6. The Place.

6. The Place.The Revelation was given in Patmos, one of the group of the Sporades, a small, rocky, and irregularly shaped island, some ten miles long by five miles wide, lying in the Ægean Sea, off the coast of Asia Minor, about sixty miles from Ephesus and thirty-five miles from Miletus,37to which John was banished“for the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus”. According to tradition offenders of rank were banished to this island under the Roman Empire to work in the mines and marble quarries; and the Apostle John perhaps shared in this harsh lot during his imprisonment, as asserted by Victorinus in his commentary, the earliest work on the Apocalypse, written[pg 033]toward the close of the third century. The chief feature of the modern island is the Monastery of St. John, founded in A. D. 1088, which lies a mile and a half south of La Scala, the landing place; while halfway up the hillside a grotto, known as the cave of the Apocalypse, is pointed out as the traditional place where the visions of the book were seen. The natural scenery of the island is rugged and the view of the sea and of the neighboring islands very fine, which may have contributed somewhat to the imagery of the book, as has been suggested by different travelers.38The content of the visions was doubtless committed to writing soon afterward, and probably while John was still a prisoner in Patmos, though the general work of authorship may have been done later at Ephesus.397. The Canonicity.The right of the Book of Revelation to a place in the New Testament Canon is well attested both historically and by internal evidence. The historical evidence is especially complete, and is regarded by some as stronger than that of any other book in the New Testament:40the objections have all arisen from the internal evidence, which has been differently estimated by different minds.The Historical Evidence covers the question both of authorship and of canonicity,—for these cannot well be separated, since the apostolic authorship carried with it for the early church the canonicity also—and it may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—(1) Papias (circ. A. D. 130). Bishop of Hierapolis,“the hearer of John”, and“the companion of Polycarp”, regarded it as authoritative, and is the first to attest it, though he does not affirm its apostolicity. We are indebted for his testimony to Andreas of Cappadocia (about the end of the fifth century), who refers to Papias along with Irenæus and others, and quotes from a work by Papias his comment on Rev. 12:7-9. In this early witness of its canonicity we can scarcely conceive of[pg 034]Papias being mistaken, and his testimony is of great value.(2) Justin Martyr (circ. A. D. 140) says it was written by“a certain man whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ”. This testimony is within fifty years of the later date assigned to the book, and seventy-five years of the earlier one, and is therefore of special importance; and there is no hesitancy in affirming that the author was“one of the apostles of Christ”.(3) According to Eusebius, Melito, Bp. of Sardis (circ. A. D. 170), wrote a lost work on“the Revelation of John”; also two other bishops, Theophilus of Antioch, and Appolonius of Ephesus (both before the close of the second century), cited from it in their writings.(4) In a letter from the churches of Lyons and Vienne (circ. A. D. 177) the Revelation is cited, and is described as“sacred Scripture”.(5) Irenæus (circ. A. D. 180) defends its apostolic authority, and asserts frequently and positively that the Apocalypse was written by“John, a disciple of the Lord”.(6) Clement of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 200) refers to the four and twenty elders with an explanatory clause,“as John says in the Apocalypse”.(7) Tertullian (circ. A. D. 200) cites it frequently, ascribing it to John the Apostle, and attests its recognition in Africa.(8) The Canon of Muratori (circ. 200) includes it without question, and says,“John in the Apocalypse, though he writes to the Seven Churches, yet says to all, &c,”and the context shows that the reference is to the Apostle.(9) Hippolytus (circ. A. D. 210) wrote on“the Gospel and Apocalypse of John”; and he also cites the Apocalypse as a Scripture authority against Caius. After this time its canonicity was regarded as established by the Western Church.(10) Origen (circ. A. D. 250), the pupil of Clement of Alexandria, and the first textual critic of the New Testament, whose knowledge of the opinion and usage in different parts of the church was very wide, knows of no doubts concerning the Apocalypse, but quotes it as the recognized composition of the Apostle and Evangelist.[pg 035]The authority of the Apocalypse was not, however, destined to remain unquestioned, though its apostolic authorship and canonical right were practically unchallenged until toward the end of the second century—and in fact it was generally received by the church until the middle of the third century—but subsequently both of these were questioned, viz:—(1) Marcion, the so-called“Heretic”(circ. A. D. 150), rejected it in forming his Canon because of its apparently Jewish character, and not because he did not regard it as genuine. This, however, did not represent a church view, and had little influence on opinion outside of his own sect.(2) Dionysius of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 247) argues that it is not by the Apostle, though he does not reject the book. With him the question is mainly one of authorship, and not of canonicity.(3) Eusebius (circ. A. D. 270) follows the opinion of Dionysius and may be regarded as“wavering”, for he cites much in its favor. After Eusebius, however, opposition to it became general in the Syro-Palestinian Church, and it does not appear in the Peshito Version, though St Ephraim Syrus, the chief father of the Syrian Church, cites it and ascribes it to the Apostle John.(4) Cyril of Jerusalem (circ. A. D. 386) omits the Apocalypse from his list of the canonical books of the New Testament.(5) In the Eastern Church the book was questioned on dogmatic grounds connected with the Millenarian controversy, and it was omitted from the Canon by the Council of Laodicea (circ. A. D. 360).(6) Finally, however, in deference to the strong testimony of the Western Church, and influenced somewhat, no doubt, by the internal evidence of the book itself, it was authoritatively accepted and universally recognized by the church at large.The Internal Evidence for the canonicity of the book, apart from the difficulties discussed under the head of Unity, is quite clear and satisfying and is practically irrefutable, for the disputed questions of authorship and date are not of such character as to affect its canonicity. This evidence may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—(1) The historical situation and references correspond to the time in which the book claims to have been[pg 036]written, the latter half of the first century, and are fully sustained by contemporaneous history.(2) The literary form and diction are each suitable to the period and authorship to which the book is ascribed.(3) The doctrinal teachings are fully and distinctively Christian, and are such as we would expect in a work of the period, written by inspiration for the whole church, viz:—(a) the Christianity it bears witness to has escaped from the particularism of Jewish thought into the broad catholicity of the Pauline Epistles; (b) Christ is presented as the divine atoning Lamb seated in the midst of the throne, co-equal with the Father; (c) the personality of the Holy Spirit is recognized, and his illuminative work illustrated; (d) the chief duties of the Christian life are those presented in the Gospels, faith, witness, and purity, while the reward of overcoming is set forth in terms of apostolic hope; and (e) the entire contents of the book, so widely different from the non-canonical literature, appeal to the instincts of the Christian heart now as in the first generation, and verify themselves afresh to the Christian consciousness in such a forceful and convincing way that this goes far to overcome any apparent objections to its canonical authority based upon subjective judgments of another class. In fact the impartial verdict of careful investigation serves to confirm the opinion that the Apocalypse is rightfully received on ample and concurrent testimony both of Historical and Internal Evidence as a part of sacred Scripture by the whole church throughout the world.8. The Form.The Book consists of a series of strange and impressive symbolic visions which contrast present and historic conditions of trial and suffering in the church and in the world with future and prophetic conditions of triumph and reward for the holy and of wrath and punishment for the sinful. It is an interpretative view of the divine path and plan of the centuries that is evidently given for the comfort and help of God's children in the midst of trial and distress. Its Literary Form is marked and significant, and belongs to that highly figurative style of late Jewish and early Christian writings which is known[pg 037]as the Apocalyptic Literature.41And though John must often have felt himself hampered and impeded by the fanciful and more or less unreal character of this literary form, yet it doubtless met more fully than any other the conditions of the time, and afforded an adequate method of reaching the devout Christian mind of that generation. This literature is distinguished both by its peculiar style and by the exceptional range of its thought, and may be described as consisting of all of that particular class of the Apocryphal writings which are couched in mystic symbols and figures, and which attempt to give an account of hidden things miraculously disclosed, especially those pertaining to the other world and to the closing events of human history. The word Apocalyptic in its present sense belongs to recent usage, being introduced by the modern critical school as a generic term to designate these writings as a distinct department of the Apocryphal books, and also to denote the literary style or art-form in which they are cast. The use of the word Apocalypse to designate the writings or books now known by that name (as theApocalypse of Baruch, and others) is undoubtedly very old, though it did not apparently begin before the end of the first century, and seems to have taken rise from the common use of the title“The Apocalypse of John”in Christian circles to designate the Revelation, from which the word came to be applied to all writings of a similar class. Every Apocalypse is thus an example of Apocalyptic; but, owing to the late introduction of the latter term as now used, most dictionaries do not give an adequate definition.42The unique symbolism of these writings constitutes their most striking and characteristic feature; and it is this uniform use of cryptic symbols instead of ordinary figures of speech that invests the Apocalypse of John with its peculiar charm, and at the same time creates the special problems of its interpretation. A symbol may be defined as a conventional objective form chosen to represent something else, often not otherwise capable of portraiture, because of some real or fancied resemblance[pg 038]that appeals to the mind; an ideal representation couched in sensuous form that embodies one or more of the prominent features of its subject, and that comes to represent a fixed conception in the world of fancy, a lower and material sign being used to represent a higher and abstract idea. The use of symbols of some sort is instinctive and universal, and grows out of a natural effort of the mind to clothe its ideas in forms