendency to regard the members of such churches as ‘fellow-Christians’.

What then is the antichrist theory? The antichrist theory is that the beast prophecies of Revelation in fact refer to an individual who will arise and establish himself as a world dictator. He will rule Jerusalem for a period of seven years, proclaiming himself to be the Messiah, but in fact being the agent of Satan. Some believers in this idea expect that the true Christians (as they would term them) will be snatched away to heaven just before the antichrist commences his rule; others believe that they will suffer a period of tribulation first, then be snatched away.

There are many ideas about the antichrist, but they tend to involve an individual who overthrows Russian forces in the Middle East, proclaims himself king of the earth from Jerusalem, makes an alliance with the Jews, and calls upon the world to submit to him. This is remarkably like what we believe Jesus Christ will do when he returns. Some elements of the antichrist view are held by most churches, the Roman Catholics being no exception, and it seems therefore that when Jesus appears in the Middle East he will be widely regarded by Christendom as the antichrist. Those who expected to be taken to heaven before antichrist appears will conclude that they were wrong, and that there will be a tribulation period first.

Christadelphian futurist interpretations of Revelation do not have much in common with the antichrist theory, and anyway it is traditionally believed that the saints will be called away to the judgement seat before Christ proclaims himself king in Jerusalem. It does not seem very likely therefore that some professing Christadelphians will actually be lined up with Christendom in viewing Messiah returned as the antichrist. However, the exact sequence of events at the time of the return of Christ is not easy to establish, and we should bear in mind the lessons of the past. When the Messiah first entered into the world the Jews did not accept him as the promised Messiah because they had a wrong understanding of the prophetic Scriptures. Professing Christians will be in the same position at his Second’ Coming, and we surely do not want to be like them. The fall of the Jewish state in AD. 70 is, we believe, typical of the fall of the Gentile kingdoms when Christ returns. True believers then had to be able to recognise the signs in order to escape at the right time (Mt. 24:15,16). Is this parallel to be repeated? The days of Noah and of Lot are typical of our times, and neither Noah nor Lot was saved automatically from the judgement which fell upon their contemporaries; they had to respond in faith to a Divine call. Will the same pattern be repeated? And if it is, how will we be placed to respond in faith if we are still looking for much of the Apocalypse to be fulfilled before Christ returns?

No clear alternative

The various Christadelphian expositions of Revelation which depart from the continuous-historical view all claim to be more Scriptural than the continuous-historical view. If this is in fact the case one would expect to see a consensus, in broad terms at least, as to what the book refers to. What we do find is a wide variety of views.

The beast is clearly a central figure in Revelation. The three main alternative interpretations of Revelation published during the last fifteen years within the Brotherhood interpret the beast in very different ways. One says it is the Arabs, another that it is Israel, and the third that it is a world-dominating superpower (not specifically identified in the book, but from the description Russia is the obvious candidate). It would be difficult to have three interpretations of the beast which differ more widely than these. No clear alternative view to the continuous-historical view has arisen, only a plethora of conflicting interpretations. Other examples of widely diverging interpretations could also be given.

The idea that the Apocalypse can be understood by comparing Scripture with Scripture alone sounds very reasonable, but is a misleading half-truth. Comparing Scripture with Scripture is vital to establish the true meaning of the symbology used, but it cannot provide the application of the prophecies, for the prophecies concern events outside the book, and to understand the prophecies the events which fulfil them must be known. No one disputes the fact that knowledge of events outside the Bible is necessary to understand the prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse is no different. This makes the task of understanding the Apocalypse difficult, but that is in the nature of such prophecies, and there is no escaping it.

There is, of course, an easy way out of the question as to whether the Apocalypse is to be interpreted in the continuous-historical way or in the futurist way, and that is to say that it is both. Since the Scriptures are full of dual-fulfilment prophecies, then why should not the Apocalypse be the same? This view is not, however, tenable.

The main part of the Apocalypse, as was shown at the beginning of the article, consists of two sequences of prophecies, each beginning at the time the visions were revealed and ending with the return of Christ and the Kingdom. It is clearly not possible for such a sequence to be fulfilled twice, so we cannot expect a second set of events, all in the future, which fulfil it. Any attempt to interpret the Apocalypse along dual-fulfilment lines must therefore involve deciding that only certain bits are fulfilled twice. Any such decision can only be an arbitrary one, and no actual basis for such an interpretation has, to the knowledge of this writer, been presented.

The continuous-historical view of Revelation has always been a significant part of the Christadelphian understanding of Scripture. It goes with our belief that the churches of Christendom are astray from the Truth. If we lose this understanding our separation as a community will be greatly weakened, and we will be in the position of looking out for a whole sequence of significant events which will never happen. Let us hold fast to those things which have always been believed amongst us.

Next Article in this Issue

Home | About | Subscriptions | Contact us | Search
New this month | Back issues | Other publications | Other sites
Back to Special Issue contents