that give free scope to the imagination. But the peculiar nature of the symbols and the profusion of their use in the Apocalyptic literature, serve to mark it as separate from all other literary forms. Oriental symbols, too, are so unfamiliar and oftentimes so incongruous to our minds, such as the Dragon, the Scarlet Beast, the Two-horned Beast, and even the Cherubim, that we perhaps fail to realize how much they meant to people of a primitive civilization who were possessed of a vivid imagination without scientific precision of thought. This difference in the instinctive appreciation of the nature and value of symbols, together with the wide possibilities of meaning that are apparently inherent in the symbols used in the Apocalypse, has always given room for the fertile fancy of interpreters. But the later study of the Apocalyptic writings as a class has made it plain that this effort was largely misspent, and has led to more discriminating views of the meaning and use of symbols as there found, and to their limitation by established usage, where such is known to have existed. For while the growth of recognized symbols is necessarily slow, and their origin often impossible to trace yet when they have once been formed, and have come to possess an established meaning in the public mind, they exhibit a remarkable persistence; and though their meaning may be somewhat modified by subsequent use and by particular application, yet it can scarcely suffer sudden and radical change. And let us remember that the symbols, metaphors, and other figures found in the Revelation are not purely literary: they have had a history and have acquired a recognized and conventional meaning. We have, therefore, an available guide to the interpretation of the symbols in the book furnished by their use not only in the Old Testament, in which by former interpreters they were mainly sought, but especially in Jewish apocalypses, which give the current meaning of many of them at the time when this book was written, a sense which[pg 039]could not well have been departed from to any great extent without making their meaning wholly unintelligible. And the more clearly we apprehend this fact, the more constantly we apply it in our interpretation, the more likely are we to arrive at the meaning intended.43For while the Western mind revolts against the oftime obscurity of Apocalyptic symbols, yet we not infrequently recur to the same method of illustration. For instance, a good example of the present day use of symbols, aided by illustrative skill, is found in such a cartoon as“The Modern Juggernaut”that appeared a few years ago, in which the wheeled car of India was transformed into a huge wine bottle full of intoxicating drink that rolls along its way, crushing out the lives of thousands of miserable victims, while the fierce dogs of War, Famine, and Pestilence have under its malign influence slipped their leash and go forth to prey upon men.44This symbolism in some measure parallels that of the Scarlet Beast in the Revelation, and shows how a great destructive force operating in the world may be presented to many minds in an objective form much more effectively than by any abstract verbal statement. Like a parable an apocalypse flings a great truth across our path, instinct with the touch of spiritual life.The revelation made to John doubtless took the Apocalyptic form because it was the prevailing literary method of that time for the treatment of the theme dealt with by his prophecy, and its constructive symbolism already filled and colored his thought. But notwithstanding that it is cast in a Jewish mould, the Christian thought everywhere triumphs over the Jewish form. The line of thought is limited to the peculiar range of Apocalyptic subjects, and is found to be closely related to that of our Lord's discourse upon the last things (the so-called“little apocalypse”of our Lord in Mat. 24), though it should not be regarded as formally an amplification of that discourse, or as chiefly or wholly determined in content by[pg 040]it.45The prophetic mood is manifest in every part of the book, and the exalted mental state of the writer is sustained throughout after the manner of a rhapsody, in the structure and movement of which all literary forms are in a measure fused together.46Indeed by a deeper study of this unique work we come to feel as though in it“we touch the living soul of Asiatic Christendom”.It remains to be said that while we class the Apocalypse of John with Jewish apocalypses as to literary form, yet it so manifestly rises above its class both in method and content that it is universally accorded the first place among Apocalyptic writings, and fully establishes its claim to a place among the inspired books of Scripture by reason of the penetrative prophetic insight which it everywhere displays in dealing with the greatest, the most central, and the most mysterious theme in the whole sphere of Christian thought.9. The Theme.The Theme of the Revelation, stated in its broadest terms, is Christ and the Church through Time to Eternity; the mystery of God in human life and history made manifest through the disclosure of the divine redemptive plan becoming effective and triumphant.47The theme we assign to the Revelation will, of course, be determined largely by our view of its contents. Many interpret it to be Jerusalem, Rome, and the End, limiting its outlook to the horizon of the early church; others make it the Course of History, or the Future Path of the Church in the World; still others affirm it to be the Last Things, or the Second Coming of Christ. But the wider view is the truer one, which includes many phases of the kingdom, and the theme is properly interpreted as Christ and the Church here and hereafter, or Redemption in its present and future relation to Human Life. This theme is wrought out in prophetic vision by an evolving drama that moves forward in multiple and progressive cycles of trial and triumph, of conflict and victory, ever advancing toward the[pg 041]complete and final consummation, when righteousness shall win, sin be punished, and the redeemed be restored to the immediate presence of God; and whereby the divine plan shall be abundantly vindicated notwithstanding all apparent anomalies, and seeming contradictions, and temporary reverses, for it is confidently affirmed that the night of sin shall ultimately pass away, and the day dawn at last in which“the glory of God and of the Lamb shall be the light thereof”; and“He that sitteth on the throne shall spread his tabernacle over them ... that come out of great tribulation”. Thus the book gives answer to the deep call of the soul for some sign concerning the future that shall point the path of faith and cheer the heart for service; and the answer is abundantly satisfying, for those who interpret the theme aright. Occupied with such a subject of thought it finds its proper place at the end of the inspired volume; it forms a fitting close for the entire line of prophetic voices; and it binds the long succession of books into an unbroken unity.48With illimitable sweep its visions look backward through time and forward into eternity, downward on earth's struggles and upward upon heaven's victory, inward to the soul's conflicts and outward to God's eternal peace, while through it all there rings out the one transcendent note, Christ reigns but to triumph.10. The Occasion.The conditions which gave Occasion for this sole Apocalyptic book of the New Testament have left their impress on its form and thought, viz. persecution from without, and trial and distress within the church. These conditions which are subsumed throughout must be clearly recognized in order to interpret the message aright, and to estimate its proper value for the age which first received it. For, whether we accept the earlier or later date of writing, the deadly power of the Roman Empire was being put forth to repress and destroy the church. At the later date the worship of the Emperor was being made the test of obedience to law, and at either time many Christians in the face of persecution were weak and wavering. The immediate outlook was increasingly dark, and the future prospect full of gloom. The failure of the Messiah to reappear and of the church to triumph; the[pg 042]bitter experience of persecution already endured, and the certainty of greater suffering yet to follow; in a word, the apparent reversal of the brightest hopes of early Christianity, all of these called for some divine message of cheer that would inspirit the discouraged, throw light upon the path of sorrow and shame, and make their lot endurable because of the assuredly glorious outcome of the future. And there was no kind of message so well suited to meet such a crisis as the form of Apocalyptic, which grew out of similar conditions, and had a tone and temper peculiarly adapted to infuse a triumphant hope in the midst of growing religious despair.49But let us not fail to perceive that though the Apocalypse was specially designed to meet a great crisis in the life of the early church, its effectiveness does not end there. Its lessons are for us and for all time; it has the course and end of world-history in view, and this is an ever-living theme for the church of Christ in every age.11. The Purpose.The Purpose of the Apocalypse, as indicated by its introductory words“The Revelation”, is the revealing or unveiling of mystery. In the Christian sense a mystery is a former secret of divine truth that has now been at least partially revealed (Eph. 3:1-11), while an apocalypse is the process of revealing it, and also the revelation itself containing the truth made known. The comprehensive design of the book is to unfold and interpret the divine purpose and method in human history, especially in relation to the redemptive process, by portraying in scenic outline the present and future course of the church of Christ through conflict to victory, for the vindication of God's righteousness in the final issue, and for the comfort and encouragement of tried and persecuted Christians in the midst of the pathway of life.50The more immediate purpose was to strengthen the church in the strain of present distress, while the ultimate aim is to be found not in the disclosure of history itself, but in the establishment of the moral order of the world, in illustrating the fact that history is a divinely guided“moral process toward a goal”, as the substantial ground of a true philosophy of life, and[pg 043]as a permanent defense against false and partial views. And this purpose is so wrought out by the portrayal of the world as an ideal battlefield full of opposing forces, with alternating scenes of triumph and danger, that the whole becomes a fervent and powerful appeal to the heroic in Christian life and character, and a clear call to new faith and courage. For whatever else may be its lessons, we must not leave out of view this practical purpose of divine monition to the world of men, which has so deeply impressed itself upon every generation of Christians. Its message of warning is inwrought with and reënforced by its prophetic scenes of terror and reward: for the Apocalypse is the book of the future as well as of the past and present, and that future is ever near in prophetic vision, however far it may be in historic relation, and to John's eye is always filled with the figure of the returning Christ who comes to judgment and to victory. The message, however, viewed in its entirety, while it contains a sympathetic element of encouragement for the saints, and a monitory element of exhortation and warning for all men, is yet fundamentally a philosophic interpretation of the divine method in history for all who would see God in the story of man's life on the earth—a theodicy based upon prophecy. And any view which assumes for the author a narrow field of vision, such as that he merely grouped together the current apocalyptic conceptions of his time in order to fling them in fierce polemic against the Roman Empire and to foreshadow its defeat and fall,51rests upon a manifestly imperfect judgment that fails in religious depth, missing the spiritual significance of the message, and lacks in literary insight, denying the evident marks of originality, genius, and inspiration in the most wonderful and unique composition of its kind that has ever been produced.12. The Interpretation.There are two essentially different methods of Interpretation that have been followed in attempting to arrive at the meaning of this manifestly difficult book, which are founded upon different conceptions of its didactic purpose, and proceed upon different lines of inquiry, viz. the Historical, and the Symbolical.The Historical Interpretation regards the book as aprophetic review and forecast of historyveiled in symbol,[pg 044]and seeks the meaning and fulfilment of the visions in certain specific historical events which either have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the sphere of human life and experience. There are three different forms of this method of interpretation, all of which specialize the prophecy but differ as to the time and nature of the fulfilment, viz. (1) thePreteristview (also called the Contemporaneous-Historical), which regards that the visions relate mainly to events in the history of the early church, and that they have been already fulfilled in the far past; (2) theFuturistview (also called the Future-Historical), that the visions relate mainly to events which shall occur in the last days, and that the fulfilment is to be looked for chiefly in the more or less remote future; and (3) theProgressivistview (also called the Continuous- or Church-Historical), that the several visions constitute a continuous and progressive series, covering the whole period of the church's history from the time of John to the last judgment, and that their fulfilment is therefore to be found in a successive line of historical events, part of which lie in the past and part in the future.The Symbolical Interpretation, upon the other hand, regards the book as aprophetic idealization of history, dealing with the general course and outcome of man's life upon the earth, and disclosing under the form of symbols the spiritual and moral forces which give to history its deeper meaning; and seeks the significance and fulfilment of the visions not, therefore, in particular events, but rather in classes of events, not solely at one definite time, but at many different times, finding the revelation mainly illustrative of general principles of the divine government rather than predictive of particular facts of history, a view of various phases rather than of historic stages of the church's experience,52and interpreting its symbols in the genuine spirit of Apocalyptic as pictorial representations of the prevailing fortunes of the church in the world as she moves forward to the final consummation.53This method of interpretation, which is commonly known as[pg 045]theSymbolistview (also called the Spiritual), presents no such marked difference of form as the Historical, but with a wider outlook regards that the visions relate to all such like events in every age as specially manifest God's rule in the world sending forth judgment unto victory, and such as particularly exhibit the progressive development of good and evil in human life, together with their constant conflict and their final reward and punishment.All the current interpretations may be classified under one or other of the above heads, yet in the hands of individual interpreters they are often modified and blend into each other in their application—a manifest recognition of the fact that there is an element of truth underlying each view, which we may perhaps say has been unduly emphasized, for all agree that the interpretation is somehow and somewhere to be found in human life and history.What might be called still another method of interpretation is the Apocalyptic-Traditional (or Tradition-Historical) view of late critical writers on the Apocalypse already referred to, which approaches the question from the viewpoint of literary origin, and attributes certain portions of the book to the introduction of traditional Jewish or Jewish-Christian Apocalyptic fragments that have been utilized by the author and applied to the historical conditions of his time, adapting them to a new meaning. This, however, is not so much a separate method of interpretation as it is a corollary of the present Literary-Critical method of dealing with the book, which regards it as an early Christian work in successive editions that has taken into itself certain Jewish elements. With this origin assumed the interpretation does not differ materially from the Preterist view except, perhaps, that it is less rigorous in its application to current events, and recognizes more fully the idealism of the author; for the historical outlook has measurably lost its value except as an indication of the date of writing, and for most who hold this view the book has no longer any distinctive prophetic message for the church; it has become chiefly a fantastic dream, a pious dream it is true, but only a dream of the far past.The principal question of interpretation, as will be seen by a consideration of the current views, relates not only to the view-point, but also to the aim or design of the[pg 046]Revelation. The Historical method centers the chief aim of the book in apredictive-prophetic element which it finds throughout and regards as pointing to specific events in particular periods of history that are designed to teach important spiritual lessons. With this idea of the didactic purpose, it yet presents the widest variation of opinion concerning the viewpoint of the book, and includes upon the one hand the extreme rationalist who considers it a purely human writing, a Jewish apocalypse that has been revamped to include Christian ideas, which blends history with prediction and reflects only the horizon of the first century; and on the other hand the devout mystic who accepts its message as chiefly predictive prophecy of the far future, and interprets it well nigh literally as a prophetic account of the world's ending amid terror and blood. The Symbolist method, with a quite different conception, centers the aim of the book in aninterpretative-prophetic element which it finds in every part, and regards as setting forth the principles of the divine government, and pointing to their exemplification in multiple events occurring in different periods of history that are working together toward the final consummation. According to this method of interpretation the viewpoint is idealistic, universal, and timeless, and the scope of the visions correspondingly wide.The latter view, which is the one presented in the following outline, affords a fairly satisfactory interpretation that has been steadily gaining ground during the last half-century, and to the present author seems destined in some form to attain general though perhaps not universal acceptance. The views of the leaders in the symbolical school present no material divergence in general interpretation,54and the principles of this interpretation seem likely to prevail throughout the Christian church of the future, though the form and application may be somewhat modified. The objection that“this system of interpretation is out of keeping with the general purpose of Apocalyptic literature”,55loses its force if we grant that the book is inspired, and realize that the literary form was chosen because of its adaptability for the treatment of the topics dealt with in the Apocalypse; for once, the Apocalyptic form becomes the vehicle of a divine revelation, it thereby escapes some of the main limitations of its class, one[pg 047]of which was“the consciousness of no new message from God for the generation to which it was addressed”; and accordingly it should here be regarded as only the literary setting in which the message continually overtops the form, the art-form in which the art is lost sight of through the beauty and power of the truth which it presents. This view, although not without difficulties, is yet believed by a good proportion of eminent scholars to be based upon sound and temperate exegesis, to be best suited to the character of the book, and to give relative value to all the elements of truth contained in other views. The importance of the historical situation of John's time and of the lessons for that age is fully recognized, the eschatological element throughout is given due consideration, and the application of the prophecy to the entire trend and events of history is made apparent, while the precise time-relation of the visions is for the most part eliminated, and thus the field of prophetic prospective is maintained in its true breadth, and not narrowed as in the historical interpretation to a particular age or series of events. And the interpretation as a whole rests for its validity upon the scope and tenor of the book throughout, and can therefore be maintained without determining the full or specific meaning of every part. The Revelation thus understood ceases to be either a political diatribe of the first century, or the terrored story of the End; it rises above an epitome of history whether near or far, and takes rank as a true prophetic book in Apocalyptic form, dealing with the all-embracing plan of God for the ages, and the munificent purpose of redemption; and it is thereby rescued from many conjectural and contradictory interpretations which have obscured its meaning, and becomes a living prophecy of value to the church in every age.The tendency toward wiser methods in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, and the growing spirit of unanimity concerning its larger lessons, provide good ground for encouragement to the troubled reader. And while, no doubt, the influence of the individual type of mind will continue to be felt in the interpretation, the rationalistic emphasizing the preterist application, the mystic the futurist, and the practical mind the symbolic and universal reference, yet it should always be kept in view that the chief importance of the book for the church at large[pg 048]transcends any question of theoretical interpretation, and lies in its practical worth in providing a rich source of religious inspiration, an invigorating aid to imperfect faith, and an abiding stimulus to the Christian imagination, in enabling the ordinary mind to realize the spiritual in the midst of and transcending the natural, and in making the deep conflict of life with its divine superintendence an ever present fact to the human soul. Indeed the book was evidently written for common use in the early church in public worship (ch. 1:3), which indicates an appreciation of its value in striking contrast with the modern indifference that passes it by as unintelligible. The Apocalypse has also a historical value, quite apart from its general meaning and use, that we should not overlook, for it throws important light upon the political and social conditions as well as the inner thought and development of the Christian church in the latter part of the first century. It reflects throughout the faith and temper in which the early church faced its growing conflict with the world. And it serves to show that at the close of the apostolic age there was a Christianity which was free from the law and universal, and yet continued to adhere to Jewish modes of expression.56

The Revelation was given in Patmos, one of the group of the Sporades, a small, rocky, and irregularly shaped island, some ten miles long by five miles wide, lying in the Ægean Sea, off the coast of Asia Minor, about sixty miles from Ephesus and thirty-five miles from Miletus,37to which John was banished“for the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus”. According to tradition offenders of rank were banished to this island under the Roman Empire to work in the mines and marble quarries; and the Apostle John perhaps shared in this harsh lot during his imprisonment, as asserted by Victorinus in his commentary, the earliest work on the Apocalypse, written[pg 033]toward the close of the third century. The chief feature of the modern island is the Monastery of St. John, founded in A. D. 1088, which lies a mile and a half south of La Scala, the landing place; while halfway up the hillside a grotto, known as the cave of the Apocalypse, is pointed out as the traditional place where the visions of the book were seen. The natural scenery of the island is rugged and the view of the sea and of the neighboring islands very fine, which may have contributed somewhat to the imagery of the book, as has been suggested by different travelers.38The content of the visions was doubtless committed to writing soon afterward, and probably while John was still a prisoner in Patmos, though the general work of authorship may have been done later at Ephesus.39

7. The Canonicity.The right of the Book of Revelation to a place in the New Testament Canon is well attested both historically and by internal evidence. The historical evidence is especially complete, and is regarded by some as stronger than that of any other book in the New Testament:40the objections have all arisen from the internal evidence, which has been differently estimated by different minds.The Historical Evidence covers the question both of authorship and of canonicity,—for these cannot well be separated, since the apostolic authorship carried with it for the early church the canonicity also—and it may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—(1) Papias (circ. A. D. 130). Bishop of Hierapolis,“the hearer of John”, and“the companion of Polycarp”, regarded it as authoritative, and is the first to attest it, though he does not affirm its apostolicity. We are indebted for his testimony to Andreas of Cappadocia (about the end of the fifth century), who refers to Papias along with Irenæus and others, and quotes from a work by Papias his comment on Rev. 12:7-9. In this early witness of its canonicity we can scarcely conceive of[pg 034]Papias being mistaken, and his testimony is of great value.(2) Justin Martyr (circ. A. D. 140) says it was written by“a certain man whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ”. This testimony is within fifty years of the later date assigned to the book, and seventy-five years of the earlier one, and is therefore of special importance; and there is no hesitancy in affirming that the author was“one of the apostles of Christ”.(3) According to Eusebius, Melito, Bp. of Sardis (circ. A. D. 170), wrote a lost work on“the Revelation of John”; also two other bishops, Theophilus of Antioch, and Appolonius of Ephesus (both before the close of the second century), cited from it in their writings.(4) In a letter from the churches of Lyons and Vienne (circ. A. D. 177) the Revelation is cited, and is described as“sacred Scripture”.(5) Irenæus (circ. A. D. 180) defends its apostolic authority, and asserts frequently and positively that the Apocalypse was written by“John, a disciple of the Lord”.(6) Clement of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 200) refers to the four and twenty elders with an explanatory clause,“as John says in the Apocalypse”.(7) Tertullian (circ. A. D. 200) cites it frequently, ascribing it to John the Apostle, and attests its recognition in Africa.(8) The Canon of Muratori (circ. 200) includes it without question, and says,“John in the Apocalypse, though he writes to the Seven Churches, yet says to all, &c,”and the context shows that the reference is to the Apostle.(9) Hippolytus (circ. A. D. 210) wrote on“the Gospel and Apocalypse of John”; and he also cites the Apocalypse as a Scripture authority against Caius. After this time its canonicity was regarded as established by the Western Church.(10) Origen (circ. A. D. 250), the pupil of Clement of Alexandria, and the first textual critic of the New Testament, whose knowledge of the opinion and usage in different parts of the church was very wide, knows of no doubts concerning the Apocalypse, but quotes it as the recognized composition of the Apostle and Evangelist.[pg 035]The authority of the Apocalypse was not, however, destined to remain unquestioned, though its apostolic authorship and canonical right were practically unchallenged until toward the end of the second century—and in fact it was generally received by the church until the middle of the third century—but subsequently both of these were questioned, viz:—(1) Marcion, the so-called“Heretic”(circ. A. D. 150), rejected it in forming his Canon because of its apparently Jewish character, and not because he did not regard it as genuine. This, however, did not represent a church view, and had little influence on opinion outside of his own sect.(2) Dionysius of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 247) argues that it is not by the Apostle, though he does not reject the book. With him the question is mainly one of authorship, and not of canonicity.(3) Eusebius (circ. A. D. 270) follows the opinion of Dionysius and may be regarded as“wavering”, for he cites much in its favor. After Eusebius, however, opposition to it became general in the Syro-Palestinian Church, and it does not appear in the Peshito Version, though St Ephraim Syrus, the chief father of the Syrian Church, cites it and ascribes it to the Apostle John.(4) Cyril of Jerusalem (circ. A. D. 386) omits the Apocalypse from his list of the canonical books of the New Testament.(5) In the Eastern Church the book was questioned on dogmatic grounds connected with the Millenarian controversy, and it was omitted from the Canon by the Council of Laodicea (circ. A. D. 360).(6) Finally, however, in deference to the strong testimony of the Western Church, and influenced somewhat, no doubt, by the internal evidence of the book itself, it was authoritatively accepted and universally recognized by the church at large.The Internal Evidence for the canonicity of the book, apart from the difficulties discussed under the head of Unity, is quite clear and satisfying and is practically irrefutable, for the disputed questions of authorship and date are not of such character as to affect its canonicity. This evidence may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—(1) The historical situation and references correspond to the time in which the book claims to have been[pg 036]written, the latter half of the first century, and are fully sustained by contemporaneous history.(2) The literary form and diction are each suitable to the period and authorship to which the book is ascribed.(3) The doctrinal teachings are fully and distinctively Christian, and are such as we would expect in a work of the period, written by inspiration for the whole church, viz:—(a) the Christianity it bears witness to has escaped from the particularism of Jewish thought into the broad catholicity of the Pauline Epistles; (b) Christ is presented as the divine atoning Lamb seated in the midst of the throne, co-equal with the Father; (c) the personality of the Holy Spirit is recognized, and his illuminative work illustrated; (d) the chief duties of the Christian life are those presented in the Gospels, faith, witness, and purity, while the reward of overcoming is set forth in terms of apostolic hope; and (e) the entire contents of the book, so widely different from the non-canonical literature, appeal to the instincts of the Christian heart now as in the first generation, and verify themselves afresh to the Christian consciousness in such a forceful and convincing way that this goes far to overcome any apparent objections to its canonical authority based upon subjective judgments of another class. In fact the impartial verdict of careful investigation serves to confirm the opinion that the Apocalypse is rightfully received on ample and concurrent testimony both of Historical and Internal Evidence as a part of sacred Scripture by the whole church throughout the world.

The right of the Book of Revelation to a place in the New Testament Canon is well attested both historically and by internal evidence. The historical evidence is especially complete, and is regarded by some as stronger than that of any other book in the New Testament:40the objections have all arisen from the internal evidence, which has been differently estimated by different minds.

The Historical Evidence covers the question both of authorship and of canonicity,—for these cannot well be separated, since the apostolic authorship carried with it for the early church the canonicity also—and it may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—

(1) Papias (circ. A. D. 130). Bishop of Hierapolis,“the hearer of John”, and“the companion of Polycarp”, regarded it as authoritative, and is the first to attest it, though he does not affirm its apostolicity. We are indebted for his testimony to Andreas of Cappadocia (about the end of the fifth century), who refers to Papias along with Irenæus and others, and quotes from a work by Papias his comment on Rev. 12:7-9. In this early witness of its canonicity we can scarcely conceive of[pg 034]Papias being mistaken, and his testimony is of great value.

(2) Justin Martyr (circ. A. D. 140) says it was written by“a certain man whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ”. This testimony is within fifty years of the later date assigned to the book, and seventy-five years of the earlier one, and is therefore of special importance; and there is no hesitancy in affirming that the author was“one of the apostles of Christ”.

(3) According to Eusebius, Melito, Bp. of Sardis (circ. A. D. 170), wrote a lost work on“the Revelation of John”; also two other bishops, Theophilus of Antioch, and Appolonius of Ephesus (both before the close of the second century), cited from it in their writings.

(4) In a letter from the churches of Lyons and Vienne (circ. A. D. 177) the Revelation is cited, and is described as“sacred Scripture”.

(5) Irenæus (circ. A. D. 180) defends its apostolic authority, and asserts frequently and positively that the Apocalypse was written by“John, a disciple of the Lord”.

(6) Clement of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 200) refers to the four and twenty elders with an explanatory clause,“as John says in the Apocalypse”.

(7) Tertullian (circ. A. D. 200) cites it frequently, ascribing it to John the Apostle, and attests its recognition in Africa.

(8) The Canon of Muratori (circ. 200) includes it without question, and says,“John in the Apocalypse, though he writes to the Seven Churches, yet says to all, &c,”and the context shows that the reference is to the Apostle.

(9) Hippolytus (circ. A. D. 210) wrote on“the Gospel and Apocalypse of John”; and he also cites the Apocalypse as a Scripture authority against Caius. After this time its canonicity was regarded as established by the Western Church.

(10) Origen (circ. A. D. 250), the pupil of Clement of Alexandria, and the first textual critic of the New Testament, whose knowledge of the opinion and usage in different parts of the church was very wide, knows of no doubts concerning the Apocalypse, but quotes it as the recognized composition of the Apostle and Evangelist.

The authority of the Apocalypse was not, however, destined to remain unquestioned, though its apostolic authorship and canonical right were practically unchallenged until toward the end of the second century—and in fact it was generally received by the church until the middle of the third century—but subsequently both of these were questioned, viz:—

(1) Marcion, the so-called“Heretic”(circ. A. D. 150), rejected it in forming his Canon because of its apparently Jewish character, and not because he did not regard it as genuine. This, however, did not represent a church view, and had little influence on opinion outside of his own sect.

(2) Dionysius of Alexandria (circ. A. D. 247) argues that it is not by the Apostle, though he does not reject the book. With him the question is mainly one of authorship, and not of canonicity.

(3) Eusebius (circ. A. D. 270) follows the opinion of Dionysius and may be regarded as“wavering”, for he cites much in its favor. After Eusebius, however, opposition to it became general in the Syro-Palestinian Church, and it does not appear in the Peshito Version, though St Ephraim Syrus, the chief father of the Syrian Church, cites it and ascribes it to the Apostle John.

(4) Cyril of Jerusalem (circ. A. D. 386) omits the Apocalypse from his list of the canonical books of the New Testament.

(5) In the Eastern Church the book was questioned on dogmatic grounds connected with the Millenarian controversy, and it was omitted from the Canon by the Council of Laodicea (circ. A. D. 360).

(6) Finally, however, in deference to the strong testimony of the Western Church, and influenced somewhat, no doubt, by the internal evidence of the book itself, it was authoritatively accepted and universally recognized by the church at large.

The Internal Evidence for the canonicity of the book, apart from the difficulties discussed under the head of Unity, is quite clear and satisfying and is practically irrefutable, for the disputed questions of authorship and date are not of such character as to affect its canonicity. This evidence may be briefly stated as follows, viz:—

(1) The historical situation and references correspond to the time in which the book claims to have been[pg 036]written, the latter half of the first century, and are fully sustained by contemporaneous history.

(2) The literary form and diction are each suitable to the period and authorship to which the book is ascribed.

(3) The doctrinal teachings are fully and distinctively Christian, and are such as we would expect in a work of the period, written by inspiration for the whole church, viz:—(a) the Christianity it bears witness to has escaped from the particularism of Jewish thought into the broad catholicity of the Pauline Epistles; (b) Christ is presented as the divine atoning Lamb seated in the midst of the throne, co-equal with the Father; (c) the personality of the Holy Spirit is recognized, and his illuminative work illustrated; (d) the chief duties of the Christian life are those presented in the Gospels, faith, witness, and purity, while the reward of overcoming is set forth in terms of apostolic hope; and (e) the entire contents of the book, so widely different from the non-canonical literature, appeal to the instincts of the Christian heart now as in the first generation, and verify themselves afresh to the Christian consciousness in such a forceful and convincing way that this goes far to overcome any apparent objections to its canonical authority based upon subjective judgments of another class. In fact the impartial verdict of careful investigation serves to confirm the opinion that the Apocalypse is rightfully received on ample and concurrent testimony both of Historical and Internal Evidence as a part of sacred Scripture by the whole church throughout the world.

8. The Form.The Book consists of a series of strange and impressive symbolic visions which contrast present and historic conditions of trial and suffering in the church and in the world with future and prophetic conditions of triumph and reward for the holy and of wrath and punishment for the sinful. It is an interpretative view of the divine path and plan of the centuries that is evidently given for the comfort and help of God's children in the midst of trial and distress. Its Literary Form is marked and significant, and belongs to that highly figurative style of late Jewish and early Christian writings which is known[pg 037]as the Apocalyptic Literature.41And though John must often have felt himself hampered and impeded by the fanciful and more or less unreal character of this literary form, yet it doubtless met more fully than any other the conditions of the time, and afforded an adequate method of reaching the devout Christian mind of that generation. This literature is distinguished both by its peculiar style and by the exceptional range of its thought, and may be described as consisting of all of that particular class of the Apocryphal writings which are couched in mystic symbols and figures, and which attempt to give an account of hidden things miraculously disclosed, especially those pertaining to the other world and to the closing events of human history. The word Apocalyptic in its present sense belongs to recent usage, being introduced by the modern critical school as a generic term to designate these writings as a distinct department of the Apocryphal books, and also to denote the literary style or art-form in which they are cast. The use of the word Apocalypse to designate the writings or books now known by that name (as theApocalypse of Baruch, and others) is undoubtedly very old, though it did not apparently begin before the end of the first century, and seems to have taken rise from the common use of the title“The Apocalypse of John”in Christian circles to designate the Revelation, from which the word came to be applied to all writings of a similar class. Every Apocalypse is thus an example of Apocalyptic; but, owing to the late introduction of the latter term as now used, most dictionaries do not give an adequate definition.42The unique symbolism of these writings constitutes their most striking and characteristic feature; and it is this uniform use of cryptic symbols instead of ordinary figures of speech that invests the Apocalypse of John with its peculiar charm, and at the same time creates the special problems of its interpretation. A symbol may be defined as a conventional objective form chosen to represent something else, often not otherwise capable of portraiture, because of some real or fancied resemblance[pg 038]that appeals to the mind; an ideal representation couched in sensuous form that embodies one or more of the prominent features of its subject, and that comes to represent a fixed conception in the world of fancy, a lower and material sign being used to represent a higher and abstract idea. The use of symbols of some sort is instinctive and universal, and grows out of a natural effort of the mind to clothe its ideas in forms that give free scope to the imagination. But the peculiar nature of the symbols and the profusion of their use in the Apocalyptic literature, serve to mark it as separate from all other literary forms. Oriental symbols, too, are so unfamiliar and oftentimes so incongruous to our minds, such as the Dragon, the Scarlet Beast, the Two-horned Beast, and even the Cherubim, that we perhaps fail to realize how much they meant to people of a primitive civilization who were possessed of a vivid imagination without scientific precision of thought. This difference in the instinctive appreciation of the nature and value of symbols, together with the wide possibilities of meaning that are apparently inherent in the symbols used in the Apocalypse, has always given room for the fertile fancy of interpreters. But the later study of the Apocalyptic writings as a class has made it plain that this effort was largely misspent, and has led to more discriminating views of the meaning and use of symbols as there found, and to their limitation by established usage, where such is known to have existed. For while the growth of recognized symbols is necessarily slow, and their origin often impossible to trace yet when they have once been formed, and have come to possess an established meaning in the public mind, they exhibit a remarkable persistence; and though their meaning may be somewhat modified by subsequent use and by particular application, yet it can scarcely suffer sudden and radical change. And let us remember that the symbols, metaphors, and other figures found in the Revelation are not purely literary: they have had a history and have acquired a recognized and conventional meaning. We have, therefore, an available guide to the interpretation of the symbols in the book furnished by their use not only in the Old Testament, in which by former interpreters they were mainly sought, but especially in Jewish apocalypses, which give the current meaning of many of them at the time when this book was written, a sense which[pg 039]could not well have been departed from to any great extent without making their meaning wholly unintelligible. And the more clearly we apprehend this fact, the more constantly we apply it in our interpretation, the more likely are we to arrive at the meaning intended.43For while the Western mind revolts against the oftime obscurity of Apocalyptic symbols, yet we not infrequently recur to the same method of illustration. For instance, a good example of the present day use of symbols, aided by illustrative skill, is found in such a cartoon as“The Modern Juggernaut”that appeared a few years ago, in which the wheeled car of India was transformed into a huge wine bottle full of intoxicating drink that rolls along its way, crushing out the lives of thousands of miserable victims, while the fierce dogs of War, Famine, and Pestilence have under its malign influence slipped their leash and go forth to prey upon men.44This symbolism in some measure parallels that of the Scarlet Beast in the Revelation, and shows how a great destructive force operating in the world may be presented to many minds in an objective form much more effectively than by any abstract verbal statement. Like a parable an apocalypse flings a great truth across our path, instinct with the touch of spiritual life.The revelation made to John doubtless took the Apocalyptic form because it was the prevailing literary method of that time for the treatment of the theme dealt with by his prophecy, and its constructive symbolism already filled and colored his thought. But notwithstanding that it is cast in a Jewish mould, the Christian thought everywhere triumphs over the Jewish form. The line of thought is limited to the peculiar range of Apocalyptic subjects, and is found to be closely related to that of our Lord's discourse upon the last things (the so-called“little apocalypse”of our Lord in Mat. 24), though it should not be regarded as formally an amplification of that discourse, or as chiefly or wholly determined in content by[pg 040]it.45The prophetic mood is manifest in every part of the book, and the exalted mental state of the writer is sustained throughout after the manner of a rhapsody, in the structure and movement of which all literary forms are in a measure fused together.46Indeed by a deeper study of this unique work we come to feel as though in it“we touch the living soul of Asiatic Christendom”.It remains to be said that while we class the Apocalypse of John with Jewish apocalypses as to literary form, yet it so manifestly rises above its class both in method and content that it is universally accorded the first place among Apocalyptic writings, and fully establishes its claim to a place among the inspired books of Scripture by reason of the penetrative prophetic insight which it everywhere displays in dealing with the greatest, the most central, and the most mysterious theme in the whole sphere of Christian thought.

The Book consists of a series of strange and impressive symbolic visions which contrast present and historic conditions of trial and suffering in the church and in the world with future and prophetic conditions of triumph and reward for the holy and of wrath and punishment for the sinful. It is an interpretative view of the divine path and plan of the centuries that is evidently given for the comfort and help of God's children in the midst of trial and distress. Its Literary Form is marked and significant, and belongs to that highly figurative style of late Jewish and early Christian writings which is known[pg 037]as the Apocalyptic Literature.41And though John must often have felt himself hampered and impeded by the fanciful and more or less unreal character of this literary form, yet it doubtless met more fully than any other the conditions of the time, and afforded an adequate method of reaching the devout Christian mind of that generation. This literature is distinguished both by its peculiar style and by the exceptional range of its thought, and may be described as consisting of all of that particular class of the Apocryphal writings which are couched in mystic symbols and figures, and which attempt to give an account of hidden things miraculously disclosed, especially those pertaining to the other world and to the closing events of human history. The word Apocalyptic in its present sense belongs to recent usage, being introduced by the modern critical school as a generic term to designate these writings as a distinct department of the Apocryphal books, and also to denote the literary style or art-form in which they are cast. The use of the word Apocalypse to designate the writings or books now known by that name (as theApocalypse of Baruch, and others) is undoubtedly very old, though it did not apparently begin before the end of the first century, and seems to have taken rise from the common use of the title“The Apocalypse of John”in Christian circles to designate the Revelation, from which the word came to be applied to all writings of a similar class. Every Apocalypse is thus an example of Apocalyptic; but, owing to the late introduction of the latter term as now used, most dictionaries do not give an adequate definition.42

The unique symbolism of these writings constitutes their most striking and characteristic feature; and it is this uniform use of cryptic symbols instead of ordinary figures of speech that invests the Apocalypse of John with its peculiar charm, and at the same time creates the special problems of its interpretation. A symbol may be defined as a conventional objective form chosen to represent something else, often not otherwise capable of portraiture, because of some real or fancied resemblance[pg 038]that appeals to the mind; an ideal representation couched in sensuous form that embodies one or more of the prominent features of its subject, and that comes to represent a fixed conception in the world of fancy, a lower and material sign being used to represent a higher and abstract idea. The use of symbols of some sort is instinctive and universal, and grows out of a natural effort of the mind to clothe its ideas in forms that give free scope to the imagination. But the peculiar nature of the symbols and the profusion of their use in the Apocalyptic literature, serve to mark it as separate from all other literary forms. Oriental symbols, too, are so unfamiliar and oftentimes so incongruous to our minds, such as the Dragon, the Scarlet Beast, the Two-horned Beast, and even the Cherubim, that we perhaps fail to realize how much they meant to people of a primitive civilization who were possessed of a vivid imagination without scientific precision of thought. This difference in the instinctive appreciation of the nature and value of symbols, together with the wide possibilities of meaning that are apparently inherent in the symbols used in the Apocalypse, has always given room for the fertile fancy of interpreters. But the later study of the Apocalyptic writings as a class has made it plain that this effort was largely misspent, and has led to more discriminating views of the meaning and use of symbols as there found, and to their limitation by established usage, where such is known to have existed. For while the growth of recognized symbols is necessarily slow, and their origin often impossible to trace yet when they have once been formed, and have come to possess an established meaning in the public mind, they exhibit a remarkable persistence; and though their meaning may be somewhat modified by subsequent use and by particular application, yet it can scarcely suffer sudden and radical change. And let us remember that the symbols, metaphors, and other figures found in the Revelation are not purely literary: they have had a history and have acquired a recognized and conventional meaning. We have, therefore, an available guide to the interpretation of the symbols in the book furnished by their use not only in the Old Testament, in which by former interpreters they were mainly sought, but especially in Jewish apocalypses, which give the current meaning of many of them at the time when this book was written, a sense which[pg 039]could not well have been departed from to any great extent without making their meaning wholly unintelligible. And the more clearly we apprehend this fact, the more constantly we apply it in our interpretation, the more likely are we to arrive at the meaning intended.43For while the Western mind revolts against the oftime obscurity of Apocalyptic symbols, yet we not infrequently recur to the same method of illustration. For instance, a good example of the present day use of symbols, aided by illustrative skill, is found in such a cartoon as“The Modern Juggernaut”that appeared a few years ago, in which the wheeled car of India was transformed into a huge wine bottle full of intoxicating drink that rolls along its way, crushing out the lives of thousands of miserable victims, while the fierce dogs of War, Famine, and Pestilence have under its malign influence slipped their leash and go forth to prey upon men.44This symbolism in some measure parallels that of the Scarlet Beast in the Revelation, and shows how a great destructive force operating in the world may be presented to many minds in an objective form much more effectively than by any abstract verbal statement. Like a parable an apocalypse flings a great truth across our path, instinct with the touch of spiritual life.

The revelation made to John doubtless took the Apocalyptic form because it was the prevailing literary method of that time for the treatment of the theme dealt with by his prophecy, and its constructive symbolism already filled and colored his thought. But notwithstanding that it is cast in a Jewish mould, the Christian thought everywhere triumphs over the Jewish form. The line of thought is limited to the peculiar range of Apocalyptic subjects, and is found to be closely related to that of our Lord's discourse upon the last things (the so-called“little apocalypse”of our Lord in Mat. 24), though it should not be regarded as formally an amplification of that discourse, or as chiefly or wholly determined in content by[pg 040]it.45The prophetic mood is manifest in every part of the book, and the exalted mental state of the writer is sustained throughout after the manner of a rhapsody, in the structure and movement of which all literary forms are in a measure fused together.46Indeed by a deeper study of this unique work we come to feel as though in it“we touch the living soul of Asiatic Christendom”.

It remains to be said that while we class the Apocalypse of John with Jewish apocalypses as to literary form, yet it so manifestly rises above its class both in method and content that it is universally accorded the first place among Apocalyptic writings, and fully establishes its claim to a place among the inspired books of Scripture by reason of the penetrative prophetic insight which it everywhere displays in dealing with the greatest, the most central, and the most mysterious theme in the whole sphere of Christian thought.

9. The Theme.The Theme of the Revelation, stated in its broadest terms, is Christ and the Church through Time to Eternity; the mystery of God in human life and history made manifest through the disclosure of the divine redemptive plan becoming effective and triumphant.47The theme we assign to the Revelation will, of course, be determined largely by our view of its contents. Many interpret it to be Jerusalem, Rome, and the End, limiting its outlook to the horizon of the early church; others make it the Course of History, or the Future Path of the Church in the World; still others affirm it to be the Last Things, or the Second Coming of Christ. But the wider view is the truer one, which includes many phases of the kingdom, and the theme is properly interpreted as Christ and the Church here and hereafter, or Redemption in its present and future relation to Human Life. This theme is wrought out in prophetic vision by an evolving drama that moves forward in multiple and progressive cycles of trial and triumph, of conflict and victory, ever advancing toward the[pg 041]complete and final consummation, when righteousness shall win, sin be punished, and the redeemed be restored to the immediate presence of God; and whereby the divine plan shall be abundantly vindicated notwithstanding all apparent anomalies, and seeming contradictions, and temporary reverses, for it is confidently affirmed that the night of sin shall ultimately pass away, and the day dawn at last in which“the glory of God and of the Lamb shall be the light thereof”; and“He that sitteth on the throne shall spread his tabernacle over them ... that come out of great tribulation”. Thus the book gives answer to the deep call of the soul for some sign concerning the future that shall point the path of faith and cheer the heart for service; and the answer is abundantly satisfying, for those who interpret the theme aright. Occupied with such a subject of thought it finds its proper place at the end of the inspired volume; it forms a fitting close for the entire line of prophetic voices; and it binds the long succession of books into an unbroken unity.48With illimitable sweep its visions look backward through time and forward into eternity, downward on earth's struggles and upward upon heaven's victory, inward to the soul's conflicts and outward to God's eternal peace, while through it all there rings out the one transcendent note, Christ reigns but to triumph.

The Theme of the Revelation, stated in its broadest terms, is Christ and the Church through Time to Eternity; the mystery of God in human life and history made manifest through the disclosure of the divine redemptive plan becoming effective and triumphant.47The theme we assign to the Revelation will, of course, be determined largely by our view of its contents. Many interpret it to be Jerusalem, Rome, and the End, limiting its outlook to the horizon of the early church; others make it the Course of History, or the Future Path of the Church in the World; still others affirm it to be the Last Things, or the Second Coming of Christ. But the wider view is the truer one, which includes many phases of the kingdom, and the theme is properly interpreted as Christ and the Church here and hereafter, or Redemption in its present and future relation to Human Life. This theme is wrought out in prophetic vision by an evolving drama that moves forward in multiple and progressive cycles of trial and triumph, of conflict and victory, ever advancing toward the[pg 041]complete and final consummation, when righteousness shall win, sin be punished, and the redeemed be restored to the immediate presence of God; and whereby the divine plan shall be abundantly vindicated notwithstanding all apparent anomalies, and seeming contradictions, and temporary reverses, for it is confidently affirmed that the night of sin shall ultimately pass away, and the day dawn at last in which“the glory of God and of the Lamb shall be the light thereof”; and“He that sitteth on the throne shall spread his tabernacle over them ... that come out of great tribulation”. Thus the book gives answer to the deep call of the soul for some sign concerning the future that shall point the path of faith and cheer the heart for service; and the answer is abundantly satisfying, for those who interpret the theme aright. Occupied with such a subject of thought it finds its proper place at the end of the inspired volume; it forms a fitting close for the entire line of prophetic voices; and it binds the long succession of books into an unbroken unity.48With illimitable sweep its visions look backward through time and forward into eternity, downward on earth's struggles and upward upon heaven's victory, inward to the soul's conflicts and outward to God's eternal peace, while through it all there rings out the one transcendent note, Christ reigns but to triumph.

10. The Occasion.The conditions which gave Occasion for this sole Apocalyptic book of the New Testament have left their impress on its form and thought, viz. persecution from without, and trial and distress within the church. These conditions which are subsumed throughout must be clearly recognized in order to interpret the message aright, and to estimate its proper value for the age which first received it. For, whether we accept the earlier or later date of writing, the deadly power of the Roman Empire was being put forth to repress and destroy the church. At the later date the worship of the Emperor was being made the test of obedience to law, and at either time many Christians in the face of persecution were weak and wavering. The immediate outlook was increasingly dark, and the future prospect full of gloom. The failure of the Messiah to reappear and of the church to triumph; the[pg 042]bitter experience of persecution already endured, and the certainty of greater suffering yet to follow; in a word, the apparent reversal of the brightest hopes of early Christianity, all of these called for some divine message of cheer that would inspirit the discouraged, throw light upon the path of sorrow and shame, and make their lot endurable because of the assuredly glorious outcome of the future. And there was no kind of message so well suited to meet such a crisis as the form of Apocalyptic, which grew out of similar conditions, and had a tone and temper peculiarly adapted to infuse a triumphant hope in the midst of growing religious despair.49But let us not fail to perceive that though the Apocalypse was specially designed to meet a great crisis in the life of the early church, its effectiveness does not end there. Its lessons are for us and for all time; it has the course and end of world-history in view, and this is an ever-living theme for the church of Christ in every age.

The conditions which gave Occasion for this sole Apocalyptic book of the New Testament have left their impress on its form and thought, viz. persecution from without, and trial and distress within the church. These conditions which are subsumed throughout must be clearly recognized in order to interpret the message aright, and to estimate its proper value for the age which first received it. For, whether we accept the earlier or later date of writing, the deadly power of the Roman Empire was being put forth to repress and destroy the church. At the later date the worship of the Emperor was being made the test of obedience to law, and at either time many Christians in the face of persecution were weak and wavering. The immediate outlook was increasingly dark, and the future prospect full of gloom. The failure of the Messiah to reappear and of the church to triumph; the[pg 042]bitter experience of persecution already endured, and the certainty of greater suffering yet to follow; in a word, the apparent reversal of the brightest hopes of early Christianity, all of these called for some divine message of cheer that would inspirit the discouraged, throw light upon the path of sorrow and shame, and make their lot endurable because of the assuredly glorious outcome of the future. And there was no kind of message so well suited to meet such a crisis as the form of Apocalyptic, which grew out of similar conditions, and had a tone and temper peculiarly adapted to infuse a triumphant hope in the midst of growing religious despair.49But let us not fail to perceive that though the Apocalypse was specially designed to meet a great crisis in the life of the early church, its effectiveness does not end there. Its lessons are for us and for all time; it has the course and end of world-history in view, and this is an ever-living theme for the church of Christ in every age.

11. The Purpose.The Purpose of the Apocalypse, as indicated by its introductory words“The Revelation”, is the revealing or unveiling of mystery. In the Christian sense a mystery is a former secret of divine truth that has now been at least partially revealed (Eph. 3:1-11), while an apocalypse is the process of revealing it, and also the revelation itself containing the truth made known. The comprehensive design of the book is to unfold and interpret the divine purpose and method in human history, especially in relation to the redemptive process, by portraying in scenic outline the present and future course of the church of Christ through conflict to victory, for the vindication of God's righteousness in the final issue, and for the comfort and encouragement of tried and persecuted Christians in the midst of the pathway of life.50The more immediate purpose was to strengthen the church in the strain of present distress, while the ultimate aim is to be found not in the disclosure of history itself, but in the establishment of the moral order of the world, in illustrating the fact that history is a divinely guided“moral process toward a goal”, as the substantial ground of a true philosophy of life, and[pg 043]as a permanent defense against false and partial views. And this purpose is so wrought out by the portrayal of the world as an ideal battlefield full of opposing forces, with alternating scenes of triumph and danger, that the whole becomes a fervent and powerful appeal to the heroic in Christian life and character, and a clear call to new faith and courage. For whatever else may be its lessons, we must not leave out of view this practical purpose of divine monition to the world of men, which has so deeply impressed itself upon every generation of Christians. Its message of warning is inwrought with and reënforced by its prophetic scenes of terror and reward: for the Apocalypse is the book of the future as well as of the past and present, and that future is ever near in prophetic vision, however far it may be in historic relation, and to John's eye is always filled with the figure of the returning Christ who comes to judgment and to victory. The message, however, viewed in its entirety, while it contains a sympathetic element of encouragement for the saints, and a monitory element of exhortation and warning for all men, is yet fundamentally a philosophic interpretation of the divine method in history for all who would see God in the story of man's life on the earth—a theodicy based upon prophecy. And any view which assumes for the author a narrow field of vision, such as that he merely grouped together the current apocalyptic conceptions of his time in order to fling them in fierce polemic against the Roman Empire and to foreshadow its defeat and fall,51rests upon a manifestly imperfect judgment that fails in religious depth, missing the spiritual significance of the message, and lacks in literary insight, denying the evident marks of originality, genius, and inspiration in the most wonderful and unique composition of its kind that has ever been produced.

The Purpose of the Apocalypse, as indicated by its introductory words“The Revelation”, is the revealing or unveiling of mystery. In the Christian sense a mystery is a former secret of divine truth that has now been at least partially revealed (Eph. 3:1-11), while an apocalypse is the process of revealing it, and also the revelation itself containing the truth made known. The comprehensive design of the book is to unfold and interpret the divine purpose and method in human history, especially in relation to the redemptive process, by portraying in scenic outline the present and future course of the church of Christ through conflict to victory, for the vindication of God's righteousness in the final issue, and for the comfort and encouragement of tried and persecuted Christians in the midst of the pathway of life.50The more immediate purpose was to strengthen the church in the strain of present distress, while the ultimate aim is to be found not in the disclosure of history itself, but in the establishment of the moral order of the world, in illustrating the fact that history is a divinely guided“moral process toward a goal”, as the substantial ground of a true philosophy of life, and[pg 043]as a permanent defense against false and partial views. And this purpose is so wrought out by the portrayal of the world as an ideal battlefield full of opposing forces, with alternating scenes of triumph and danger, that the whole becomes a fervent and powerful appeal to the heroic in Christian life and character, and a clear call to new faith and courage. For whatever else may be its lessons, we must not leave out of view this practical purpose of divine monition to the world of men, which has so deeply impressed itself upon every generation of Christians. Its message of warning is inwrought with and reënforced by its prophetic scenes of terror and reward: for the Apocalypse is the book of the future as well as of the past and present, and that future is ever near in prophetic vision, however far it may be in historic relation, and to John's eye is always filled with the figure of the returning Christ who comes to judgment and to victory. The message, however, viewed in its entirety, while it contains a sympathetic element of encouragement for the saints, and a monitory element of exhortation and warning for all men, is yet fundamentally a philosophic interpretation of the divine method in history for all who would see God in the story of man's life on the earth—a theodicy based upon prophecy. And any view which assumes for the author a narrow field of vision, such as that he merely grouped together the current apocalyptic conceptions of his time in order to fling them in fierce polemic against the Roman Empire and to foreshadow its defeat and fall,51rests upon a manifestly imperfect judgment that fails in religious depth, missing the spiritual significance of the message, and lacks in literary insight, denying the evident marks of originality, genius, and inspiration in the most wonderful and unique composition of its kind that has ever been produced.

12. The Interpretation.There are two essentially different methods of Interpretation that have been followed in attempting to arrive at the meaning of this manifestly difficult book, which are founded upon different conceptions of its didactic purpose, and proceed upon different lines of inquiry, viz. the Historical, and the Symbolical.The Historical Interpretation regards the book as aprophetic review and forecast of historyveiled in symbol,[pg 044]and seeks the meaning and fulfilment of the visions in certain specific historical events which either have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the sphere of human life and experience. There are three different forms of this method of interpretation, all of which specialize the prophecy but differ as to the time and nature of the fulfilment, viz. (1) thePreteristview (also called the Contemporaneous-Historical), which regards that the visions relate mainly to events in the history of the early church, and that they have been already fulfilled in the far past; (2) theFuturistview (also called the Future-Historical), that the visions relate mainly to events which shall occur in the last days, and that the fulfilment is to be looked for chiefly in the more or less remote future; and (3) theProgressivistview (also called the Continuous- or Church-Historical), that the several visions constitute a continuous and progressive series, covering the whole period of the church's history from the time of John to the last judgment, and that their fulfilment is therefore to be found in a successive line of historical events, part of which lie in the past and part in the future.The Symbolical Interpretation, upon the other hand, regards the book as aprophetic idealization of history, dealing with the general course and outcome of man's life upon the earth, and disclosing under the form of symbols the spiritual and moral forces which give to history its deeper meaning; and seeks the significance and fulfilment of the visions not, therefore, in particular events, but rather in classes of events, not solely at one definite time, but at many different times, finding the revelation mainly illustrative of general principles of the divine government rather than predictive of particular facts of history, a view of various phases rather than of historic stages of the church's experience,52and interpreting its symbols in the genuine spirit of Apocalyptic as pictorial representations of the prevailing fortunes of the church in the world as she moves forward to the final consummation.53This method of interpretation, which is commonly known as[pg 045]theSymbolistview (also called the Spiritual), presents no such marked difference of form as the Historical, but with a wider outlook regards that the visions relate to all such like events in every age as specially manifest God's rule in the world sending forth judgment unto victory, and such as particularly exhibit the progressive development of good and evil in human life, together with their constant conflict and their final reward and punishment.All the current interpretations may be classified under one or other of the above heads, yet in the hands of individual interpreters they are often modified and blend into each other in their application—a manifest recognition of the fact that there is an element of truth underlying each view, which we may perhaps say has been unduly emphasized, for all agree that the interpretation is somehow and somewhere to be found in human life and history.What might be called still another method of interpretation is the Apocalyptic-Traditional (or Tradition-Historical) view of late critical writers on the Apocalypse already referred to, which approaches the question from the viewpoint of literary origin, and attributes certain portions of the book to the introduction of traditional Jewish or Jewish-Christian Apocalyptic fragments that have been utilized by the author and applied to the historical conditions of his time, adapting them to a new meaning. This, however, is not so much a separate method of interpretation as it is a corollary of the present Literary-Critical method of dealing with the book, which regards it as an early Christian work in successive editions that has taken into itself certain Jewish elements. With this origin assumed the interpretation does not differ materially from the Preterist view except, perhaps, that it is less rigorous in its application to current events, and recognizes more fully the idealism of the author; for the historical outlook has measurably lost its value except as an indication of the date of writing, and for most who hold this view the book has no longer any distinctive prophetic message for the church; it has become chiefly a fantastic dream, a pious dream it is true, but only a dream of the far past.The principal question of interpretation, as will be seen by a consideration of the current views, relates not only to the view-point, but also to the aim or design of the[pg 046]Revelation. The Historical method centers the chief aim of the book in apredictive-prophetic element which it finds throughout and regards as pointing to specific events in particular periods of history that are designed to teach important spiritual lessons. With this idea of the didactic purpose, it yet presents the widest variation of opinion concerning the viewpoint of the book, and includes upon the one hand the extreme rationalist who considers it a purely human writing, a Jewish apocalypse that has been revamped to include Christian ideas, which blends history with prediction and reflects only the horizon of the first century; and on the other hand the devout mystic who accepts its message as chiefly predictive prophecy of the far future, and interprets it well nigh literally as a prophetic account of the world's ending amid terror and blood. The Symbolist method, with a quite different conception, centers the aim of the book in aninterpretative-prophetic element which it finds in every part, and regards as setting forth the principles of the divine government, and pointing to their exemplification in multiple events occurring in different periods of history that are working together toward the final consummation. According to this method of interpretation the viewpoint is idealistic, universal, and timeless, and the scope of the visions correspondingly wide.The latter view, which is the one presented in the following outline, affords a fairly satisfactory interpretation that has been steadily gaining ground during the last half-century, and to the present author seems destined in some form to attain general though perhaps not universal acceptance. The views of the leaders in the symbolical school present no material divergence in general interpretation,54and the principles of this interpretation seem likely to prevail throughout the Christian church of the future, though the form and application may be somewhat modified. The objection that“this system of interpretation is out of keeping with the general purpose of Apocalyptic literature”,55loses its force if we grant that the book is inspired, and realize that the literary form was chosen because of its adaptability for the treatment of the topics dealt with in the Apocalypse; for once, the Apocalyptic form becomes the vehicle of a divine revelation, it thereby escapes some of the main limitations of its class, one[pg 047]of which was“the consciousness of no new message from God for the generation to which it was addressed”; and accordingly it should here be regarded as only the literary setting in which the message continually overtops the form, the art-form in which the art is lost sight of through the beauty and power of the truth which it presents. This view, although not without difficulties, is yet believed by a good proportion of eminent scholars to be based upon sound and temperate exegesis, to be best suited to the character of the book, and to give relative value to all the elements of truth contained in other views. The importance of the historical situation of John's time and of the lessons for that age is fully recognized, the eschatological element throughout is given due consideration, and the application of the prophecy to the entire trend and events of history is made apparent, while the precise time-relation of the visions is for the most part eliminated, and thus the field of prophetic prospective is maintained in its true breadth, and not narrowed as in the historical interpretation to a particular age or series of events. And the interpretation as a whole rests for its validity upon the scope and tenor of the book throughout, and can therefore be maintained without determining the full or specific meaning of every part. The Revelation thus understood ceases to be either a political diatribe of the first century, or the terrored story of the End; it rises above an epitome of history whether near or far, and takes rank as a true prophetic book in Apocalyptic form, dealing with the all-embracing plan of God for the ages, and the munificent purpose of redemption; and it is thereby rescued from many conjectural and contradictory interpretations which have obscured its meaning, and becomes a living prophecy of value to the church in every age.The tendency toward wiser methods in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, and the growing spirit of unanimity concerning its larger lessons, provide good ground for encouragement to the troubled reader. And while, no doubt, the influence of the individual type of mind will continue to be felt in the interpretation, the rationalistic emphasizing the preterist application, the mystic the futurist, and the practical mind the symbolic and universal reference, yet it should always be kept in view that the chief importance of the book for the church at large[pg 048]transcends any question of theoretical interpretation, and lies in its practical worth in providing a rich source of religious inspiration, an invigorating aid to imperfect faith, and an abiding stimulus to the Christian imagination, in enabling the ordinary mind to realize the spiritual in the midst of and transcending the natural, and in making the deep conflict of life with its divine superintendence an ever present fact to the human soul. Indeed the book was evidently written for common use in the early church in public worship (ch. 1:3), which indicates an appreciation of its value in striking contrast with the modern indifference that passes it by as unintelligible. The Apocalypse has also a historical value, quite apart from its general meaning and use, that we should not overlook, for it throws important light upon the political and social conditions as well as the inner thought and development of the Christian church in the latter part of the first century. It reflects throughout the faith and temper in which the early church faced its growing conflict with the world. And it serves to show that at the close of the apostolic age there was a Christianity which was free from the law and universal, and yet continued to adhere to Jewish modes of expression.56

There are two essentially different methods of Interpretation that have been followed in attempting to arrive at the meaning of this manifestly difficult book, which are founded upon different conceptions of its didactic purpose, and proceed upon different lines of inquiry, viz. the Historical, and the Symbolical.

The Historical Interpretation regards the book as aprophetic review and forecast of historyveiled in symbol,[pg 044]and seeks the meaning and fulfilment of the visions in certain specific historical events which either have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the sphere of human life and experience. There are three different forms of this method of interpretation, all of which specialize the prophecy but differ as to the time and nature of the fulfilment, viz. (1) thePreteristview (also called the Contemporaneous-Historical), which regards that the visions relate mainly to events in the history of the early church, and that they have been already fulfilled in the far past; (2) theFuturistview (also called the Future-Historical), that the visions relate mainly to events which shall occur in the last days, and that the fulfilment is to be looked for chiefly in the more or less remote future; and (3) theProgressivistview (also called the Continuous- or Church-Historical), that the several visions constitute a continuous and progressive series, covering the whole period of the church's history from the time of John to the last judgment, and that their fulfilment is therefore to be found in a successive line of historical events, part of which lie in the past and part in the future.

The Symbolical Interpretation, upon the other hand, regards the book as aprophetic idealization of history, dealing with the general course and outcome of man's life upon the earth, and disclosing under the form of symbols the spiritual and moral forces which give to history its deeper meaning; and seeks the significance and fulfilment of the visions not, therefore, in particular events, but rather in classes of events, not solely at one definite time, but at many different times, finding the revelation mainly illustrative of general principles of the divine government rather than predictive of particular facts of history, a view of various phases rather than of historic stages of the church's experience,52and interpreting its symbols in the genuine spirit of Apocalyptic as pictorial representations of the prevailing fortunes of the church in the world as she moves forward to the final consummation.53This method of interpretation, which is commonly known as[pg 045]theSymbolistview (also called the Spiritual), presents no such marked difference of form as the Historical, but with a wider outlook regards that the visions relate to all such like events in every age as specially manifest God's rule in the world sending forth judgment unto victory, and such as particularly exhibit the progressive development of good and evil in human life, together with their constant conflict and their final reward and punishment.

All the current interpretations may be classified under one or other of the above heads, yet in the hands of individual interpreters they are often modified and blend into each other in their application—a manifest recognition of the fact that there is an element of truth underlying each view, which we may perhaps say has been unduly emphasized, for all agree that the interpretation is somehow and somewhere to be found in human life and history.

What might be called still another method of interpretation is the Apocalyptic-Traditional (or Tradition-Historical) view of late critical writers on the Apocalypse already referred to, which approaches the question from the viewpoint of literary origin, and attributes certain portions of the book to the introduction of traditional Jewish or Jewish-Christian Apocalyptic fragments that have been utilized by the author and applied to the historical conditions of his time, adapting them to a new meaning. This, however, is not so much a separate method of interpretation as it is a corollary of the present Literary-Critical method of dealing with the book, which regards it as an early Christian work in successive editions that has taken into itself certain Jewish elements. With this origin assumed the interpretation does not differ materially from the Preterist view except, perhaps, that it is less rigorous in its application to current events, and recognizes more fully the idealism of the author; for the historical outlook has measurably lost its value except as an indication of the date of writing, and for most who hold this view the book has no longer any distinctive prophetic message for the church; it has become chiefly a fantastic dream, a pious dream it is true, but only a dream of the far past.

The principal question of interpretation, as will be seen by a consideration of the current views, relates not only to the view-point, but also to the aim or design of the[pg 046]Revelation. The Historical method centers the chief aim of the book in apredictive-prophetic element which it finds throughout and regards as pointing to specific events in particular periods of history that are designed to teach important spiritual lessons. With this idea of the didactic purpose, it yet presents the widest variation of opinion concerning the viewpoint of the book, and includes upon the one hand the extreme rationalist who considers it a purely human writing, a Jewish apocalypse that has been revamped to include Christian ideas, which blends history with prediction and reflects only the horizon of the first century; and on the other hand the devout mystic who accepts its message as chiefly predictive prophecy of the far future, and interprets it well nigh literally as a prophetic account of the world's ending amid terror and blood. The Symbolist method, with a quite different conception, centers the aim of the book in aninterpretative-prophetic element which it finds in every part, and regards as setting forth the principles of the divine government, and pointing to their exemplification in multiple events occurring in different periods of history that are working together toward the final consummation. According to this method of interpretation the viewpoint is idealistic, universal, and timeless, and the scope of the visions correspondingly wide.

The latter view, which is the one presented in the following outline, affords a fairly satisfactory interpretation that has been steadily gaining ground during the last half-century, and to the present author seems destined in some form to attain general though perhaps not universal acceptance. The views of the leaders in the symbolical school present no material divergence in general interpretation,54and the principles of this interpretation seem likely to prevail throughout the Christian church of the future, though the form and application may be somewhat modified. The objection that“this system of interpretation is out of keeping with the general purpose of Apocalyptic literature”,55loses its force if we grant that the book is inspired, and realize that the literary form was chosen because of its adaptability for the treatment of the topics dealt with in the Apocalypse; for once, the Apocalyptic form becomes the vehicle of a divine revelation, it thereby escapes some of the main limitations of its class, one[pg 047]of which was“the consciousness of no new message from God for the generation to which it was addressed”; and accordingly it should here be regarded as only the literary setting in which the message continually overtops the form, the art-form in which the art is lost sight of through the beauty and power of the truth which it presents. This view, although not without difficulties, is yet believed by a good proportion of eminent scholars to be based upon sound and temperate exegesis, to be best suited to the character of the book, and to give relative value to all the elements of truth contained in other views. The importance of the historical situation of John's time and of the lessons for that age is fully recognized, the eschatological element throughout is given due consideration, and the application of the prophecy to the entire trend and events of history is made apparent, while the precise time-relation of the visions is for the most part eliminated, and thus the field of prophetic prospective is maintained in its true breadth, and not narrowed as in the historical interpretation to a particular age or series of events. And the interpretation as a whole rests for its validity upon the scope and tenor of the book throughout, and can therefore be maintained without determining the full or specific meaning of every part. The Revelation thus understood ceases to be either a political diatribe of the first century, or the terrored story of the End; it rises above an epitome of history whether near or far, and takes rank as a true prophetic book in Apocalyptic form, dealing with the all-embracing plan of God for the ages, and the munificent purpose of redemption; and it is thereby rescued from many conjectural and contradictory interpretations which have obscured its meaning, and becomes a living prophecy of value to the church in every age.

The tendency toward wiser methods in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, and the growing spirit of unanimity concerning its larger lessons, provide good ground for encouragement to the troubled reader. And while, no doubt, the influence of the individual type of mind will continue to be felt in the interpretation, the rationalistic emphasizing the preterist application, the mystic the futurist, and the practical mind the symbolic and universal reference, yet it should always be kept in view that the chief importance of the book for the church at large[pg 048]transcends any question of theoretical interpretation, and lies in its practical worth in providing a rich source of religious inspiration, an invigorating aid to imperfect faith, and an abiding stimulus to the Christian imagination, in enabling the ordinary mind to realize the spiritual in the midst of and transcending the natural, and in making the deep conflict of life with its divine superintendence an ever present fact to the human soul. Indeed the book was evidently written for common use in the early church in public worship (ch. 1:3), which indicates an appreciation of its value in striking contrast with the modern indifference that passes it by as unintelligible. The Apocalypse has also a historical value, quite apart from its general meaning and use, that we should not overlook, for it throws important light upon the political and social conditions as well as the inner thought and development of the Christian church in the latter part of the first century. It reflects throughout the faith and temper in which the early church faced its growing conflict with the world. And it serves to show that at the close of the apostolic age there was a Christianity which was free from the law and universal, and yet continued to adhere to Jewish modes of expression.56

Back to Index Next